Should Lemmy.ca defederate from Maga Place?
8mon 29d ago by lemmy.ca/u/Sunshine in main@lemmy.ca from lemmy.ca
🚮
Let’s go!
Will piefed.ca follow suit?
piefed.ca is also set to auto-defederate from any instance defederated by: lemmy.ca.
As both a Canadian and an American, yes please. Nothing good comes out of MAGA.
Same situation, same answer. Fascists and nazis must be deplatformed. Let them have their echo chamber all to themselves. Defederate.
How . . .
Dual Citizenship maybe?
Ding ding! Born Canadian, but lived in the US for over a decade, including starting a family (which prompted my application for citizenship). I moved back to Canada a bit ago.
Yah I forgot Canada was a civilized nation.
Plus all the fascism down here makes us stupider.
Hey, be fair, they're working on their own brand of fascism in Alberta (from what I read). It's just as terrible but with maple syrup, probably!
/s
Yes, please.
Fuck them. Lemmy is Canadian.
MAGA, the people who want to make Canada their 51st state, can fuck right off.
However, I do find it funny these "American patriots" feel they need to use Canadian servers to exercise their free speech. Their Orange god is completely against free speech. They should embrace that instead.
Edit: Sorry. I misunderstood how this maga place this was hosted when I made the comment. I thought it was on lemmy.ca but I see now how it's hosted and shared.
However, I do find it funny these "American patriots" feel they need to use Canadian servers to exercise their free speech.
Canadian servers? what do you mean? fedidb does not show server location to me
You're correct.
The A record for the domain name maga.place resolves to 216.144.226.200, which is under the 216.144.226.0/24 prefix of AS36352 (HostPapa). The prefix being used is registered to madgenius.com, which is a hosting provider registered in the United States. Curiously, that provider even has their own ASN (AS55154) that's not being used here.
It's also a shared IP address. The address itself resolves to suportefiscal.aptosclinica.com.br. when you perform a reverse lookup.
As for the domain name itself, a quick whois lookup points to Namecheap. The MX records corroborate this, pointing to registrar-servers.com.
In any case, the server itself is hosted in Virginia. The hosting provider used is an American company either owned by or reselling services from a Canadian company.
This is a 1-day-old account and they also said "Lemmy is Canadian", so I'm presuming that they think that defederation means to remove this like it were a community.
Although even so they aren't wrong: federation with Lemmy.ca means to help spread their messages using Canadian servers:-).
However, I do find it funny these "American patriots" feel they need to use Canadian servers to exercise their free speech.
No, actually they have their own server which is maga.place.
In the Fediverse, independent servers automatically synchronize with each other to publish their content. However, it is possible to cut the link with another server to avoid its publications from showing up on our own server.
No, actually they have their own server which is maga.place
I see that now. I misunderstood how they were hosted.
Yes. Build a wall.
And make MAGA pay for it!
proceeds to send them the invoice
Good luck with that - Trump never pays his bills, & I expect no different from MAGAts.
Yes, this shouldn’t even be a discussion. There’s no room at the table for fascists.
Yes please, no point in taking any chances.
I vote yes.
We don’t need to federate with a safe space for spreaders of hate and conspiracy theories.
At worst, that instance will become another Grad with trolls that piss everyone off. At best, it’ll be a cluster of people and content I’m just going to block anyway.
Defederate from 1 user? 🤣
It’s always good to self contain problems before they get worse.
Yep, and let’s not forget that MAGA started as a fringe movement… it’s like some people still refuse to fucking learn.
Lets not forget how networks underestimated Trump and led to him getting a lot of coverage, and it resulted in him gaining in popularity to get elected his first term to spread the infection.
That's the mistake the left keeps making. They think logic can win out against effective faith based movements founded upon hate with a belief a higher power is on their side. And they waste time debating against something that appeals to the averge person who is desperate and angry. Which is why facism is trending.
The networks knew what they were doing and did it for reason$. Anyway, if maggoty is correct it's um, it's probably a fed.
I wouldn't call him a faith-based movement so much as a populist movement. He just happened to have some talking points that overlapped with the faith-based movements, and he leaned into those to gain his market share. That isn't what I would call a defense of faith-based movements, either, more a reference of causation vs. correlation.
He throws out how something is the best or the worst and makes up false facts and figures and his followers takes him at his word. Same applies to many of his inner circle like RBK with what is supposed to be science.
What else is it at that point other than faith? Its not grounded in facts but belief. Bringing evidence is dismissed as fake news because the movement doesn't care about that. It has the usual hallmarks of religion in my eyes.
Okay, that's fair.
If lemmy doesn't want to do it then everyone should stand together and block them. We can force defederation.
If Nazi.whatever pops up Id want to defederate from that too if they had 1 member
lol 1 user! Yes, by all means, block and defederate.
To be fair, there's fuckamerica@maga.place that's been a real trooper on that instance and posting anti-fascist stuff all over the place. The whole instance has been flooded by them lol!
Maybe that's what we should do, just turn it into an anti-Maga instance by flooding it with anti-fascist posts and comments.
