This isn’t about immediately filtered content, like the disgusting DuffMan George Floyd meme, or Holocaust denial. That’s pretty well kept in check by mod tools. I’m also not talking about cogent or even pointed political discussion.
I’m not even talking about necessarily in this community directly, however in a lot of other spaces I’ve noticed a lot of accounts using divisive language and terms like “The ineffectual left” “single issue voters” “ignorant right wing morons”. Lots of straw man arguments, lots of willful ignorance.
I’m not a centrist, I’m very very very far left however I know well enough not to patently dismiss the talking points of others, outside of course calls to genocide. I know what dog whistles sound like, and I’m hearing a lot of them lately.
Most egregiously I’m seeing very long form post replies that read very much like what is generated from LLMs.
So I guess my question is, how’re we all fairing with what might be the largest Turing test ever?
Wait… single issue politics is a real, proven, thing. Don’t lump that in with ad hominem attacks. If you’re not going to vote for someone you otherwise would because of a single issue, you’re a single issue voter.
And an idiot
While I do absolutely agree that single issue politics is a real thing like you showed, literally the only reply to your comment was “if you are a single issue voter, you’re an idiot”.
So I also think OP has a point here and we’re talking more about the people who use the term as an ad hominem attack, which I certainly have seen plenty of. And now Lemmy has provided us with yet another example of people taking something legitimate and turning it into a weakness/attackable offence. Like some trolls and racist people on the right now talk about DEI in negative terms
Fair points. I’m guilty of just saying “single issue voters,” without elaborating on every comment. That could easily be seen as an indirect ad-hominem attack. Maybe I should make a copy-pasta response for whenever I see someone arguing for single-issue decision making.
That said, there are justifiable single-issue decisions. If Trump was spouting rhetoric about shutting down all support of Israel, yeah. I can stand behind folks “switching sides” over this. Free Choice, ditto. 2A I have a harder time with, but that’s because there are usually so many other issues that you’d think are more important. Not my decision, but I have less sympathy for people who think being able to own a gun is more important than the ability to unionize.
Anyhoo, like I said: fair points.