Not in my backyard
1y 4mon ago by sh.itjust.works/u/Gigliorananomicom in politicalmemes from sh.itjust.works
Isn't it weird how much harder it is for them to tip the scales on Lemmy and Mastodon, platforms without algorithms designed by right-wing billionaires?
WHAT? Are you implying that the rich used the advantage of closed black box algorithms to screw with peoples opinions, motivations and emotions for the goal of enriching themselves both financially and with power‽
Preposterous!/s
Yay capitalism and oligarchy! /s
Kinda makes ya think… Maybe letting someone else filter the content you see is an inherently biased concept.
I’d rather apply my own biases to my feed, tyvm.
Bias is always present in this type of thing, the critical difference is honesty, openness, freedom to dissent (in theory and in practicality) and integrity of which big tech companies do not even possess a homeopathic amount.
Same story with trust for that matter...
There's also the fact that the 'left-wing' has constant infighting... about how to help people, whereas the 'right-wing' are (mostly) single issue voters who don't care what the other conservatives do so long as they get their thing. So a left-wing 'echo chamber' is kind of amusing when you try to imagine a Social Democrat and an Anarchist tacitly agreeing to almost anything.
Is there bias? Sure. What exactly that constitutes seems, to me at least, to be 'I don't think people should be in camps/have their rights removed/lose bodily autonomy, or that governments should spend more subsidizing oil and gas than all other areas.'
I agree with the spirit of the point, but I also think it is critically important to SCREAM into the air right now that actually yes we do agree on a whole lot more on the leftwing than rightwing people do amongst their lame circles of hate.
It is our vibrant arguments, passionate disagreements and loud messy divisions and categories that keep leftism from becoming an echo chamber, as you nod towards in putting it in parentheses as 'echo chamber'. Yes this is true and necessary to point out, but also the leftwing simultaneously and not in the least bit paradoxically agrees on way more than conservatives do. Don't mistake blind compliance with whatever dominant narrative is being broadcast at the moment (hating trans people, being afraid of an """"""""immigrant crisis""""""""", not believing in evolution?? (did that go out of style yet? (sorry I wrote this aside like lisp code))) for a group of people being in true agreement and solidarity.
Interview a bunch of conservatives individually and ask them basic questions about how their espoused values connect with real world policies, actions and circumstances and if you ask about ANYTHING that isn't the hot topic right now to hate on in conservative circles you will get a random mix of complete and utter amateur speculation and shockingly silly re-imaginings of things that already exist because of problems that have already been solved (i.e. naive libertarians).
Interview a bunch of leftist individually and do the same thing and you will get basically the same damn answers every time on the important stuff.
Is healthcare a human right?
Yes
Does everybody deserve to earn a living wage?
Yes
Are all people created equal and worthy of empathy?
Yes
Does everybody deserve housing and the ability to live in a decent living situation?
Yes
Is climate change real and are humans driving it?
Yes
Do you believe in the seperation of church and state?
Yes..?
Do you condone any form of racism?
Emphatically no, never. I am an anti-racist which means also resisting structural racism not just overt racism
Are you a feminist?
Fuck off, why are you condescending me, of course I am
Is disability a weakness?
No, blind worship of strength is
Do you support LGTBQ+ people?
entirely
OF COURSE there are exceptions, but by and large do this to leftists and you will get a consistent expression of leftist ideology throughout their beliefs that agrees at a basic level (especially among younger folks) with almost every other leftist you interview, with massive exceptions in the details of course....
There are annoying and bad and toxic people on the left, yes, but let us remember we are much more effective at ensuring we are interacting on a basis of shared values, and we are much louder and much more annoying when people violate those basic values.
It is our vibrant arguments, passionate disagreements and loud messy divisions and categories that keep leftism from becoming an echo chamber, as you nod towards in putting it in parentheses.
Yes, I could have been more direct there absolutely. Left-wing discussions cannot become echo chambers because there's nothing to echo other than 'help people.' I'm in a workers assembly, and we constantly disagree on how to make major change. We do all of it, however, while handing out gloves, socks, and toques to the unhoused. We do it while making survival packs with menstrual pads in them for unhoused women. We do it while marching in solidarity with striking workers.
I have never, ever seen a single 'centrist' join us in any of these things. No right-wingers, no Centrists, just Marxists, Anarcha-Feminists, Socialists, hell even a tankie once.
The issue we have is that, especially since the 80's, 'centrists' (with the directions of the Right-wing) have tried to make it seem like there's something 'extreme' about the Left-wing. Like there's some sort of thing to fear, some sort of spooky hidden agenda. The reality is that they can pretend the Soviet government and it's progroms or the CCP and it's Uyghur massacre are somehow 'left-wing,' and not authoritarian and conservative. Wanting to 'keep things as they are/have in and out groups' is a core tenet of Conservatism, which is right-wing. The reality on the left is all of our infighting is about the hows and not the whats. Any infighting the Right has is about the what's and not the hows. They don't care how they pay less in taxes, they want to pay less in taxes. They don't care how they get their religion made into law, just that it happens. They don't care who gets deported, so long as it's not them and 'gets it done.' They are complete and total amorality, with a singular objective of more for themselves.
Our issue on the left is one of organization (which, as part of an assembly, I have seen live quite a lot) and choosing a path forward. We all know we want to protect 2SLGBTQIA+ people. We all know we want to protect women, children, the unhoused. Do we work with the government, like the Social Democrats want? Do we burn it all down, and rebuild smaller communities, like the Anarchists want? Do we simply reject capitalism, build our communes, and work together there?
