Lemmy is more left leaning because the rights popularity seen on other social media are driven by bots that are not here.

https://lemmy.world/post/2081340

Lemmy is more left leaning because the rights popularity seen on other social media are driven by bots that are not here. - Lemmy.world

Yet.

i think its not just the bots but also that the right want their posts to be seen and want to “present” themself and their “opinions”. And i think for that, lemmy is just not visible enough, yet.
There’s also the fact that there isn’t an algorithm trying to keep you doomscrolling by promoting commercial content.

I think this is a huge part of it. Occasionally I'll surf Facebook after checking out the marketplace. Last night I saw tons of posts about that "Try that in a small town" song with tons of people claiming to support it. Just post after post of people saying they don't see anything racist about it at all, and not a single one pointing out how showing videos of the BLM protests while singing "we take care of our own, try that in a small town" miiiiiiiight just be a little bit racist. Fortunately I usually only click on cat videos and the rare left leaning recommended posts, so I got to see one post with a picture of John Cougar Mellencamp saying something like "I sang about my small town without mentioning violence." The post had hundreds of comments....all deleted by admins.

Even when you try to avoid the controversy and hateful comments, the system is still designed to keep you doomscrolling. Positivity doesn't help that...

I need eye bleach - I googled that song and wished I didn’t. You don’t even need to go to a small town - you go 5 feet outside of ANY city in US and everyone suddenly has a Southern accent and half of the people have Confederate flags. My 5 year old was with her mom in a peaceful protest and the fucking sheriff teargassed the group - she didn’t get hit by the teargas but she did almost get crushed by the panicking crowd. Fuck these people. Sorry about the “negativity.” But fuck.
Yep this is huge. I still scroll on RiF sometimes without being logged in, and I had only ever looked at the subs I was subscribed to until now. I’m shocked by how much infuriating nonsense is being pushed by the site.

This is underrated. I actually close Lemmy a lot easier and more quickly than I did reddit, it’s not hooking me with dopamine hits nearly as strongly.

As a result, since I know I’ll probably just scroll for a few minutes at a time, I’m more willing to check in more often and toss a few upvotes and maybe a comment or two around.

Grandpa also doesn’t understand federation
Grandpa actually votes tho
As a grandfather, boomer, white cis male, I suggest you might just be over-generalizing.
Thinking like this is why people get surprised when right leaning parties get voted for in elections
Lol right? “Right wing politics only seem popular because of bots”. No, left wing politics only seem popular on social media because old people dont use it, despite making up the majority of many populations and often times are the only people who actually vote in elections.
Left wing politics are more popular in the real world than they are in real world governments. The thing is that extremely online youth have absolutely no idea of just how far left they are.
Left wing politics only seems popular on social media because social media can and does ban people for right wing opinions.
Among people in general who actually read comments, the left does have a distinct advantage.
If Republicans could read, they'd be real mad

Not really. I mean that “because…” part.

Leftism is inherenty tied to technology, especially new. It’s part of its lifestyle. EVERY new, massive social “site” (or online service) is expected to be left-leaning by default. It may later change its political viewpoint, but in its relative infancy it’s left.

Rightism is more about actions taking place in real-world. As such, the technology isn’t perceived as more than a tool, used for specific purpose only, rather than part of, or the foundation of a lifestyle.

…and of course there’s a plethora of alternative political views, options and convictions that are a mix of either extremes of the spectrum - if you meet a person online, it shouldn’t be surprisied to learn about “pro-life”, but also “anti-Trump” and similarly puzzling approaches to various aspects of life.

tl;dr: it’s not about bots. It’s because Lemmy/Mastodon isn’t popular enough to serve as a tool for right-wing politics.

Agree with this ,RW is having an elongasm on twitter while most of my lefties moved to mastodon

Leftism is inherenty tied to technology, especially new.

I don’t know, there has always been a huge libertarian contingent of the tech industry as well. I’m not sure which is bigger. I hope the leftism.

I feel that comment is on the vibe of “liberals are leftists”.
Libertarians are not leftists.
Ayn Rand style, “Don’t tread on me” objectivists, no. But they just co-opted the term. Libertarianism is pretty much anarchism, which is incomoatible with right wing beliefs, no matter what an-caps try and tell you. A right wing social order necessitates hierarchy, which anarchism is diametrically opposed to.

While yes, libertarian is originally a leftist term, that’s not true what I mean.

I mean the first comment saying most people on new tech are leftists is wrong. Most people who are technophilic are liberals. As in US style Democrat liberals. Which are NOT leftists. At all.

Why on earth would you say most tech heads are liberal?

Why would you say they are? They all buy in hard into capitalism.

Where are all these leftist techies?