Yep. Fuck em
I think everyone should. that's the whole point of having a decentralized federation system: different people on different instances can decide what's to Nazi for them to tolerate. Not like Xitter where one dude decides what's the acceptable level of Nazi everyone should see every day.
any instance they label themselves maga are usually up to no good, its a launch point for trolling/russian backed propaganda.
The paradox of tolerance is a philosophical concept suggesting that if a society extends tolerance to those who are intolerant, it risks enabling the eventual dominance of intolerance; thereby undermining the very principle of tolerance.
- Wikipedia
How do you determine the threshold for when it can no longer be tolerated? How do you put this into use without being the very thing you are trying to eliminate?
Maybe it’s difficult to establish a precise threshold, but Nazis in general and MAGA in particular are way beyond any reasonable one.
How do you identify Nazis or MAGA, and what level of violence is appropriate to stop them?
I’ve just found one: you
If so, what level of violence are you threatening me with?
Just blocking you, piece of Nazi shit.
Great conversation, have a nice day.
Probably when they weaponize tolerance of their intolerance to further their intolerance and cause objective harm.
Popper says it's when they resort to "fist or pistol" to advance their agenda. That's how you know, when they actually resort to violence.
By then it’s too late and that’s just a revolution.
Well what it means is that if you resort to fist or pistol first, then you are the bad guy, and should not be tolerated.
Its pretty easy to spot
The Moment someone tells me what to do, without telling me in what way my actions are actually hurting someone else, I tell them to fuck off
![(https://lemmy.ca/pictrs/image/6058c6dc-0505-42ce-a732-f89b9f19e5ac.jpeg)]
Should Lemmy.ca defederate from a Nazi instance? Yes. Let's not have their fascist propaganda leak into our instances.
Curious. I just a quick scan on their instance and see no Nazi stuff. Got any examples?
They deleted one of the communities that had a rainbow confederate flag with Nazi swastikas on it.
So they're actively moderating their instance and removing objectionable material. that's a good thing.
Yeah, but the question remains of which half of that they found objectionable.
Curious. Curious.
Who else was famous for saying "curious"?
Kill it before it lays eggs..!
They are heavily moderating and removing any counter argument. So: YES, defederate!
Tbh Lemmy.ml is pretty famous for that as well, so if THAT is the reason, perhaps defederate from both?
ArtemZ
FYI, their single mod/admin uses slav name Artem + Z letter associated with pride in russian modern war efforts. I don't think it's genuine. Probably a prep for some concern trolling campaign in the future or whatever that was discovered (c/antifa) by a shitposter, or, I suppose, their alt persona for different usecases.
It is super clear to me it’s just a troll. A committed troll.
It's against lemmy.ca rules #1 and #2
Get them the fuck out of here
I don't think there's any value associating with racists, sexists, homophobes, transphobes, or traitors.
So, yes.
1 user
Lol
No one should ever tolerate intolerance.
Yes, get them the fuck away from us.
Guy from US here ... This is our cancer .. get away from the stupid .
Cut that fediverse invasion contingent out.
Preferably but I can block it easy enough but I’d love it for this place not to get overrun with those annoying, pathetic fucks
Yes, please.
Uhh... duh? Is that even a question? Of course we should ditch the chuds LMAO
Is the sky blue? This is why the fediverse exists.
Although it would be jumping the gun a bit too soon, you have to let them incriminate themselves. Give them a few weeks and enjoy watching them wasting their time trying to appear to be good faith participants. Then clamp down on them hard when the inevitable hate starts spewing out. Be quite upfront about what you are doing, in fact warn them and their users they will likely be defederated in the future due to the expected devolution of discourse from anyone identifying themselves as such.
B-B-BuT tHe ToLeRaNt LeFt!!!
It's not now or never, but why wait?
They have mistaken the left's tolerance for weakness. Now they will find out that we can fight, too.
Do it before it's too late.
Yes lol, lemmy shouldn't be accepting of these kinds of people. Accepting fascists onto your site is how your site gets ruined for the marginalized groups who have made it their home. It doesn't matter how civil they pretend to be, don't give them an inch
No censorship? Does that mean the rest of us can go in there and shit on their terrible opinions?
Fuck the magats and their orange narcissist god. Canada doesn't need to have ANY association with them and their trade war against us.
Visiting the server is confusing. The only MAGA bullshit i can see is the title and logo, the sole account has posted all antifa and "hard left" content as well as being a \c\antifa moderator.
Maybe it's a legitimate "hard left" or maybe it's a wierd attempt at a false flag "the left is our enemy" construction.
Could someone more knowledgeable on US politics, with more articulate critical skills than me, give a more detailed breakdown of this content structure?
It looks like there are only 3 communities; a meta for the server, Israel, and ANTIFA. The server owner created the first two and the antifa one is created by a troll who has made most of the posts on the server with the single exception of one post the server owner made to the meta community (an RIP charlie kirk post).
Yes wtf
I would. That's the advantage of federated social media. They're welcome to their little corner of bullshit, and rest of us don't have to listen.
Yes! Let them be pariahs if they're going to spout that shit
I thought it was a parody instance.