Unfortunately right now those are objectives in the far future. We need to survive to that point, and right now, we're losing. The left in the US hasn't been something a government would fear to cross since the 70's. If it should rise up, if it should finally admit that violence is going to happen whether we want it or not, and we have to meet it with violence in return, then we will see change. If Americans follow this guide and make it impossible for Trumps fascist regime to do what they want, then we have a chance. Yet if they don't, the rest of the world is in for an extremely bad time. We tried voting, we tried peaceful marching, we tried peaceful protests, we tried begging, pleading with them. Our children begged us to stop killing the planet and their very futures, and we refused. The social contract was broken.
What will you do, America? Will you watch yourselves go through what Germany did in the 1930's, on the back of a climate that is going to absolutely be hell for our children, and their children? When do you stand up and refuse to watch? When do you stand up, and do offline what you do online?
I want so very much to believe you'll fight.
I am so sad that many of us will have to die defending people who can't defend themselves, or shouldn't have to. I plan to die that way, whether taking a bullet for a young girl protesting for her bodily autonomy, a beating meant for an unhoused person who just wants to survive, or a baton meant for a young man in transition who just wants to be left alone. I love you all. <3
If Americans follow this guide
...did you get that from Pig Bodine?
Our issue on the left is one of organization (which, as part of an assembly, I have seen live quite a lot) and choosing a path forward. We all know we want to protect 2SLGBTQIA+ people. We all know we want to protect women, children, the unhoused. Do we work with the government, like the Social Democrats want? Do we burn it all down, and rebuild smaller communities, like the Anarchists want? Do we simply reject capitalism, build our communes, and work together there?
The answer to all of the above is yes I said yes I will Yes.
a longer answer
Last night I dreamt I went to Manderley again. It seemed to me I stood by the iron gate leading to the drive, and for a while I could not enter, for the way was barred to me. There was a padlock and a chain upon the gate. I called in my dream to the lodgekeeper, and had no answer, and peering closer through the rusted spokes of the gate I saw that the lodge was uninhabited.
No smoke came from the chimney, and the little lattice windows gaped forlorn. Then, like all dreamers, I was possessed of a sudden with supernatural powers and passed like a spirit through the barrier before me. The drive wound away in front of me, twisting and turning as it had always done, but as I advanced I was aware that a change had come upon it; it was narrow and unkept, not the drive that we had known.
At first I was puzzled and did not understand, and it was only when I bent my head to avoid the low swinging branch of a tree that I realised what had happened. Nature had come into her own again and, little by little, in her stealthy, insidious way had encroached upon the drive with long, tenacious fingers. The woods, always a menace even in the past, had triumphed in the end.
They crowded, dark and uncontrolled, to the borders of the drive. The beeches with white, naked limbs leant close to one another, their branches intermingled in a strange embrace, making a vault above my head like the archway of a church. And there were other trees as well, trees that I did not recognise, squat oaks and tortured elms that straggled cheek by jowl with the beeches, and had thrust themselves out of the quiet earth, along with monster shrubs and plants, none of which I remembered.
The drive was a ribbon now, a thread of its former self, with gravel surface gone, and choked with grass and moss. The trees had thrown out low branches, making an impediment to progress; the gnarled roots looked like skeleton claws. Scattered here and again amongst this jungle growth I would recognise shrubs that had been landmarks in our time, things of culture and of grace, hydrangeas whose blue heads had been famous. No hand had checked their progress, and they had gone native now, rearing to monster height without a bloom, black and ugly as the nameless parasites that grew beside them.
As a left-leaning libertarian, I think this is a really great list.
For real, I've had some lefty take beef with me on BlueSky cause my "tone" is too harsh.
You want me to be high brow and polite when the right is fighting dirty?
To be fair, it took a huge Reddit exodus for Lemmy to stop being full-blown work camp supporting communist. I'm sure if enough to right wing trolls showed up, this place would change again too
We are fortunate then, that the upcoming generation of conservatives cannot read.
That's a good point, but at least the views would reflect those of the majority rather than being algorithmically-manipulated as on Twitter or Facebook.
The bittersweet end of a successful movement. The public will be better off after Fediverse Eternal September.
Hey it isn't nice to beat up people who only want to seriously hurt and maim you, your family and your friends.
Right? What happened to tolerance?
What happened to tolerance is quite clear, to the point that it has a name, it is called the paradox of tolerance.
I had never heard of the paradox of tolerance. TIL
Obv you have the wikipedia link, but this is a nice bite-sized overview that I keep around:
We should keep them all trapped on twitter forever.
It's a good containment zone for the trash.
If you see someone supporting Trump tell them to go back to twitter and block them
TBH I'd rather them leave Twitter just so Twitter doesn't make money
Twitter isn't making money anyway
it stopped being about money a while ago, its literally a tool now, not a revenue source.
Or more accuratley, its a weapon, a weapon in the information war. being weilded by the Corpo-Oligarchs, the Fascists, the nazis, the Russian state, and whatever brain-worm is in Elon's head on any given day. When Elon was forced to buy twitter, he obviously decided "fuck it, im going to use this to exert my will on the world then". and then a year later, he was doing jumping jacks on stage for Trump rallies.
Fucking
Called
It
Capitalism
Well, bluesky isn't the fediverse, but the point stands.
