Lemmy is more left leaning because the rights popularity seen on other social media are driven by bots that are not here.
Lemmy is more left leaning because the rights popularity seen on other social media are driven by bots that are not here.
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.
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.
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 would you say they are? They all buy in hard into capitalism.
Where are all these leftist techies?
Hyperbole my friend. Exaggeration.
But to be much more precise and literal: a good amount of them. Likely even a majority, do.
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.
They most definitely are.
I don’t know anyone who considers communists to be right-wing, and communists are as classic as libertarianism gets.
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.