It will be after we overflow it with tgirl accounts
Duh. Remember that time where a MAGA person listened to facts and logic, not emotion? Yeah, me neither...
Yes
yeeehuuupppp
It's got like 5 users... Unless they're actively causing trouble i would be in favour of not defederating.
That said, i'm not a .ca user so it doesn't really matter to me
Tolerance of the intolerant is unacceptable, no matter how few there may be.
The right wing movement continues to grow. you can assist them in locking themselves away in their bubbles where their ideology will continue to grow and fester or you can help address the problem and start winning hearts and minds.
There is no other way out of this mess
That's not going to happen on social media, let's be honest with each other.
How do you win the hearts and minds of cult members tho?
Someone has to help them see the contradictions within their own beliefs, if they don't get there on their own. For the most part, I think the most likely candidates are people who were once like them (and there are social media accounts like this), since they'll be more likely to listen to someone who they feel understands them. If people who have already recovered from that life aren't available, then someone matching the qualities they wouldn't reject in a friend is the next best thing. In other words, THIS is where allies are supposed to shine if they want to be doing something meaningful to help.
At the earliest, those of us in one or more of their currently most hated marginalized groups can start stepping in once they've crossed the threshold from "this doesn't feel right" to "how do I start connecting with others in a healthier way." Allies should help them bridge that initial gap first, and then the tougher-skinned ones among their friends in marginalized groups can ideally join in. That's how a functioning, healthy society should work. Instead of tunnel vision/pipelines and social bubbles, we need genuine healing and connection.
As an aside, I've been thinking a lot lately about how preemptive (as opposed to reactive) social isolation is actually remarkably analogous to expecting someone in financial poverty to pull themselves up by their bootstraps. It's just that the problem is an emotional form of poverty instead of financial (or both). Some externalize the pain (hating/blaming group X), and some internalize it (any marginalized group that tries to be MAGA), and some do both ("own the libs!") but all in all we're talking about people trying to convince themselves they're happy while also struggling to drown their own humanity.
By discussing their beliefs with them and not ridiculing them.
By avoiding emotional inaccurate rhetoric and biased sources.
By carefully deconstructing their beliefs without attacking them
Not allowing yourself to be pulled off topic.
That kind of pie-in-the-sky happy happy optimism won't work on MAGA. They are too far gone. Literally anything you say to them is a lie (in their mind). Every fact is "fake". Every source is "Pfft...that's what they want you believe*. Every survey is "biased" and every person who doesn't agree with them is a "radical".
Your tips apply to regular debate, even to some degree with christian conservatives. But MAGA is legitimately a cult at that point.
When they firmly believe that Charlie Kirk performed a miracle by preventing the bullet from killing people behind him, they aren't a rational group anymore; they're mentally ill.
You can't win a game against people who aren't following the rules. What you're suggesting works when there's a foundational understanding that is shared, otherwise they must be kicked out of the game (by society at large) until they agree to follow the rules.
It doesn't matter if it's a far-right conspirasist that believes Democrats eat blended up human babies or a far-left feminist that believes bullets and rockets are penis shaped to oppress the masses by flaunting the power of the white man to keep the patriarchy in power.
We teach this to children, everyone can play regardless of color, origin, or race, but as soon as any of the kids start biting or screaming in peoples ears, they're not allowed to play with the rest. Its called consequences.
Good thing we're all tolerant, and all of our political opposition isnt! We really dodged a bullet there...
The paradox of tolerance, while often misapplied, is about this exact scenario.
The paradox of tolerance is just one philosophy on free speech (well really, an argument against it). Personally I think it is too easy to abuse to be a useful guide. EVERYONE thinks they are tolerant and EVERYONE thinks their political opposition isn't, so if everyone subscribes to the idea of the paradox of tolerance you end up with the people with power always trying to suppress the opposition. For example conservatives literally refer to the left as "the intolerant left".
Yeah but thats the perfect time imo. Better to do it now while there is no value than if it gets big and ca users have to abandon a community they may have been participating in (not every community is necessarily related to the main theme of the instance)
1 user?
Have there been any infringements of Lemmy.ca's rules ^[1]^ by users of Maga Place ^[3]^?
References
- Type: Website. Name: "Lemmy.ca". Publisher: "Lemmy.ca". Accessed: 2025-09-22T22:46Z. URI: https://lemmy.ca/.
[…]
[…] - Type: Website. Name: "Maga Place". Publisher: "Maga Place". Accessed: 2025-09-22T22:47Z. URI: https://maga.place/.
[…]
[…] - Type: Meta. Accessed: 2025-09-22T22:48Z.
- Maga Place shows that it has 11 users ^[2]^.
:::
I am saying to not defederate. This instance of the Lemmy is entitled to benefits of white Western culture such as the cloud computing, subsidized fiber communications, and language. As great leaders such as President Putin have said, there is no need to fear for degenerates will be stomped on by the heel of righteousness.
Also I am a loyal member of the Canada who am a socialist and having the blue hair where I work at your Canadian Tire.