I'm ignorant af tbh 😅 Thanks for the clarification
I think Mastodon would be what you're looking for.
Bluesy is a business, Mastodon is a community tool that runs on the ActivityPub (same as Lemmy which is what we are talkin on).
Part of their marketing seems to be to create confusion about it. Bluesky uses the language and values of the fediverse to promote what is essentially another closed network. Meta is also doing this with Threads. Bluesky seems like a chill place and a lot of decent people seem to be very happy there, and they provide a lot more user controls than other networks, so the comic definitely still works.
It sort of depends on how you define fediverse. If you mean things using the ActivityPub protocol and are federated with Mastodon, Lemmy, etc. then no, it's not part of the fediverse. If you mean anything using federated technology then you could possibly include it. https://docs.bsky.app/docs/advanced-guides/federation-architectureIt uses something called AT instead of ActivityPub. I'm not personally aware of any other services or instances using it, but I also didn't look very hard.
Edit: I learned that the term AT Protocol uses for their version of fediverse is "atmosphere". So I wouldn't necessarily say it's part of the fediverse, but the context of the usage matters.
Right, but you can't run your own instance so there's nothing to federate with.
https://atproto.com/guides/self-hosting
Edit: After digging in a bit, I believe the thing most people would consider as "running an instance" would be an appview and/or relay. Both of which they claim are ready, I just haven't seen any. I think that part of the disconnect is that in ActivityPub the roles of what AT Protocol calls PDS, Relay, and AppView are all handled by a single instance. A PDS stores canonical data, a Relay aggregates PDSes, and an AppView is a UI reading from a relay.
https://github.com/bluesky-social/pds?tab=readme-ov-file#what-is-the-current-status-of-federation
That lets you host your own data. You cannot host an instance. You must use the Bluesky app with your PDS.
What's preventing you from running your own Relay and/or AppView?
From what I've read, that's not possible, at least not yet. Currently, everything must go through their relay and it will only "federate" with PDS'
It sort of sounds like they're trying to "have their cake and eat it too." It will be interesting to see where things go with it. I hope they choose to be more open with federating instead of trying to become Centralized Twitter 2.0.
Agreed -- I will say, being able to host your own data is already a huge step away from traditional social media, so I'm not shitting on Bluesky by any means
Yeah, it at least solves the problem of your account getting deleted not meaning you lose your stuff. For better or worse people use social media platforms (mostly things like Facebook) as cloud storage for photo albums.
I haven't looked deep into AT stuff tbh.
You're correct. But blue sky does support federation, just not the same protocol as the fediverse, right?
Federation with what?
BlueSky does not support federation in any way that we understand the word.
It is 100% reliant on the corporate server(s). They do offer a way to host your own data, which solves a singular problem with corporate media, which seems to be what they mean when they promote it "supporting federation." Is also has an open codebase, which is something.
As an aside, I have read in some places that self-hosting is very straightforward, and in other places that it is prohibitively difficult. I have basically no idea about any of these things.
It’s not that these groups are full of true liberals, it’s that much of the population isn’t tolerant of lies and misinformation. So it seems that “conservatives” are being targeted.
I've seen people be objectively correct but assholes with their delivery and get fucking blasted on here. Regardless of politics I'd youre a prick you get vibe checked.
As it should be. I'm tired of lying and "alternative facts" being the new normal.
Even correct and real facts delivered in an intentionally backhanded way can fuck off for all I care
That too. Oh! And double speak...
<nobodyAsked>
I'm still unreasonably salty about getting bodied into negatives after pointing out that the fusion research coming out of the National Ignition Facility is just nuclear weapons research. That's what Laser Inertial Confinement is, it's a very contained implosion bomb. Their role in the nuclear stewardship program is the first thing in their damn "about me" page. Gah. I wasn't even (all that) rude about it, its just really hard for some people on here to accept that their understanding is flawed (myself very much included)
</nobodyAsked>
People bandwagon, they think it's funny to make the number go down even if it doesn't deserve to. Although I have come back from negative to positive.
I rather tolerate honest pricks
Conservatives are often so completely full of shit it isn't funny.
So you're telling me that Trump didn't actually turn on the giant spigot and single-handedly extinguish the California wildfires?!?
I'm a person who likes to learn. When I find out I was mistaken on an issue and why, I sometimes feel briefly embarrassed for being wrong, but in the end I appreciate knowing more and like to share the truth with others. I feel like I can approach people from a place of familiarity, empathy, and compassion and help them understand something they did not before.
I feel like there's a lot of people here who share that mindset, and when we see someone intentionally trying to manipulate others by knowingly spreading disinformation, the other, less-compassionate side of us shows up to the party.
I’d absolutely rather take the embarrassment of being corrected, over the embarrassment of being wrong consistently.
Oh yeah. It's a temporary thing, but I wasn't going to pretend like it's not a thing and say I'm instantly excited when someone proves me wrong without any kind of hit to my ego.
We have instinctual emotional reactions and if we pretend we're 100% above them to the point they don't exist it makes it harder to empathize with others.
They are slowly leaking into lemmy.world, my friends living in .world please try your best to hold your position there. Don't let them break through
At this point, I think we should invite back hexbear tankies to roll over the conservatives and "centrist" in .world
I'm half joking, but there may be some truth in that.
What are you saying? That democrats are incapable of resistance against the republicans?
