Fediverse

Given the recent right wing takeover of other social media sites and the glorification of hate speech I am fine not seeing that bullshit spread here.

I think the idea that all viewpoints are equally valuable and need to be given equal weight or volume in discussions is incredibly fallacious. Left wing ideals are backed by a multitude of research as well as ethical and moral philosophies. I don't know how you could be a leftist and say "what this place really needs is more right-wing voices" with a straight face. The whole "im just asking questions, everyone deserves to be heard, i just want to hear both sides of the argument" is a common tactic the right uses to try to seem reasonable and propagandize more people. Some ideas aren't worth hearing out and can only do damage to those who listen.

There appears to be a lack of “centrist”

“Progressive” liberals in fact the centrists—they're center-left at best—and there are plenty of them here.

right-wing voices (and I don’t mean extreme MAGA-type views, but rather more moderate conservative positions)

These people are liberals as well, but because they usually break Lemmy’s code of conduct regarding various bigotries, they get usually quickly the boot.

non-political

Everything social is political, and the fediverse is social media.

Given how likely right wing conservatives tends to spread misinformation and cite low quality sources, I honestly don't mind the lack of right wingers.

Conservative and/or right wing, authoritarian, reactionary (feel free to pick your favorite analogous label) views are ethically wrong and lack evidence to add a worthy perspective to discussions. Capitalism is a belief and should be discussed as other religions.

Liberals are not leftists.

Seems like lemmy.world already provides plenty of right wing perspectives, we really don't need me.

1. Yes I noticed this too
2. It already is, which is a shame
3. Yes it's a problem because even if you try to get a balanced amount of all the views in your Lemmy subscriptions it's not possible, at the same time bubbles radicalize people.
4. Let discussions happen, don't delete and ban because you're against the view (as long as it's not continuously spamming)
5. Benefit: You see people as humans even if they are wrong, Drawback: you need to sometimes change your mind in face of new evidence showing up, which it wouldn't if you stay in your bubble.

The thing which I really dislike with a bubble is that people inside of it get more and more radical and ban even their allies because they're not radical enough.

The thing about the right wing is that it always boils down to the cruelty being the point. People play it up -just- being a difference of opinion like we're talking about whether or not pineapple is good on pizza; when the opinions in question are that brown people are inferior, trans people people don't deserve rights, a woman's life is worth less than a fetus, etc: there's no valuable dialogue to be had. Ban the fucker and don't look back.

The closest thing to valuable dialogue you're going to get with that garbage is the bullshit veneer they slap onto their vitriol to make it easier to sell - the whole white knight bit about protecting babies or bathrooms or some other nonsense that conveniently lands the same outgroups into a bind every single time. If you think any of that shit is in good faith, you've fallen for a trap before the conversation even starts.

Diversity of thought is great, up until we start turning to hatred/bigotry for a fresh perspective. Those are not welcome here, nor should they be anywhere else.

Two big problems are

, when you talk with the Right, you don’t have to dig very deep before you encounter dishonesty.

When you talk with Liberals, they are not politically aware at all

I find it interesting that some people are saying "the right is this" and "conservatives are that" and then saying horrible things most people would be opposed to. How would you know if you never talk to them and just assume what they think?

I think most people assume the extreme right is the entire right, just like most people assume the extreme left is the entire left. It's actually a spectrum. Or more accurately, a Nolan chart.

Most people I know are in the center, and they oppose racial segregation, oppose racism, oppose oppression, oppose monopolies, and oppose corrupt officials. But since they are not communists or socialists, some people on the left lump them in with the far right, which the center doesn't like either.

And if you attack the people in the center by falsely accusing them of being the right, all you are doing is alienating people who might agree with you on a lot of things.

Not counting lemmygrad and hexbear most of lemmy instances is completely liberal, at best radical liberal. I seriously doubt your statement about being communist if you call for more centrism and think we need more rightwing info.

You want more rightwing? Go anywhere else in the internet, there's full of it everywhere. What is lacking everywhere else, is communist point of view.

There appears to be a lack of "centrist", non-political, or right-wing voices (and I don't mean extreme MAGA-type views, but rather more moderate conservative positions).

They hang out in /modlog.