(/s)
4/7, needs more usage of the definite article
I don't get that place. It looks like there are 2 users, and the mod is posting lefty articles and the admin seems to be in opposition to that coming from the right.
example: https://maga.place/post/1084
All the posted content is antifascist or anarchist leftish stuff. Seems like the first user has decided to make this MAGA site as offputting as possible to actual MAGA, or to attempt to expose them to saner views. If it becomes a real MAGA space then defederate, and in the meantime pass the popcorn.
On second thoughts, just block it.
Yes please! 🇨🇦
Looks like it.
Fuck yeah! Let them stew in their own cesspool.
Ban also Charlie kirk memorial community.
Yes
This will be unpopular but I wouldn't defederate it just for having shitty politics just like I don't believe in defederating the "Tankie" Lemmy instances for their politics. As long as they're not shitting up the rest of the lemmyverse like the way r/The_Donald used Reddit like a fleshlight from 2016-2019 they can have their little corner, who gives a fuck.
You're right, that will be an unpopular opinion, because MAGA have proven every chance they can that they will not keep to themselves. Over and over again, every chance they get, they try to push their insane feelings and religion and bullshit onto everyone else.
We're watching the Paradox of Tolerance in real time, and yet there are still people like you going 'well as long as they're intolerant but don't try to spread their intolerance it's probably fine.'
The entire point is that they're intolerant, they're not going to keep that to themselves.
They don’t stay in their corner, all they do is seek out pathetic arguments because they’re loser narcissists. And they can’t stand each other because they hate themselves so they always spill out of their echo chamber
We know with 100% certainty that they will indeed shit up the rest of the fediverse.
We heard their ideas enough. Yes, we wanted to help free these people from their delusions before by really, truly hearing them out without judgement.
The time for that has passed. We are at WAAAAR!
Get rid of them!
Yes.
... it has 1 user total with 2 posts. Can we stop with looking for outrage or smthing? Are you a troll OP? Because the MagaPlace looks like a troll.
Yes please defed
I visited the instance and it did not seem at all MAGA friendly.
Yes!!
Is there some glitch in the viewership stats, or is that really how many users they have?
The instance is only a few hours old, maybe less. No one else than the admin has registered so far. It will probably stay that way lol
One person has registered and is diligently posting antifascist and anarchist content, and the admin is arguing with them, which is amusing.
Not now that multiple instance admins have told everyone they exist.
Defederated
aye
Let them incriminate themselves first
At this time, I vote no as it's better for users to block the instance.
Should we migrate existing conservative comms there?
That implies that it is a "conversation comm", which it clearly is not.
Oooo somebody doesn't want to be deported
No, because downvoting them to hell is a stronger disincentive than forcing them into their own echo chamber.
You can do that from Lemmy.zip
I really dont like maga at all but they should have theyre own place as well.
They’ll still have their own place, we just won’t have to deal with them. Defederation doesn’t remove their instance, it just means their content won’t be shared with us.
Thats cool
I was at a shitty crustpunk bar once getting an after-work beer. One of those shitholes where the bartenders clearly hate you. So the bartender and I were ignoring one another when someone sits next to me and he immediately says, "no. get out."
And the dude next to me says, "hey i'm not doing anything, i'm a paying customer." and the bartender reaches under the counter for a bat or something and says, "out. now." and the dude leaves, kind of yelling. And he was dressed in a punk uniform, I noticed
Anyway, I asked what that was about and the bartender was like, "you didn't see his vest but it was all nazi shit. Iron crosses and stuff. You get to recognize them."
And i was like, ohok and he continues.
"you have to nip it in the bud immediately. These guys come in and it's always a nice, polite one. And you serve them because you don't want to cause a scene. And then they become a regular and after awhile they bring a friend. And that dude is cool too.
And then THEY bring friends and the friends bring friends and they stop being cool and then you realize, oh shit, this is a Nazi bar now. And it's too late because they're entrenched and if you try to kick them out, they cause a PROBLEM. So you have to shut them down.
And i was like, 'oh damn.' and he said "yeah, you have to ignore their reasonable arguments because their end goal is to be terrible, awful people."
And then he went back to ignoring me. But I haven't forgotten that at all.
— Transcribed from a series of tweets by iamragesparkle
It's called hell.
I see it as an opportunity to convert them.
If they're still maga at this point they are beyond redemption. Fuck them.
Wanting to convert them is a noble pursuit, but you need to understand what you're up against. MAGA is a cult, and you need to treat it as one.
Here is one article giving some pointers about how to reach someone in a cult.
One of the big things you have to keep in mind is that rational arguments won't work--their beliefs are inherently irrational, and they have ways of deflecting anything that contradicts them (e.g., "fake news").
Because of this, discussions over social media are incredibly ineffective. Reaching someone in a cult involves building a foundation of trust, which needs to be done one-on-one or in a small group setting, and needs to have something other than the context of your differences.
I see remaining federated as more likely to cause additional friction and division. I urge you to continue reaching out to any MAGA you can connect with on a personal level, but don't try to convince someone online with a rational argument. There are better ways to spend your time and energy.
