Hello! I’ve been searching for a reddit alternative, and yes, I’ve picked Lemmy and Raddle, but here’s the thing. My morbid curiosity is perked up, and a part of me wants to join the “free speech” alternatives, like Saidit, Poal, etc. What’s wrong with me that I want to join toxic places? I mean, yes I’ll find a whole new perspective (albeit wrong), on political topics, but a part of me wants to be the antagonist, and post lefty memes, and music with a left-leaning message (bands from r/rabm) I know that’s like kicking the hornet’s nest, so you don’t need to start in with “that’s a bad idea” I know it is. My main point/question is, is it wrong to join a site with potential hate speech? Does it make someone a bad person?
It potentially opens you up to radicalization in the wrong direction.
Generally radicalization in any direction is bad.
Why? Shouldn’t the measure of good and bad be with respect to how correct it is, not how closely the position aligns with the status quo?
The word implies an unhealthy and incorrect degree. Otherwise you’re not radicalized, just representing an opinion.
the word radical means “from or going to a root or source.”
it simply implies wanting to deal with the root cause of issues. the word you are looking for is probably “extremism”
What a word used to mean and how a word is used today aren’t necessarily the same.
Not necessarily, it implies conviction and separation from the norm.
radical means arising from or going for the root.
it implies fixing things at the perceived root cause, the word you are actually looking for here is probably “extremism”
To be fair I think my definition of radicalize is wrong given the other comments. Ive always used it as a synonym for extremism.
Yes, hence they reveal that they think the staus quo is the correct way of doing things… Though to be fair, being a little reactionary is hard wired in human brains and is especially prone to surface for those politically illiterate (or idiots in Greek).
Enlightened centrist entered the chat.
It’s always that instance.
Yeah, Lemmy.ml is pretty trash tbh
You know where the exit is.
There are a few instances like that, not just one
I want so bad for them to add auto-hiding for comments from certain instances.
I have blocked the most annoying instances, I used to just keep blocking all communities from them that I saw in my feed, but that list quickly became too long to even open in my app…
Like up?
we need radical change tbh, things are not sustainable the way they are. just pays to be cautious about it though.
Good luck man, you’re about to learn how easy it is to get banned on those free speech alternatives. Still funny though.
Be careful however. No matter what, you’re still just a brain in a flesh jar. You are susceptible to false information and lies as your brain can’t really differentiate between false and correct info that well.
You are not immune to propaganda
Be careful however. No matter what, you’re still just a brain in a flesh jar. You are susceptible to false information and lies as your brain can’t really differentiate between false and correct info that well.
You are not immune to propaganda
I never understood this argument. How is it any different for leftist propaganda? This just feels like telling someone to stop thinking because you’re on our team now and we want to make sure you don’t leave.
How is this different than leftist propaganda?
It’s not. In no way, shape, and or form. Once more, you are not immune to propaganda.
Again, I’m not stating you shouldn’t seek out people who disagree with you, I seek these people out often, but you need to understand what your brain will do.
You should generally be cognizant of bias and the fact that you will, inevitably, accept without confirmation some information or internalize information you’ve confirmed incorrect. This is not only true to one group, and is just as true for those under the umbrella of “leftist” as much as under the term “alt right”.
I will state it’s less dangerous to be less cautious here than a free speach absolutist community. Here, we value truth. There, they value all speach even objectively false. Here, you’ll see false info removed there, definitionally, or is not.
Lastly, for fascism, death of truth is a defining reality. To paraphrase Mussolini let not truth stand on a pillar except insomuch as it assists in our goals. In the places where absolutist freedom of speach reigns fascists, famously very good propagandists, thrive. This is a danger above a left winger repeating false statistics around racism in the police force, or the rates of spousal abuse. Or even myself lying about that Mussolini quote at the beginning of this paragraph
Thank you for the responce however and the respectful tone you took, I hope I clarified>
So if I understand correctly, you’re saying that
- you’re more likely to be exposed to lies on a right wing forum compared to left wing forums
- the types of lies you’re exposed to are more dangerous in a right wing community compared to the left.