You think every tech enthusiast “buys hard into capitalism”?

Hyperbole my friend. Exaggeration.

But to be much more precise and literal: a good amount of them. Likely even a majority, do.

Libertarians promote “natural” hierarchy, the ones based on slavery, inheritance, and other mechanisms of white supremacy.

It’s like you only read two words of my comment. The dixkheads who call themselves linertarian are NOT libertarian. It is a left wing ideology. You cannot have a society that is both right wing and libertarian. It is impossible.

That is exactly why those fuckheads bring in bullshit like “natural hierarchy”, to jam their square beliefs into the round hole that is a classless ideology.

My point was that anarchism is not compatible with capitalism because capital is a form of hierarchy.

And I read your post. Yes, tea party libertarians ultimately lean more big government authoritarian than strict libertarians should.

But libertarians aren’t anarchist because they ultimately use the power of money and privilege to create hierarchy and control others. They just don’t want democracy (i.e. governments) interfering in that power.

That’s not anarchy but feudalism.

That’s exactly what I’ve been saying…
Depends on which libertarian ideology is being expressed. Left libertarians - anarcho-syndicalists libertarian socialists, anarcho-communists are all libertarians. The right wing of anarchism aren’t leftists, the left wing are.

They most definitely are.

I don’t know anyone who considers communists to be right-wing, and communists are as classic as libertarianism gets.

Communism and libertarianism have nothing to do with each other. What are you even talking about?

They most certainly do, lol.

Go to wiki, look up libertarianism, look under the section etymology.

In a political context it has always carried the meaning of anarchist - it was coined to differentiate libertarian/anarcho-communists from socialist communists.

When Rothbard appropriated the term for his neoliberal populism in recent American history, even he was drawing from that basis - although obviously in bad faith, since he promotes a platform of oppression.

Yeah crypto bros aren’t exactly leftist, neither is the hypercapitalist Silicon Valley crowd, and I’ve encountered plenty of other tech enthusiasts with worrying opinions.

I’d say I’m generally conservative and have been dabbling in alternative social media for a number of years. Some of the biggest Mastodon instances are/were right leaning. Gab.ai started off as a proprietary site and then migrated to Mastodon. Truth.social was always based on Mastodon. I’ve never been active on them because I don’t like echo chambers though. I’ve never really had a desire to have my thoughts reaffirmed by strangers…

I would assume they’re presence isn’t felt in the fediverse because the concept of de-federating is working? Gab is likely cut off by others and truth social never federated with others to begin with. I don’t think Truth ever intended to though, and really just wanted something they didn’t have to build from scratch.

The only Mastodon instance I actually have an account with now is somewhat right leaning but it’s not their emphasis. Even then I’m not too active on it.

From what I gather, Mastodon attracts little attention in conservative circles.

One of main reasons I’ve heard is that “there’s hardly anyone to talk with”. Beats me if it’s default, general conservative opinion…

I mean, they’re there to talk to… If you like jacking each other off… I don’t.

Thanks to Big tech censorship, there are lots of people who are more anti-establishment right on the fediverse. Lots of fairly large instances. Some of them are real nasty pieces of work filled with folks dropping n bombs and swastikas, some of them are filled with some of the sweetest religious right folks you ever met in your life.

I think one of the biggest differences is that you don’t have the Jerry Springer algorithm trying to match up a bunch of black people with a bunch of KKK members. Most far right instances don’t defederate anyone, but many of the far left instances defederate the moment anyone looks at them funny so despite sharing a platform, typically there just isn’t that much engagement between the two groups. In the middle of there are instances that are more than happy to federate with both as long as they aren’t too big of jerks.

Yet despite the clear creation of echo chambers, which I think is inevitable given how freedom of association works so smoothly and easily online, the Fediverse forces them all to “live next to each other”.

It’s not an entirely separate service I need to go on if I want to see what all the Nazi kids are up to these days.

This forced adjacency and inability to create any blocks stronger than defederation (which is pretty weak, really, compared to what other services can do) is going to have overall beneficial effects in the long-run, I think. Though it’ll certainly cause its fair share of headaches too.

I’m actually happy to see the reduction in echo chambers for myself because it does 2 things:

  • It reminds me that the people I think I disagree with have good points I need to remember, and
  • It reminds me that the people I think I agree with have terrible points I need to remember.
  • For someone who thinks for themselves, seeing extremism in some cases actually makes you less extreme because you see it and realize you don’t agree with it at all.

    Did you come up with “Jerry Springer algorithm” expression? Very apt way to express it.
    Both of those sites have been ostracized (defederated) from the mastodon fediverse. The mastodon fediverse is in general quite left.
    Yes, I said that. Well technically I said Gab was. Truth was so forked I don’t believe there was even an option to defederate them. They intended on a walled garden on their own.
    Lemmy also isn’t profit driven, so you don’t get libertarian tech bros.