Haha. That's the mistake the left keeps making. They think a cult can be reasoned with and keep giving them a platform to talk to them and spread their gospel. Thinking logic can beat faith bases hatred attributed to a higher power. That's why they keep expanding.
You can pick a given idea and turn them now and again. No, they simply can't pull a 180, but I've had much success bringing people around on a given idea.
No. This place is an echo chamber and I like diverse opinions.
I like diverse opinions too, but like "lower taxes are good for the economy" not "climate change is fake" or "trans people are all pedos and should be put to death".
Fuck their opinions.
Yeah these aren't opinions. They're stupidity, falsehood, and hatred.
So you want the same echo chamber conservatives put themselves in? You see no value in knowing your enemy?
There's certainly value in seeing what the other side actually says vs. the rage bait we see on social media. Used to have a conservative friend, and holy shit, the things he thought all liberals believed was shocking.
And from the other side, I don't know a single conservative that hates trans people. Yes, the majority opposes transition, but that doesn't translate into murderous hate. They think they're being reasonable. Anecdotally, there was a trans woman working the paint counter at Home Depot for years, in my dark red county. Think if the hate was so universal she could have held that position, if not having her ass beat on the daily?
Anyway, you get my point. Saying all people in $group are X, Y, Z is how you get vile ideas like racism. And yes, I understand the paradox of tolerance. Told my MAGA neighbor to fuck himself and that his wife was a fat, froggy little fascist.
If you really want to see alt right opinions that much just go use Twitter, tiktok, and youtube and the algorithm will adjust to show you the content you are so desperate to see.
Heck go use reddit. If you want diverse opinions that much go use a mainstream platform.
Somebody here hasn’t heard of the paradox of tolerance.
No. Hearing and understanding opinions with which we disagree is part of being a functional adult.
If we end up having a situation where they spam with hate speech etc, that's different but just being conservative? I'd like to hear what they have to say.
John Stuart Mills put it better than I can:
He who knows only his own side of the case, knows little of that. His reasons may be good, and no one may have been able to refute them. But if he is equally unable to refute the reasons on the opposite side; if he does not so much as know what they are, he has no ground for preferring either opinion.
The quote from Mills assumes the "other side" has reasons, or is willing to argue in good faith.
I have no problem with conservative communities. MAGA isn't just a conservative community, it's a hate-driven cult. We already know their reasons, they have nothing else to contribute to a meaningful discourse.
I'm so bored of this "but we need to listen to the opposing view" bullshit. We know what the maga fascists think, we will learn nothing new by putting up with their crap.
100% this.
It's like giving nazi's and child rapists a voice on Lemmy. In fact MAGA is JUST like that.
Something something Venn circle something something
And we've seen two times what listening to maga and giving people like that a platform to discuss results in. Trump being elected twice and maybe a third in the future.
We have actual real world events of how ineffective it is with networks giving Trump huge coverage when he first appeared.
Yep. That titanic has sailed.
I don't think in our context the point would be to seriously consider the other side. Rather to hear what they're on about at the moment purely informatively. But if most don't want that the rest could use alts to check on the crazies.
it’s a hate-driven cult. We already know their reasons, they have nothing else to contribute to a meaningful discourse.
You know, they say much the same about us.
Almost like the way to resolve the situation is actual dialogue rather than just seeing the worst of each side getting thrown up on social media.
For every asshole in MAGA gear that we take as a fair representation of the group, there's some kid talking about how the only good MAGA person is six feet under and making it look like everyone on the Left is ready to kill anyone who disagrees with them.
I've had actual dialogue. For real. Many times, over many years, with many of them.
After you've had enough conversations with them, you start to realize that they're not interested in good-faith discussion. If they were, they wouldn't be part of the cult. Or in other words, anyone who was interested in good-faith discussion has already left.
I'm not using hyperbole or exaggerating. Any person still wearing the red hat is not interested in anything you have to say. If you want proof, ask anyone from MAGA: "What would it take to change your mind?" I've asked this question dozens of times, and I've only gotten two answers: "nothing", and nothing.
It's good to have the general approach of wanting to hear the opinions of others. But like anything, too much of a good thing can become a bad thing. In this case, the MAGA folks will take advantage of your willingness to platform them, and trample all over you for it. In this case, "hearing both sides" isn't helping them or you. They've made their positions very clear, and they won't be swayed. There's realistically nothing they could tell me to sway my position either, because there's nothing that could override the evidence from the man himself. It's a useless standoff.
I get wanting to offer the olive branch and resolve things through civil discussion, but realistically there are some cases where that approach hurts more than it helps.
It doesn't mean we have to resort to violent rhetoric or immaturity (though I understand where those people are coming from too), it means we need to approach MAGA for what it is: a cult. Trying to help someone leave a cult is very different from having a discussion about politics. There are some effective ways to help someone leave a cult, but online cross-community friction isn't that--it's only going to get people more divided.
Ironically, sometimes it's less divisive to simply defederate.
Why should anyone be forced to listen to Nazi bullshit. Fuck magats. Nazis have only one place in the world, 6 feet under.