Discussions often feel like they're happening within an ideological bubble.

While this can be true for some communities, I find that users here do still engage with other viewpoints when the discussions are in good faith.

I think the reason why a lot of users lean in a certain political direction is because of

• the origins of Lemmy
• users that choose to leave the older platforms may have done so for social / political reasons
• threadiverse is still relatively small

Do you think Lemmy is at risk of becoming an echo chamber for leftist views, a sort of Truth Social, Parler, Gab, etc., esque platform, but for Leftists?

I feel like we're getting more politically diverse over time. It's only a risk if we force a certain political leaning through moderation.

Is this a problem we should be concerned about, or is it a natural result of Lemmy's community-driven nature?

Worth keeping an eye on to see how it changes over time

How might we encourage more diverse political perspectives while still maintaining a respectful and inclusive environment?

Mainly moderation. If a community or space is intended for a particular group, it's perfectly fine to moderate how you see fit. If it is meant to be a general space, try to limit political biases when moderating and focus on bad faith comments.

If a post/comment was in good faith, it's more effective to let someone explain why it is wrong rather than removing it. Chances are that others can learn from the explanation (or that they were correct to begin with, and you'll learn something)

What are the potential benefits and drawbacks of having a more politically diverse user base on Lemmy?

The benefits are easy, I can't think of many drawbacks. Maybe:

• More people = higher moderation costs (which can be dealt with by having bigger teams)
• More drama (we have drama already)

I am an independent and politically nonbinary, but people like assuming, almost always incorrectly, what I am thinking. The people on the right think I am left, and the people on the left think I am right. Apparently it is all relative, and the attitude of "if you disagree with me, you must be evil" is way too prominent, both on the left and the right.

I like listening to a variety of viewpoints because I can learn something new about human nature, even if I disagree with their opinion. It allows me to spot patterns that others don't see.

It also allows me to better understand and respond to flawed thinking and dangerous ideas. For example, giving power to someone who is power-hungry is dangerous, no matter what propaganda they are spouting. And there are opportunists and snakes in the grass all over the political spectrum. Just because they say the right things does not mean they do the right things. People don't always like it when that is pointed out. They confuse the leader for the cause.

The problem with remaining in an information bubble surrounded by like-minded people is that you start assuming that everyone thinks like you, which is usually not true at all. Both the right and the left fall into this trap sometimes. And people who have not experienced other cultures also fall into this trap. It creates an unrealistic and inaccurate view of the world. It also results in a shock when they realize that people on the other side of the world or from a different background think completely differently than they do.

It is one of the reasons why the Democrats lost the election in the U.S. They assumed they were the majority because they surrounded themselves with people who agreed with them and they repeatedly blocked or canceled anyone who disagreed. As a result, they shifted further and further away from what the people wanted, abandoned the working class, embraced unpopular views, and then wondered why they lost the swing voters, thereby giving the election to their arch enemies.

Cultivating and remaining in an information bubble is like shooting yourself in the foot and blaming the other side. The more you isolate yourself, the less reach your ideas have, and the less influence you have over society.

To be frank, some people are actually hoping both the far left and the far right becomes increasingly isolationist. It would mean they disappear from the mainstream consciousness since they silence themselves by blocking anyone who disagrees with them. That way they talk to themselves instead of bothering the mainstream middle, who are the actual majority.

The fact is, you don't hear much from the people in the middle because they get attacked from both the right and the left, and most people don't like the drama. Instead, they just go to the ballot box and vote against the politicians they don't like.

In an idea world, we could talk about the issues and come up with some non-partisan solutions. But society has become so polarized, I am not sure that is even possible anymore.

I dunno. I'm fairly far left, and moderately radicalized, and I get plenty of pushback. And from both those further left, and those that are US left (which is more centric overall).

Yeah, you don't get as many right wingers, but they do exist, and they tend to be willing to speak up. On the less crazy instances, they don't even get shut down by admins/mods, though they'll get down voted all to hell.

But I can't say that lemmy as a whole is that echoey. It just leans more left than any other form of social media.

Yeah, it's not necessarily bad but it affects my point of view

Some might deny it, some might agree but decide it's for the best and apparently, others will just denote the least left of the leftists as conservative scum