Asklemmy

43777 readers

1432 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy 🔍

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

Open-ended question
Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

Lemmyverse: community search
sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
!lemmy411@lemmy.ca: a community for finding communities

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~

founded 5 years ago

MODERATORS

Lemmy is not ideologically diverse. Thoughts? (lemmy.ml)

submitted 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) by Owell1984@lemmy.ml to c/asklemmy@lemmy.ml

65 comments fedilink hide all child comments

edit: having a community dedicated to letists only can be a bad idea in that it can make sure your beliefs are not questioned. I have thought myself as a socialist and I have thought myself as a anarcho-capitalist, I don’t believe in either anymore. I think if radical views go unchecked they might cause problems. Although I am a capitalist now, being confronted by socialists has made me aware of capitalisms deep flaws. When I considered myself a communist (17 year old me) I thought opposing views really changed my mind. So that's the ideologically diversity I am talking about.

I love the outlook of lemmy, I think the design is decent and simplistic. But one thing I can't seem to get over is the fact that almost everyone here seem to think the same politically. Why do you guys think this is?? I know this is a community of leftists foss enthusiasts but I hope everyone here is aware that it is driving many people away from adapting it.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] comfy@lemmy.ml 7 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

although he is not fit to lead US after Jan 6

Jan 6 didn't just magically happen in isolation. Trump, through his public speeches, actively encouraged ideas and theories that lead to that. Jan 6 was merely the result, to think of Jan 6 as a thing he and a few thousand people woke up and did one day is not a useful way of analyzing how to avoid it happening again; preventative treatment is the most effective.

I wonder what brings that out.

A bunch of things. Modern Republicans appeal strongly to anti-progressivism (to paraphrase, "we resist the woke leftist socialism of the politically correct Democrats!"), engage in STRONG patriotism and nationalism (keeping "the Mexicans" out) and more so some things like "good people on both sides" and failing to denounce the rise of white nationalist terrorism (intentionally or not) act as dog-whistles and tacit encouragement, so naturally those racist crowds flock to him. In the false binary of Democrat and Republican, their choice is obvious. That clearly doesn't mean 'Trump supporters must be racist', but it's absolutely no surprise those millions of people flock to him.

Of course, that doesn't mean Biden is good either. He's also absolute shit, along with approximately the entire Democrat party (protip: most of the world would consider them center-to-right wing in that dumb left-right spectrum, apart from a couple of small social progressive policies). The electoral system of the US is ineffective, and it's no surprise people are turning to radical groups in all directions in the past few years.

[–] Owell1984@lemmy.ml 2 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Trump, through his public speeches, actively encouraged ideas and theories that lead to that. Jan 6

I agree and I felt sad that he did that. He was indifferent or positively ecstatic about the consequences of his speech. He put himself above the nation.

engage in STRONG patriotism and nationalism (keeping “the Mexicans” out) and more so some things like “good people on both sides”

Again, I do think merit based immigration is a good thing, so as long as they want that I am not against them. (thank for the answer, I understand your point broadly. )

[–] southerntofu@lemmy.ml 5 points 2 years ago

Maybe we need a dedicated thread, but "merit-based" immigration is a racist scam. When you go travel abroad with your fancy european/american ID, are you asked for the merits you're gonna bring to the countries you're visiting?

Why can i with a french passport travel anywhere in the former french colonies without a visa, while Mali/Senegal/etc citizens require a long process to acquire a visa?

What does it mean to judge people based on their "merit"? How is that evaluated? As someone born in France, should i be evaluated based on my merits too? Why do immigrants who wish to reside in France get indoctrinated/interrogated about about stories and ideas i disagree with as a french person? Why is it ok for me to disagree with the french Empire but not with immigrants?

I don't in absolute (and in isolation from other questions) disagree with the principle of chosen immigration. If we lived in an autonomous community and could only sustain 200 people, we'd have to be careful who we let in and how they can help the community thrive. But "chosen" immigration on a country-scale in some of the richest countries on earth where there's millions of empty dwellings and tons of wasted food is just a racist scam.

What would attract you about this idea? Why do you feel like it's even needed in the first place?

PS: See, we can have debates here on lemmy.ml too :P :P