You know they're just going to ban anyone who goes in there, that isn't MAGA, right?
I dunno, a quick look through the admin seemed like they were open to stuff with which they disagree. (Looks like one of us was already there trolling and the admin seems to have responded in good faith.)
Mills didn't live through fucking First and Second World War.
Less well known is the paradox of tolerance : Unlimited tolerance must lead to the disappearance of tolerance. If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them. — In this formulation, I do not imply, for instance, that we should always suppress the utterance of intolerant philosophies ; as long as we can counter them by rational argument and keep them in check by public opinion, suppression would certainly be most imwise. But we should claim the right to suppress them if necessary even by force ; for it may easily turn out that they are not prepared to meet us on the level of rational argument, but begin by denouncing all argument ; they may forbid their followers to listen to rational argument, because it is deceptive, and teach them to answer arguments by the use of their fists or pistols. We should therefore claim, in the name of tolerance, the right not to tolerate the intolerant. We should claim that any movement preaching intolerance places itself out- side the law, and we should consider incitement to intolerance and persecution as criminal, in the same way as we should consider incitement to murder, or to kidnapping, or to the revival of the slave trade, as criminal.
Popper, Karl R. The Open Society and Its Enemies: Volume 1, The Spell of Plato. Routledge, 1945
If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant
Allowing people to hear different opinions is not unlimited tolerance.
Is that the only thing you can rebut out of all of that?
It is the only relevant part.
Are these the kind of meaningful debates you have with MAGA?
Yeah, I get similarly silly stuff from the right, where they have readnheard of something but don't quite understand how it applies, eg:
"I guess you haven't read the Constitution!"
"Free speech is about government, not public outcry."
Such is life.
What's silly about the paradox of intolerance? Why does it not apply to defederating here? I don't grasp it's purported lack of relevance.
You are misunderstanding.
I'm not calling the paradox (or the constitution) silly, I'm saying they don't apply in this scenario.
From the snippet above:
I do not imply, for instance, that we should always suppress the utterance of intolerant philosophies ; as long as we can counter them by rational argument and keep them in check by public opinion, suppression would certainly be most imwise
But we should claim the right to suppress them if necessary even by force ; for it may easily turn out that they are not prepared to meet us on the level of rational argument, but begin by denouncing all argument ; they may forbid their followers to listen to rational argument, because it is deceptive, and teach them to answer arguments by the use of their fists or pistols.
In other words, yeah, if that instance starts getting people to be assholes to everyone etc, sure, tolerance does not mean we should let them do so here, that's the point of the paradox. But, as the author states, suppressing them without cause etc would be most foolish. Far better to try and discuss with rational argument first before resorting to "well, we don't want to talk to you because my MAGA uncle is a dick."
I disagree with you on this and various other points you've made here, but I appreciate you taking the time to elaborate your viewpoint.
Thanks!
MAGA and “just conservative” are not the same.
Self-labeling as MAGA is denoting full cult of personality and fealty to Trump. Add the online-ness element, plus the small size of Lemmy in general, and you’re concentrating that presence into a toxic sludge that seeps into the rest of the fediverse a la 4chan/Xhitter trolls.
“MAGA” is not going to change their minds on anything, nor are they looking to meaningfully change ours. MAGA does not argue in good faith, or based on rationality or policy. Red-hatters enter non-red-hat spaces for the purposes of intimidation, feeling superior, and sowing discord. Then they pat each other on the back for “owning the libs” and continue the cycle.
It’s perfectly reasonable to not want to federate with relentless trolling and become a Nazi bar by means of association.
Red-hatters enter non-red-hat spaces for the purposes of intimidation, feeling superior, and sowing discord. Then they pat each other on the back for “owning the libs” and continue the cycle.
It’s perfectly reasonable to not want to federate with relentless trolling and become a Nazi bar by means of association.
Declaring what they'll do before they've done it is pretty silly. Sure, if that instance starts becoming a problem, defederate. But maybe we can hope for the best first?
I respect your point, but 10 years into MAGA's relentlessly obnoxious online behaviour it seems a little naïve to think it's at all likely to go differently there.
No real harm in trying.
Otherwise, yay, we're just in our own obnoxious echo chamber being angry that people don't agree with us instead of talking with those whom we need to persuade.
I was going to say something about wanting to avoid echo chambers and then... I read the post history from the admin over there. sighs
I think it's appropriate to defederate. Doing so doesn't stop their admin, or anyone else, from creating an account on any other instance. Play by the rules of civility in the fediverse and no worries. If they can't, then it will be dealt with via bans.
If they want a maga island to themselves, then so be it.
I took a glance at their post history, didn't see anything too horrific or hate filled. I strongly disagree with their stances on immigration etc but at a glance, didn't see anything terrifying.
The question isn't about banning a user but of defederating an instance. If that particular admin wants to participate elsewhere, there's no reason why they can't so long as they can abide by the rules.
And so far, no one has given an example of the harms or bad behaviour that would warrent defederation. It's just been "I disagree with them so defederate."
I think the concern is the stated nature and purpose of the instance. It's almost certainly going to draw the kind of users and content that would be problematic.