So first of all, how do you determine that #1 is true? I’ve seen my fair share of misinformation on Lemmy and the left-leaning parts of Reddit getting highly upvoted and vice versa. But I’m basing this on what I personally know (and who knows if I’m right?) and in general, there isn’t much objective info going around. It’s mostly people sharing their sentiments on a topic with little to no factual information (e.g. “fuck [entity X]”).
#2 also assumes that you’re right to begin with and that sharing these false statistics would lead to a better world. Take false statistics on police racism for example. This can be a problem in many ways. Let’s say hypothetically that there is no police racism, but we say there is and we convince everyone that we need to fix it. This can divert resources away from other problems (e.g. working on reducing spousal abuse), and thus making problems worse elsewhere. Moreso if the police force is tasked with handling spousal violence and they’re now tied up in internal investigations, maybe losing funding, and thus reducing their capabilities. It’ll also be fuelling an unnecessary conflict (possibly violent) between people who should otherwise be allies in the struggle that is life. More people get hurt, more people can die. That’s a pretty dangerous outcome.
deleted by creator
I’ll go over this again later when I have more time, but for now, I just want to say that I don’t appreciate spending so much time trying to understand what you’ve written only to be met with accusations of having deliberately done the exact opposite. I may not be particularly smart, but I’m putting in the effort.
deleted by creator
So my efforts didn’t yield the correct understanding. I recognize that it happens and that’s why I put a short summary of my understanding right at the start so that you can easily correct it without having to read through everything else and expend unnecessary energy trying to parse it out. If you don’t want to continue the discussion, that’s fine. I can find my answers elsewhere. There’s no need to be a dick about it.
I never understood this argument. How is it any different for leftist propaganda? This just feels like telling someone to stop thinking because you’re on our team now and we want to make sure you don’t leave.
Your argument seems to suggest :
- Listening to far right voices is not too bad if you keep being alert.
- The brain of the listener who thinks for themselves will be strong enough to distinguish leftist propaganda and lies from facts and truth.
I fear, looking at the millions of people who are not well informed about some things (say privacy + GAFAM), that this is wishful thinking. Remember the experiment with people in the cinemas where some soft-drink images were almost invisible merged into the movie and made people thirsty and buy more drinks during the break ? In my opinion the human brain is unfortunately not as powerful as people make it believe it is. And I have no big issues in general with leftist propaganda as I’d like to see the planet saved rather than destroyed.
deleted by creator
It isn’t about the greater idea, it’s about the small lies you don’t know you’re accepting. Of course that isn’t to say you can’t engage at all with this content (I certainly seek out people who disagree with me.) as you say, with constant effort and confirming everything you’ll catch most of it. No matter what you’re going to end up believing something without confirming it or even realising it. Good propaganda goes unquestioned. It seems like something obvious, small, and in some base way unquestionable.
In a torrential downfall there’s no way to catch each raindrop, no umbrella that can block it all. You are going to get wet, even just a little.
They’re not looking for freedom of speech but freedom from consequences.
You’ll get banned there real quick.
you get banned from individual instances but not from the fediverse/lemmy which is kind of the point
Does Saidit and Poal work the same as Lemmy that way?
im not that familiar with them but they don’t look federated, which is what makes this possible, so no.
So what was the point of your previous comment?
wtf is freedom of speech if not a freedom of consequences from what you say?
There is a distinct difference.
Freedom of speach means that the government can’t punnish you for talking shit, except in limited circumstances.
Freedom of consequences from what you say, means that no one should be allowed to let what your say affect them in any way, this means that no one would be allowed to be offended by what you might say, nor that they would be allowed to act on such offence.
In a functional society you want to have freedom of speach, but not freedom of consequences from what you say. This allows you to express opposing views in mostly resonable ways.