Yes absolutely, in the same way that soaking up water with a roll of papertowels is a useless way to stop a ship from sinking from a hole in the hull.
They attempted to infiltrate Lemmy.ca during the BC election to worship their transphobic John Rustad. Calling someone “a paid activist” for calling out the B.C. conservatives.
Lemmy.world communities for news and politics are already moderated far too strictly. Discourse is impossible because of the liberal distributions of bans there.
Your modlog shows you’ve been banned for things like genocide denial, defending genocide, misinformation, tons of violations of simple to follow civility rules….
But yeah… let’s go with strict mods. lol!
Yikes thank you for pointing that out.
They were excusing the attacks on schools, hospitals and safe zones.
And blatantly spreading misinformation.
I got banned with the cited reason genocide denial for saying that the leaders of the US Democratic Party don’t call the war in Gaza a genocide.
That was already too much discourse for the political commissars.
No… you got banned for literally denying genocide. It’s in your comments. And it’s public. So, I don’t know why you’re lying about it.
So much harder to manufacture consent without centralized gatekeepers
That makes me wonder, what comes after decentralized gatekeepers?
You clearly lost that fight
its an ongoing battle
Just had to block someone that said wanting a democracy and not supporting a dictatorship was "Chasing perfection at the cost of the good".
That's wild given a dictatorship has the whole issue of succession, even with a perfectly benevolent leader they gonna die one day.
haha goddamn
Reminds me of a meme template.
🤣damn
But why blocking? That person does not just disappear, and if all non insane people block them, they don’t see that most disagree, but thinks all agree
People tend to feel foolish sitting in a room lecturing nobody, I don't think you should be worried too much about this, these people crave compliance and acceptance, they cannot function without a community to vampire off of..
God, imagine that... we switch to federated and the Nazis can no longer hide behind "Just asking questions" and getting the site admins to bully people.
Well the issue also is that nazis could prosper in here. If they had their own instance I fear there would be a massive delay before every single instance defederates
There are plenty of nazis already using fediverse tools, Truth.Social is just stolen Mastodon software, the reason you don't hear about it is they are losers and nobody wants to hangout with them.
I like this.
I think it should be Mastodon & Lemmy though.
Bluesky isn't even on the Fediverse. It's private corpo.
I haven't seen too many conservatives on Lemmy, but Bluesky is a fine example of how if you deplatform and cut off the oxygen of fascists and leave them talking to themselves, they really do fade into the background.
I also like how Lemmy has the "modlog" at the bottom. If conservatives are being treated "unfairly" you can see what got them banned and decide if the mods are being fair.
I hadn't noticed that before! I like that feature.
Whenever beating up fascists and their sympathizers is a question the answer is always yes >:3
The only issue I have with this is that this fules the generalisation of politics even more. There is a lot more of a nuance in politics than just left/right or conservatives/liberals etc. You see this more in countries with more politics parties. It’s not an either or but a spectrum.
But this meme really suits the current climate of Shitter and the US politic system
Then why have any discourse at all.
There's no need for two-sided discourse on Nazism. It's a settled subject.
I thought this was about conservatives.
As was established earlier in the comment chain, conservatives are openly allied with Nazis now.
A Nazi did the Nazi salute in front of every conservative in America, and not one of them repudiated him. So don't play dumb.
Potato/Potato.
I'm not going to allow my feed to be populated by toxic hateful assholes, and I've reached the point of zero-tolerance for folks who try to suggest that anything of value is lost by blocking them.
Social media is NOT the entirety of human existence for most people. We have many, many opportunities in life to interact with and be exposed to people and opinions different than our own. Further, toxic assholes are toxic assholes, and although there is some heavy overlap, not everyone I disagree with gets a block, not even most. 90% of people I block I have never interacted with, I block them based on how I see them interact with others. And yeah, one whiff of maga is insta-block.
There is no argument about creating "echo chambers" that moves me. Folks who want to be down there throwing elbows with the cult of 45 and similar whackjobs are welcome to do so. When I go on social media I want to read and engage in reasonable discussion or I want to consume things that are being posted.
It's not some kind of virtue to let trolling fascist assholes or similar shitstains to pollute the online space I make for myself when I have the tools I need to remove the taint.
Well, at the rockbottom, the only function is to shame and ostracize hateful conservatives who threaten the safety and acceptance of said community.
Hopefully it is much more than that, but even that is enough to be worthwhile.
So it’s about winning a propaganda war, not attempts at mutual understanding for you?
It is about protecting innocent people from hateful bigots, I am sorry if you can't understand the threat they pose, but I understand it very clearly.
There can be no basis for mutual understanding with people that define their politics upon hurting other groups of people.
I look forward to having intellectual conversations with conservatives after they become too afraid and ashamed to dare to speak their hate out loud in public spaces and they go back to pretending to not have batshit crazy hateful views..
The conditions for an intellectual discussion I define quite reasonably as you are not actively espousing beliefs and realword policies that preclude the existence of safe spaces for vulnerable groups like trans kids, black people, muslims, women, immigrants of any legality or origin, and the poor in general.
safe spaces
Safe spaces with strict rules are great and necessary. Not everywhere can or should be a safe space though.
Tell that to a scared trans kid, or an immigrant trying to gain a citizenship in the US and live the american dream, or tell that to a woman who has to wait until she is precisely almost dead for a lifesaving abortion.