The purpose of this post is to determine if our instance should preemptively manage the anticipated problem. Far left instances have been similarly defederated alongside other problem instances.
Anyone is free to join that instance. And any user from that instance is free to create a federated account with any number of instances to be a part of the greater fediverse. So long as they follow instance and community rules, they're free to participate with everyone.
Honestly, this is an age where we really need to be working on deescalating as much as possible.
Honestly, this is an age where we really need to be working on deescalating as much as possible.
I fully agree. And I would hope part of that de-escalation would be finding common ground with those with whom we disagree.
Instead of forcing the individual users to come and be yelled at one at a time, I'd love for them to have a place so we can start some sort of talks, even if it's just stupid shit like what video games they like. I dunno. If we can't find common ground then it's just two sides trying to destroy each other until it's too late to solve our actual problems.
The 1990’s called and want to know if you’ll be a guest on Rush Limbaugh. You won’t actually get to say anything, so no pressure.
Sure. Any chance to get his audience to hear an alternative version. The number of conservatives with whom I chat in real life who have just never heard of various things kind of blows me away. My good buddy was on the "yeah but the Left is more violent" train, we talked about it, I showed him things he hadn't seen and vice versa. We both learned, grew and revised our opinions.
Same thing could happen for Rush's audience.
You’re expecting good faith then. Like talking with a good buddy.
No, I'm just confident in the power of reality and facts. It's why I admire Pete Buttigieg for going on and making the Liberal case on Fox news. We're not converting anyone who disagrees with us here.
You know we just elected a 34-time fraud convict and adjudicated rapist to the Presidency here, right? Reality and facts weren’t even in the news for the last two years.
But hey - good luck!
You know we just elected a 34-time fraud convict and adjudicated rapist to the Presidency here, right?
Exactly the point. When things are so bad half the country is willing to say "yeah, but we trust him more than the fucking Left" something is seriously wrong.
If we don't work to figure out how to win folks over, things are going to get much much worse.
My life will be fine kind of regardless but I worry for others.
When things are so bad half the country is willing to say "yeah, but we trust him more than the fucking Left" something is seriously wrong.
The short answer is media. Or as the kids like to say, "propaganda".
Neither of which are arguable. But I appreciate you wanting to talk with people one-to-one. Good luck there.
The short answer is media. Or as the kids like to say, “propaganda”.
Ehhhh, I think blaming a problem happening simultaneously in almost every democracy on "the media" feels a bit like putting our heads in the sand and avoiding the issues. But to each their own.
There's a ton of scholarship to back it up and it will affect your efforts one way or another but you can also ignore it and hope it doesn't have as much sway as "they" say.
You are free to share some of that scholarship.
Unless you mean something like social media, then I'd probably agree. But any research blaming traditional media would have to answer three large issues that seem to stand in direct contradiction:
-
Germany has a wildly different media ecosystem than America, which has a wildly different media landscape than the UK, which has a wildly different media ecosystem than Italy, which has a wildly different media landscape than Austria, which has a very different one than France, which is very different from Poland etc. But the same phenomenon is happening across the board.
-
Traditional media is no longer where most people get their news. So either it's really radicalizing a smaller group or?
-
Traditional media consumption among age groups seems to indicate quite the opposite happening, ie, in America at least (I can't recall the age related shifts across Europe) younger voters are, relative to historical norms, lurching Right, whereas older voters are moving a bit to the Left. Yet, the younger groups are much less likely to get their news from traditional media than older voters, so if media were the culprit, you'd expect the shift to have happened the other way.
So media, properly defined, has certain properties that inherently exist regardless of the business or social environment it itself is a part of.
This explains why the phenomenon is similar across different media landscapes. And while traditional media may be fading away, people who have lived their whole lives with it are still in power at various levels and it’s still very much applicable. Also, social media affects those from a traditional media background differently.
This was posted a few days ago and is just interesting though not particularly relevant to your efforts.
To each their own. I agree with Chomsky that yeah, media blinkers people and frames the terms of the debate. But, this has been true for decades. Something has fundamentally changed in the last 10 - 15 years and we're watching those changes ripple across almost every society.
Again, you're free to share any relevant research. But, I think blaming the Rightward swing that we're seeing across the world on just "the media" is, at best, over simplistic.
Well it is simplistic. Because there’s a lot of complexity to unpack.
But, this has been true for decades. Something has fundamentally changed in the last 10 - 15 years and we're watching those changes ripple across almost every society.
So true! Several things have fundamentally changed:
- Democratization / decentralization of creators
- Speed to market
- Niche demographics
- No regulation, no oversight
Just a few things. There’s many more. But we're not talking about clothes, or food, or anything else in our daily lives that have had such an impact, because clothes or food don’t have the same qualities that make media such a pivotal piece of any given person’s worldview.
Like I said earlier, if you mean something like social media, then I agree. When I say social media, I also mean our new ways of ingesting media, eg short form text, memes, podcasts etc (though should probably use a different term.) I think there are a bunch of pernicious effects and incentives which have made seeing the humanity in those with whom we disagree difficult and compromise impossible. We don't need propaganda, people in general are just not able to handle the information landscape that's been created.