As long as the consequences are words and non-violent actions. Advocating violence as a consequence for someone expressing an idea is imho dangerous and should be avoided.
yes, but words that incite violence are also very dangerous. there is a line to thread here.
case in point: i don’t think goebbels actually directly harmed anyone, but his speech caused quite a lot of suffering, violence and death. his speech should absolutely not be rebutted with ‘just words’, there must be actual consequences to what he did.
on top of it we live in a world where his propaganda techniques are still used for harm.
it is dangerous, but so is speech that incites violence even if the perpetrator himself isn’t directly doing it. its a fine line to tread.
case in point: i don’t think goebbels ever directly killed or harmed anyone, but his speech caused a lot of death and suffering, and someone like him should absolutely not be dealt with just words. keep in mind his propaganda techniques are still alive today.
I agree that speech that incites violence is dangerous too. In theory I can imagine a net benefit if we could silence some voices in various places. The big question then is, who do we trust to decide which people should be silenced? I think governments have historically shown that they can’t be trusted. Then private people? Lots of people across the political spectrum feel that their version of truth is so important that they deem it moral to silence others, so what it comes down to is just who does it better. The image of an angry mob is no fun if the mob has decided that you should be silenced, even though you feel like you’re on the good side. They probably think they are the good ones. Who then?
People telling you you’re and arsehole and treating you like what arsehole is then expressing their freedom of speech.
It’s also a consequence of your speech.
That’s fair but I don’t think there’s much freedom of speech if someone will murder you for what you’ve said
Where the fuck did murder come from?
That’s a possible outcome that I subconciously included in the list of consequences
I mean sure, if you leap all the way from 0 to 1,000 for no reason.
No reason? Being murdered is still a consequence, isn’t it? Why wouldn’t I include it?
I don’t think it makes you a bad person, but I do think you’d be banned faster than green grass through a goose
Green grass through a goose, that’s definitely a new one
You can if you want. You’ll certainly find new perspectives however you will be unlikely to get any good discussion. If you go there to antagonize they will simply ban you as they don’t want lefty memes or left leaning messages.
I don’t think being on the same platform as hate speech makes you a bad person. You’re only wasting your time and exposing your self to needless hate and toxicity.
I think it is generally a bad idea to support sites that promote hatred and fascist ideas by providing them traffic and content.
Perhaps an unpopular take, but my suggestion would be to think if you can come from the perspective of love: do you love these people, and care about them, though they’ve believed lies? Can you converse with them with respect, listening to why they feel how they do, and be patient to bring truth only to help them, not to self-righteously vindicate yourself?
Then again, this is the internet, so if you jump in, post inflammatory memes, pat yourself on the back for being so clever, and jump out again, and show us the results; perhaps I’ll giggle along with the rest of us.
For a different take, you might like to note that part of the effectiveness of propaganda is not a good rational explanation but repeated asserted lies. Jumping into a different set of assertions can help pop you out of ones you’ve wrongly believed from your own background - but it can also wear you down to believe, or half believe, what the other community is saying even if it’s without merit. Keep a check on the things you read: What’s the actual source behind this? Could these be repeatedly misconstruing that thing in the same way (so they look coherent but aren’t)? Is there some useful truth in here I missed? And is there a subtle lie attached to the truth? And there’s lots of other helpful questions you can ask: but keep a sensible head and be prepared to step back and look at something else.
I’ve thought about being compassionate with these people, but the moment you get called a jewish slur or the n word, all compassion kinda goes out the window.
I feel for you, though that’s where the true test of compassion is.
This is the right answer. Hatred just breeds more hatred. If you approach with love and understanding (or at least a desire to understand), you’ll have a much better chance of changing hearts and minds. Try to meet in the middle and you might be able to point them in the right direction.
Free speech enthusiasts are exercising hatred. Before non-hateful people realize this they sometimes conflate it with the inversion: speaking truth to power. Or sometimes simply “freedom” which isn’t perfectly absolute when we live in a society. If you wanna witness hatred then follow the free speech thread.