Nowhere for these people is safe (especially since this a global trend) because conservatives support policies for the sole and explicit reason they hurt people in these categories to the point that they will hand everything away to the fifthy rich just for the privilege of knowing a trans kid is going to be denied lifesaving healthcare and acceptance.
Shame on you for talking so flippantly about safe spaces in such an atrociously cruel moment.
I spit on conservatives, their views are destroying my country at a rapid rate and it is just a disgusting ideology full of thinly veiled childish fear and hate.
People who aren't cowards protect innocent and vulnerable people, conservatives specifically target those people because it is easy to punch down at them and get assholes to like you for it.
Not everywhere should be safe? Oh please do explain 🍿
Do you have knives in a kitchen? Are disagreements necessary for new ideas? Do swinger‘s clubs need to accommodate children? Can you drown in a bathtub? Are bars safe for alcoholics? Can you inhale popcorn and choke from it?
The only issue I have with this is that this fules the generalisation of politics even more. There is a lot more of a nuance in politics than just left/right or conservatives/liberals etc. You see this more in countries with more politics parties. It’s not an either or but a spectrum.
I think by basically beating the conservatives out of the platforms it allows for this nuance to be expressed. Allowing them to hang around with their bullshit and disinformation leaves everyone fighting to establish basic facts and sanity and makes political discussions as tiresome as those that happen on an American presidential campaign...basically DEMOCRAT BAD, WOKE BAD, REPUBLICAN DADDY GOOD, BIG STRONG REPUBLICAN DADDY FETISH.
I like that they can't debase and pollute every political discussion here.
Your argument breaks down at "conservatism" there is no nuance to being a fascist or fascism supporter. "Oh I don't really like how he's racist and I don't really like how he treats women, but I support the tax cuts" Bitch, that's the BAIT, you're now supporting fascism because you were baited into it with your greed.
Extremism is bad yes, but you are assuming that is everything I can vote for. Politics is a spectrum and I know the US doesn’t see it, but in the end I vote in a country where I can vote on over 100 people from like 40 different parties. Same for when I vote for the EU.
I believe that the lack of nuance is part of the problem why I think the US lacks in the compromise department. No there is no defence for extremism, but if you don’t have any good options to vote for then you choose for the one you think is the least bad.
Exactly, I only see this kind of vapid dogma in the good-ol USA
Politics is all about nuance & constant concessions
Right up until it becomes about hurting and not accepting people for no good reason and blaming the victims of the inveitable catastrophic consequences, which is one of the only ideologically consistent throughlines through modern conservatism the world over.
The actions of a few shouldn’t punish the rest. Yeah extremism is bad and that is where Nazi’s and MAGA fall under (or Geert Wilders here in NL), but that doesn’t mean that every party that has a more conservative view on the world is inherently bad.
And that is where I stand, but there are rarely parties that are centered enough in the spectrum to follow my view on the world.
Yeah so the conservative parties you support and think more highly of are VERY much about conserving the precious natural landscape we all live in right? To be ideologically consistent valuing nature and strong environmental law enforcement would have to be at the top of their list right?
I don’t support conservative parties? I am more politically right aligned, but also more progressive. Stop assuming shit about people
I am not talking about your particular politics, I am pointing out the basic, desperately fundamental contradictions modern conservatism has, the world over in many different countries and in many different contexts, between the stated values it purports to defend and pursue in politics and policy and how the impacts of those actions do far worse to violate those values, drag them through the mud and violently destabilize society while simultaneously empowering criminal thugs and grifters far more than any foreign threat or adversary could do. And what does the average person get for that betrayal of decency?
They really are fragile folk, they need to diminish others in order to feel important and special.
Projection. Look at what they accuse and see how it applies to the one saying it.
also conservatives are snowflakes lmao
But you are important and special!
Sorry conservative snowflakes, there's no central authority to cry to when get bullied for being a scumbag.
And do what? I'm assuming you're not inciting violence there, friend.
Nazis are dangerous people who support dangerous ideologies, including straight up genocide.
They deserve everything they have coming to them.
This guy is definitely inciting violence, judging by their post history. They're also really fucking unnecessarily rude from time to time. Goddamn edge lord.
Weird comment, dude.
How so?
Thanks for showing up as an example of what a sympathizer looks like
That's a bit of a stretch lol. But good try.
I definitely wouldn't... stand in your way, let's say. But come on. 🙂
Holy shit that's rude. Wow.
Ah, it makes sense now. Looking at your comment history you're just an edge lord who talks big about murdering people and calling people pussies who won't "grow up" and murder people.
And you're really insulting for no reason to a lot of people. Not sure why you feel the need to be that way. I bet you're not that way in person to people though. Keyboard safety and all that.
You're the kind of person I wanted to get away from when I was on Reddit. But it's inevitable at least one of you all would seep through over here on Lemmy, of course.
mastodon:
Compared to Bluesky, pretty much yeah 😅
Lmao, maybe don’t make memes about things you don’t fully understand? Bluesky isn’t even the Fediverse or decentralized really— and it’s owned by venture capitalists. Mastodon, like Lemmy, is open-source, open-standard, and actually decentralized.
From the outside, this kind of response almost comes off as weird corporate propaganda. Even if that’s not the intent, it’s still a bit cringe—why take this angle?
I was on and off sending this reply as a whole, when I read this comment it put a bad taste in my mouth, and having nobody mention it, I decided I might as well send it.