But, if you're really talking about even the spread of more independent written media etc, then I just don't see their limited readership being the fundamental game changer that we've seen.
American conservatives arent good faith debaters.
And they feel much the same way about us. Almost like the only way to resolve the differences is, I dunno, discussion.
Yeah it worked out so well for America that they elected Trump twice and his style of politics has become more popular. But, I'm sure you can do what a nation and the people opposing him failed to do of changing minds through discussion.
How about starting with something easy first like convincing antivaxers to change their minds.
Yeah it worked out so well for America that they elected Trump twice and his style of politics has become more popular.
Oh, I hadn't realized America was secretly not super polarized and has plenty of actual spaces where people meet, interact and talk with folks with whom they disagree.
Lets ignore Canada almost choosing a prime minister that ran on US style culture war politics or Europe trying to push things like chat control or Germany with a growing alt right movement. Yeah its a roses everywhere in the world.
Lets give the alt right more of a voice its turned out so well.
I have no idea what point you're trying to make.
Debating someones right to live isnt a discussion.
I'm assuming you're talking about trans rights?
Show me where that exists in anything published by the trump campaign or project 2025.
As far as I understand, neither have said "we will murder all trans people."
These sorts of claims are exactly why I'd like to hear what MAGA has to say. It's just the same as people who claimed Harris was going abolish private property; undoubtedly some of her supporters were from our crazy Left fringe but to conflate them with her was, at best, mind numbingly stupid.
Do your own homework. Its in plain speech in both.
aka, "okay, I know they didn't say this but I feel it!"
Which is eerily similar to how republicans paint the Left on various issues.
That doesn't work on the internet. Without face-to-face interaction the ability to empathize with the other side is lost. We're NPCs, just random encounters in the posting RPG. I'm someone that deserves to die and there's literally nothing I can say or do that would change their minds, they just want to collect my posts for their cringe compilations and bully me until I kill myself.
You can't empathize with anyone unless you can see them face to face? That seems worrying.
I think a lot of people empathize without meeting people, witness y'know, the mass complaints and protests about Palestine. I don't think that many folks have actually been to the Gaza strip.
We see videos coming out of the Gaza strip. Maybe "face-to-face" was overstating it, but we really do need to be able to see and hear people to make them real in our minds. We struggle to empathize with random strings of text on a screen.
You can still do it if you try, but when you're "debating" people the relationship is inherently antagonistic. People usually aren't going to try to empathize with the enemy, they're going to try to win. That's why debating on the internet does not work.
Watch, you'll now keep arguing with me because I can't convince you of anything, because I'm an NPC in the posting RPG. Your goal here isn't to listen to anything I have to say or trust that I have literal decades of experience arguing on the internet at this point, your goal is to defeat me and gain upvotes. I'm not real, I'm just something getting in your way.
Your goal here isn't to listen to anything I have to say or trust that I have literal decades of experience arguing on the internet at this point, your goal is to defeat me and gain upvotes. I'm not real, I'm just something getting in your way.
That's a wild assumption. If I cared about upvotes, I have trouble imagining an approach more destined to fail than arguing for MAGA on Lemmy.
I also don't think everything has to be a debate. I love those and am always happy for it but really, just getting MAGA folks to interact with people whom they wouldn't otherwise is healthy. I think more good and possibly understanding our shared humanity comes of sharing memes or common interests.
Similarly, if we see the news or the things that are animating them, it's helpful. (A trivial example from years ago but that opened my eyes, I was pretty on the "cancel culture is a stupid made up complaint" and then while reading the National Review, they referenced "so you've been publicly shamed" which broke my heart when I read it. Then my opinion changed a bit.)
Yelling at people on the internet is rarely actually debating and even less often convincing.
Edit: ahhh, sorry, I'm on a phone and see I've got a note about you. I'll end this here.
Have a good day!
Or maybe not engage with a million rage bots on Reddit before you have a chance to process news in a healthy way. I think it disables their emotional regulation.
Hell, just not engaging with social media would probably be the correct call for all sides.
This stuff is destroying our ability as a people to handle anything.
The downvotes here are stupid. I have a conservative friend and we always ask each other questions about why each side feels one way or another. It is a good way to find common ground. It is also a good way to understand what is going on.
Is your conservative friend part of a hate cult?
MAGA is a hate cult, so yes. I still am interested in his opinion. He is interested in mine. We both think Kirk was a hit to distract from Epstein files. The GOP voted against the release that day. We both also disagree with funding for Israel, but for different reasons. We both are upset that Epstein files have been hidden. He has pretty much turned on Trump because of it.
We are also both really tired of establishment politicians being bought constantly. I dislike most dems now. Especially ones like Pelosi or Shumer. My frind complains about RINOs. You can find common ground.
The difference is my friend is a real person and not a bot. Those conservative forums are filled with rage bots that disable people's emotional regulation and incite violence. That's one thing I hope we can keep away. I think liberal rage bots exists too, though.