Places that advertise themselves as being free speech
- Expectation: You are free to say whatever you please
- Reality: Oops! All CSAM/racism and they ban on a hair
those things can honestly be posted here on .ml or on instances like hexbear, blahaj and such.
if you want to challenge your and other’s perspectives, you would do better doing so in instances such as lemmy.world or maaybe reddit, you are likely to encounter some pushback but they generally can be talked to. free-speech code-for-fascism sites will just ban you at best. if you actually want to troll them you will probably only have a chance if you organize.
that said if you are feeling masochistic you can go on 4chan, its probably where most of them hang out publicly, and its the rare place where they actually wont ban you for nothing.
It doesn’t make you a bad person but it’s not a healthy way to spend your time. It creates a feedback loop of finding things that upset you, ineffectually combating them, getting upset at the lack of positive results, and trying to fix that dissatisfaction by finding more things that upset you to fight against. You’ll think of it as a way to entertain yourself but, on balance, you’re the one getting the most stressed out by it.
If you want to troll the far right, you’re better off trying to do that in spaces where other people can see you doing it because that has an actual possibility of affecting their behavior. Real life, for example.
Just do it and post screen caps here.
Learn how to mask your IP using VPNs or other open proxies before any of that.
Also tracking protection in the browser to prevent reading browser history and such. Security and privacy practices are absolutely paramount if you’re planning on visiting services like that. Of course the best thing is to not visit them at all but some people feel they need to see it for themselves, if they choose they should be prepared and keep themselves safe.
People just don’t understand. Because society prohibits exhibitions of hatred, those are most likely to seek out places that do allow it. The desired “freedom” aspect of society-free judgement is why you encounter them more often in these type of forums. And when you got there to “repress” them, it’s seen as the claws of society invading one of the few avenues that allow venting their frustrations.
Think of it like this, everywhere you go there’s rules, rules, rules! You’re stuck doing a job you don’t like to pay bills that keep growing, having to play nice with people you barely get along with 5 to 7 days a week and only an online forum to let you vent off your stress. But then some bozo shows up and yells “no, you can’t do that!”. Wouldn’t that just make you angry?
This isn’t about the correct thing to vent about, it’s about being allowed to vent. When you tell someone they’re not allowed to do something because it’s bad, it usually comes off as taking away their sense of agency, and that just makes them more hateful.
Maybe it’s just my way of thinking, but if someone says “you can’t do that” I usually stop doing that and shut down, because it’s not allowed. I have autism, so that my play a role in it, but my go to response is to just shut down usually and stop doing that thing or avoid it all together.
Most people do stop doing that as well. However, a tiny bit of resentment from being disallowed also takes root. More so when they believe it’s unjust. And if they encounter more and more of “can’t do this, can’t do that”, that resentment grows into something ugly. That ugliness doesn’t care if it’s right or wrong, it only sees oppression and develops into hatred. Which eventually turns into violence.
It ain’t right, but it’s how we’re built. We usually see in 1st person and can’t fathom what it’s like to be on the other side.
r/TalesFromYourServer: Kicking a Nazi out as soon as they walk in
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.
I understand that, I really do. However, what if you change nazi memorabilia with LGBT+ stuff? Is the bartender still correct in doing so?
Or change the LGBT+ stuff to any kind of recognizable symbols of a certain group. Is it still the paradox of tolerance or is it now the paradox of intolerance? Note that this isn’t something leading. I am asking as a question that I don’t know the answer to.
I know that some groups shouldn’t be tolerated in a society they want to destroy. But here’s the thing, we can’t not live with them. If we as a society, destroy or segregate groups of a defining nature, don’t we become exactly that which we claim to prevent? And once this type of action starts, can we be sure it will stop there? Who will be the judge, how will they enforce it and for whom?
Anyway, I understand the tale and it’s the bartender’s right to do so.
I guess lots of people can relate to this on Tw(X)tter. After it was bought by mister X. it went downhill. Still a lot of left leaning people are on it with the idea to fight from within (or because they think “everyone is on it” or “important people are there”. Personally I think it is a lost cause and would leave as soon as possible. Apart from that do not underestimate how you can be influenced if you don’t do fact checking. A person I know told me year ago that they liked to read on a far right forum years (for fun or something) and is now like “yeah, I also think migration is a bit of problem”. Go figure :(