While I'm glad knowledge is being provided, but, the way this was phrased looks like you are trying to gatekeep joy and quite frankly given the meme is pretty ironic.
No need to be so serious. You can make your point without insulting the meme or the OP, and you can definitly do so without laughing at the OP. I don't think this was your intent which is why I ended up sending it anyway,
The general ideology of the meme is there, and while not 100% correct it's understandable and carries truth(which is both platforms punish trolling). Which is honestly all the matters.
i have no ill will toward OP. but this is a post in a politics sub about conservatives leaving the privately owned business that is run by a literal nazi—i am going to be serious and let them know that bluesky is also privately owned and capitalistic. i didn’t make my response until OP called mastodon a “joke.” OP is free to respond and say they didn’t mean to take this angle or were unaware—and if they did i would apologize and take everything back.
but this isn’t about “joy.” people are dying. mkay? mkay. good talk.
Chances are, fediverse will end up with right wing instances that only communicate with themselves and maybe some centrists, left wing will only communicate with themselves and maybe some centrists, centrists will see all
centrists will see all
I dunno, has this ever actually happened? I think centrists almost universally end up backing the right-wing. Hell, the Centrists were vital in the Nazi's coming to power, and it literally would not have happened without them.
And the 'left wing' is going to be a fractured bunch that overlap slightly, yet Social Democrats, Marxists, Anarcha-Feminists, these 'left wing' groups have vastly different ideas of the best way to help everyone, and I don't see Centrists asking the Anarchists what's up. Centrists are how we got neo-Liberalism, and 'well we can't BAN abortion... but we can limit it unless the woman is...' They want an 'inbetween' in an era when fascists have taken over the most powerful country in the world, with the open backing of fascists/authoritarians in other nations. What's the centrist response to concentration camps in Guantanamo Bay? What sort of chat will happen between Centrists and the Right-Wing with banning abortion? How about the rights of people transitioning? Because from what I'm seeing, they seem awfully okay with it.
They probably all agree we're stronger together. Kinda applies to left and right, too. Hence centrists. Yes yes, I know you cant reason with fascists, but I dont think a centrists aim is to recruit the furthest right.
but I dont think a centrists aim is to recruit the furthest right.
No it is to disempower and politically undermine leftist populism, uphold suffocating neoliberalism and then at the moment it all comes crashing down with innocent people getting hurt everywhere by their shitty politics they throw up their hands and say "well we tried everything, I guess we should cede power to literal fascists!".
History is littered with examples of this, it is nauseating how little creativity there is to the politics of oppression.
Man I dont get how trying to keep both from going off the rails is "hurting people" if anything the accelerationism is whats going to do that. And, motherfucker, I dont have to think marx is a genius to oppose fascism. I abhor tyrants, thats why i am liberal. What I want is freedom and liberty from oppression for all. Economic systems are just the vehicle to that for me.
Man I dont get how trying to keep both from going off the rails is “hurting people” if anything the accelerationism is whats going to do that
Literally my entire point is the centrist refusal to understand the massive difference between annoying leftists who nevertheless value human life and rightwing fascists who attempt to violently overthrow democratically elected governments opens the door wide open to rightwing fascism.
In this moment the ideological requirement for there to be both sides and both be roughly equal in how wrong they are is brainworms and it could not be less suited to understanding the coming era of rightwing, fascist normalization of violence of which the Palestinian Genocide is simply the summoning ritual.
What I want is freedom and liberty from oppression for all.
Unfortunately, your simplified notion of "center=good" here completely undermines your ability to understand what policies and politics will actually create the environment you desire, and worse leads to the classic case of a centrist angrily defending awful beliefs and hate because that is the moderate center that they conclude must be right because some rightwing people are more bigoted and some leftists are just too shrill and aggravating about how bigotry is bad, so that means a little bigotry is good!
Economic systems are just the vehicle to that for me.
Economics isn't physics, everything is biased and needs to be questioned and examined for how it actually acts on the world, economic systems are never "just" anything, they are political intersections of struggle that fools like you stand in with your eyes squeezed shut screaming "this is an objective science!" as you shake your fists at a fascist who nods and smiles and repeats your words back to you but only cares about talking economics insofar as it is a convenient language for rationalizing brutalizing minorities and the powerless (mmmm austerity).
See all, but understand nothing.
Perhaps the republicans were on the campaign trail with the democrats and they just followed them here?
Buncha conservative wankers
The only kind of NIMBY I can get behind.
You only have to talk sense.
If Conservatives were capable of being reasonable, could process reality, and acted in good faith, then they wouldn't identify as Conservative
lol. you just got here, huh?
Do conservatives and tankies added together cancel each other?
lately dem centrists have been palling around with republicans, so maybe dnc centrists and leftists cancel each other out.
Completely left out the rest of the world lol
Nah that just ends up with weirdos hurtling down the NazBol vortex
Y'all jock ride VC money interests too much
Based on specific events or??
This looks like it was printed in a newspaper in the 80's and scanned to digital in the 90's. If this was a filter I'd use it on all my memes.
Wow, they really just strung together a bunch of totally unrelated thoughts, didn't they?
When the left wingers help vote in Trump or choose not to vote they pretty much are conservatives so what's your point?
Biden's nor Harris are left wing. Clinton certainly isn't.
Obama, Harris, Biden and Clinton are all liberals.
A liberal is a centre-left winger who actually has a chance of winning.