    Most smart right wing people (not me obviously), long ago gave up trying to discuss anything important with the left.

    It’s not productive, and everyone that I know has just gone to more private chats and channels and don’t even have social media accounts.

    You get banned enough times for saying something reasonable, or constantly get called a nazi or something ridiculous and you just stop using those places to talk.

    The separation and division has already happened. For anyone hoping to have a discussion with anyone who has different opinions than you do, that train has left the station.

    There are bots, lots of them (I’m sure from the left and the right) and that’s it’s own problem. But I doubt we will ever see a place where people can just disagree anymore.

    No one seems to have the balls to let these conversations happen on either side.

    As someone who skews quite far left ideologically but believes that people on both sides have been painted into polarised caricatures in each others' minds by social media, I wholeheartedly agree.
    Fuck your enlightened centrism
    The concept of enlightened centrism is nothing but a tool to drive people into extremism. How can you not see that?
    Are you sure you replied to the right person? I was condemning the “enlightened” centrism and the idiot I responded to. I think anyone who goes “but both sides” is almost always a blithering idiot.
    It's just very hard to find a compromise or "agree to disagree" when the topic of debate is something like should LGBT people be allowed to exist. The days are long past where the right/left divide was all about economic policy -- the divide lies along basic human values at this point. You're going to be hard pressed to find people who can engage with you calmly when you're defending a party whose primary concerns right now are stripping away civil rights from their least favorite human beings before all else.
    Yup, pretty much. And most of the times I've seen right wing people just come comment the most batshit crazy thing imaginable. This doesn't mean left wing lunatics don't exist too.

    This is something people on the right just find absolutely ridiculous. No one. NO ONE, think LGBT people shouldn’t be allowed to exist.

    This is a big part of the problem, another response to my comment said people who think like I do support genocide.

    Like this just sounds so hyperbolic and absolutely laughably ridiculous that no one has the patience to put up with it. It’s not a discussion.

    You think I want an entire group of people to not exist. You have been taught this from somewhere and it’s not true. But you’ll never realize that.

    So what’s the point?

    Then explain to the class what you do believe in. Give us 3 bullet points you’d want a candidate to also support.

    I’ll start as an example:

    • I believe in complete and unequivocal abortion rights for women
    • High speed rail should get more funding in the US, and car based transport (where rail could be a realistic replacement) should not be a cheap as it is
    • Gerrymandering should be ended, and federal level elections should be taken over by a nonpartisan 50-50 committee to create new maps when local governments continue to submit unacceptable voting maps to intentionally stall so they can keep using the old gerrymandered map for the next elections
    I’m not a politician, but I’m voting for the Conservative Party in Canada, I would suggest you look into their platform if you’re interested because I’m a supporter
    Would you care so explain the policy changes right wing politicians are making then?

    www.conservative.ca/pierre-poilievre/

    This is who I’m voting for in the next Canadian election. I have a hard time disagreeing with anything Pierre Poilievre is campaigning on.

    You can find a lot of him speaking in parliament on YouTube if you’re interested

    Pierre Poilievre - Conservative Party of Canada

    Conservative Party of Canada

    But there are people recently that have said they should get stuck into asylums.

    Does existing not include participating in society?

    I don’t think gay or trans people shouldn’t participate in society. That doesn’t make any sense.

    There are people that say a lot of crazy shit I don’t agree with, on the left as well.

    Is there an argument that trans people need help? I think that’s pretty obvious. Is the help needed for the brain or the body? I think thats where a lot of disagreement comes from.

    When I think about it, I can see why someone would think that surgery on a healthy body because the mind thinks it was born in the wrong body could be the wrong thing to do.

    I don’t think that’s at all unreasonable. Most mental illnesses are treated by treating the mind.

    And if your mind disagrees with the healthy body you were born in, I can see how the mine might be the place to start treatment, and not the body.

    However, I also believe in adults being able to make their own decisions. Just as if someone wants to have cosmetic surgery to install horns in their head, or someone wants breast augmentation surgery, go fill your boots.

    So if someone wants a surgeon to create a cosmetic neovagina forcthemselves and that would make them happy, go for it.

    So there's the rub. Are puberty blockers treatment for the mind or body? If it's a "body" treatment and therefore the "wrong place to start" should children not have access to this treatment until they are 18? It does reduce morbidity of the condition.

    You get shit on for your opinions because they are both uninformed and callous. You are also missing the point of the healthcare by focusing on elective cosmetic surgeries.

    The way you talk about this subject is just awful.