Half of those people lost, and one of the winner's reelection campaign was going so badly that he had to resign. Meanwhile, the, "far-left," alternative to them had more favorable polling numbers in the last 3 elections. After the last 10 years, I'm not sure there's any serious way to argue that the center-left are the only ones who have a shot of winning.
When was the last time a ‘far-left’ alternative had a chance of winning?
Sanders. His polling numbers were better against Trump than the last three Democratic candidates, but the party leadership organized to block him in favor of centrist liberals. Biden was the only one of those liberals who was able to eke out a win against Trump, and he was on track to lose worse than Carter lost to Regan when he dropped his reelection bid.
Sanders couldn’t even win a primary and you’re talking about hypothetical polling numbers?
A) Poll numbers are all hypothetical. Non-hypothetical poll numbers are called election results. In every poll, Sanders was beating Trump by more points than any of the Democratic nominees. We'll never know for sure if Sanders would have won, but our best evidence showed he would have performed better than the Democratic nominee.
B) Yes, a coordinated effort by the Democratic party blocked Sanders in 2016 and 2020. He couldn't overcome this institutional opposition, so the Democrats' preferred candidates won the primaries. One of those candidates lost in 2016, while the other won in 2020 but imploded before 2024. We are currently living with the results of the Democrats' attempts to select a, "centre-left winger who actually has a chance of winning," and it turns out those results are almost entirely losses.
When has a far left candidate won?
In 2008. Barack Obama beat Clinton by running an extremely progressive campaign, which included homeowner bailouts, universal healthcare, and ending our foreign wars. He then abandoned all of those promises and governed as a centrist.
It's also worth noting that, despite being a centrist, Biden's platform was very progressive. In fact, Bernie Sanders helped write it. Unfortunately, centrists like Manchin and Sinema killed that legislation, even though it was very popular.
A better question is how many times has a purely centrist message won? Because I'm struggling to think of an example besides Bill Clinton.
Are you actually using Obama as an example of a far left candidate and you think Biden was progressive yet Harris was centrist?
This is why I lean more and more liberal because leftists spend more time defeating themselves instead of building a movement.
I am saying that Democrats perform better with a progressive message than a centrist one. If you don't believe me, you're welcome to look up the party platforms and stump speeches from these years and compare which candidates were pushing leftist platforms and which were centrist. You can compare Biden's BBB plan, which contains child tax credit extensions, universal pre-k, ACA subsidies, affordable housing, and dozens of other progressive programs to the, "economic opportunity," platform of business loans and first-time homebuyer's credits that Harris ran on. You can look up Obama's stump speeches regarding homeowner bailouts and compare them to the HAMP program he actually put in place.
The evidence is pretty clear; voters go to Democrats when they offer a strong, progressive vision for the country, and they abandon them when they pursue centrist policies. Yet liberals like Harris and Clinton both lost by courting, "moderate," Republicans. They’ve convinced themselves to ignore the facts and follow the, "common sense," idea that they need to move further towards the center. Even you have dismissed every piece of information I've presented you and instead continue to insist, without evidence, that being is a liberal centrist is the best strategy. This is why liberals continue to defeat themselves.
Clinton and Harris lost because leftist voters are fickle and listen to republican propaganda.
Also there’s an element of democratic voters who are sexist and racist that didn’t turn out to vote.
This is conjecture, not evidence, but if leftists really are that powerful of a voting block, that seems like further proof that the Democrats should adopt leftist policies.
Sorry but there’s no reason to continue this conversation if you’re not going to read what I write.
I could ask you to explain what you think I'm not reading, but I think we both know this is just a ridiculous cop-out, and you simply don't want to engage with facts that contradict your worldview.
It’s not though, I listened to your comments and responded but you don’t give me the same courtesy.
@SatansMaggotyCumFart @pjwestin Obama was considered "far left" when he ran in 2008.
Obama has never been considered far left unless you are a conservative fear monger.
Look at his voting history he’s always been a firm liberal.
@SatansMaggotyCumFart He was pretty far left for 2008. Support for Gay Rights/Marriage, Universal Health Care, a proto-energy New Deal, lobbyist refore (pre SuperPac Era), military pullout from Iraq were all on the left side of the 2008 Dem party and he ran hard on all those; especially in the primary.
Harris’s voting record is as progressive if not more then Obama’s.
@SatansMaggotyCumFart Harris was also widely unpopular even among Democrats. When she ran for President in 2020 she received less than 1,000 votes nationally. She was on the ballot in California our home state and we couldn't get her over 1,000 votes.
She's just not a good electoral candidate. Had Biden dropped out late 2023 and the Dems held a primary with debates and such; she never would have been chosen as the candidate.
Harris could have had a any stance(s) she wanted, she was doomed to fail from the beginning.
Liberals are not left wing, the left starts at the abolition of capitalism. Without that they cannot back up any concept of equality or equity.
I think you’re confusing the left with far left idealists. “Right wing” and “left wing” are symbolic terms that once represented the right and left sides of the French National Assembly during the French Revolution.
So the “left” is referencing democrats/liberals, not anti-capitalists.
You might want to either co-opt a different term, or better yet- come up with something new.
No matter how much you liberals whine, you're not left wing. The left starts are the abolition of capitalism, as equality and equity cannot exist under capitalism.
As far as the origin of the term.... That's not how language works. It evolves over time. The liberals haven't been included in the left since you people appointed Hitler after instigating more than a decade of institutional violence against communists.
You're not left wing, you're the exclusive reason fascists have ever gained power.
ROFL! You’re just going to lean into the bullshit, eh?
Okay, well… here ya go:
https://www.history.com/news/how-did-the-political-labels-left-wing-and-right-wing-originate
Maybe co-opt a different term? Or better yet, come up with a brand new one. Just be sure to make it sound as ridiculous as your propaganda campaign has been.
Are you running an LLM with basically no tokens?
I have no fucking idea what that even means, but… HOLY FUCKING SHIT! In one paragraph. You acknowledge that history can change the meaning of a term, and in another, you blatantly accuse modern day liberals of being fascist because of shit that happened in the 1930’s?
That is some Olympic-level mental gymnastics! And god dammed hilarious!
You’re definitely trolling. There’s no doubt.
...and that's why you don't win.
That's fine, liberalism will be overthrown like it's sister ideology feudalism before it.
Afraid we are going for the torture nexus future.
So the left will be overthrown is what you’re saying?
Wow… are you a parody account?
Liberals didn't elect Trump, fascist, though. Does not compute.
Liberals also got the Civil rights Act of 1964 passed in Congress, despite MLK's prior Birmingham letter.
To equate American Democratic liberalism of today to German parties of the 1930s... Yeesh.
Liberals also got the Civil rights Act of 1964 passed in Congress, despite MLK’s prior Birmingham letter.
ahahaha liberals HATED MLK, he is only considered a popularly liked relatively uncontroversial political figure because leftists beat down the doors of liberals who would have rather plugged their ears and let the status quo continue indefinitely while telling black men football isn't the right place to ask for empathy for black lives as that is political and sports aren't....
Imagine if Bernie Sanders was black, even more radical and you lived during a time that being centrist meant at a minimum being pretty damn racist...
And yet.
... Wait for it...
Liberals actually got laws passed.
Now tell me — just for contrast — what did the conservatives of the time do when those same "leftists" beat down their doors...? That's right: laughed at them if they didn't lynch them.
Welcome to your first lesson in Pyrrhic Victories vs. Pragmatic Progress.
(And by the way, since you raised Bernie Sanders... With whom does he caucus with >90% of the time? And which ticket did he run as President under... Twice?)
Now tell me — just for contrast — what did the conservatives of the time do when those same "leftists" beat down their doors...? That's right: laughed at them if they didn't lynch them.
...and centrists were ok with it until they got scared enough of people like Malcolm X to take MLK's vision seriously and stop laughing as black civil rights leaders got lynched and murdered.
It is white "moderates" i.e. that kept saying now is not the time and that is the wrong tone until leftist, worker movements forced it to be the right time.
It. Does. Not. Matter.
The only thing that matters is that those evil centrists were the ones to actually LISTEN... To change the laws. To move the boulder of progress forward.
If it was that easy, then why didn't the southern conservatives get scared into submission?
At the end of the day, MLK Jr., worked with those evil-doer centrist liberals — NOT the conservative southern lynchers and the KKK. If you don't believe me, just overlap a map of modern red states with the confederacy with the 1964 Voting Rights Act YES and NO Votes.
My point is centrists folded because it became ideologically and politically the path of least resistance because civil rights activists, leftists and radicals created those conditions and made ignoring them no longer possible (which is what centrists almost by definition always want to do).
And my point is — Why didn't Conservatives of the time fold?
I'm not sure what you think I'm arguing about, but the only thing that matters is that Liberals were the gateway through which progressive activism found a voice. After all, there wasn't a single leftist in Congress at the time.
So thank a liberal for at least being capable of being pressured when a conservative at the time could not be.
So thank a liberal for at least being capable of being pressured when a conservative at the time could not be.
Lol that is a ridiculous thing to ask me to thank someone for.
Lol then it's a good thing I wasn't asking!
I didn’t mention Trump
Who gives a fuck — I did. They didn't mention Hitler; yet you brought him up, didn't you, buddy? Liberals did not elect Trump, fascist.
No, Liberals did not caucus for Trump. Before going further back to the 1930s, perhaps learn more recent history? Overextending your confidence past your knowledge is called ignorant arrogance. Self-identifying liberals in America did not elect Trump, fascist. I'll await your exit-polling data to prove otherwise. Good Luck.
Why do you keep discussing other nations? lol. Yeah... America bad, but boy, your nations sure did immigrate to here en-masse (Do I need to teach you a lesson in history regarding Ellis Island?) to create the "Melting Pot of the World," huh buddy? Which is fine, I'm not opposed. But it's amusing to hear you try to drive wedges among allies in an obviously very Pro-Kremlin Talking-Points fashion.
Anyways. Bad Troll.
Nope, this discussion is over since I hit your censor and have violated us law on misinformation.
Speaking of censorship, just tell me really quickly:
-
Was The Tienamen Square Massacre real and an inhumane response by the CCP, despite Chinese censorship?
-
Do you agree the CCP's actions against Uyghurs and Tibetan is inhumane and cruel?
-
Also, do you agree Putin probably secretly dresses as a Gay Clown despite such imagery being censored in Russia?
-
Do you agree Russia's aggressive offensive preemptive invasion of Ukraine is a war crime and attemptes Genocide?
-
Do you agree Kim Jung Un is morbidly obese and their entire country is regressive and oppressed?
Edit: Hahah they ran away but DM'd me saying, "Enjoy fascism. Since you find it preferable to freedom." LOL. Wtf?