Hello! I’ve been searching for a reddit alternative, and yes, I’ve picked Lemmy and Raddle, but here’s the thing. My morbid curiosity is perked up, and a part of me wants to join the “free speech” alternatives, like Saidit, Poal, etc. What’s wrong with me that I want to join toxic places? I mean, yes I’ll find a whole new perspective (albeit wrong), on political topics, but a part of me wants to be the antagonist, and post lefty memes, and music with a left-leaning message (bands from r/rabm) I know that’s like kicking the hornet’s nest, so you don’t need to start in with “that’s a bad idea” I know it is. My main point/question is, is it wrong to join a site with potential hate speech? Does it make someone a bad person?

  • howrar@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    8 months ago

    Be careful however. No matter what, you’re still just a brain in a flesh jar. You are susceptible to false information and lies as your brain can’t really differentiate between false and correct info that well.

    You are not immune to propaganda

    I never understood this argument. How is it any different for leftist propaganda? This just feels like telling someone to stop thinking because you’re on our team now and we want to make sure you don’t leave.

    • sorrybookbroke@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      8 months ago

      How is this different than leftist propaganda?

      It’s not. In no way, shape, and or form. Once more, you are not immune to propaganda.

      Again, I’m not stating you shouldn’t seek out people who disagree with you, I seek these people out often, but you need to understand what your brain will do.

      You should generally be cognizant of bias and the fact that you will, inevitably, accept without confirmation some information or internalize information you’ve confirmed incorrect. This is not only true to one group, and is just as true for those under the umbrella of “leftist” as much as under the term “alt right”.

      I will state it’s less dangerous to be less cautious here than a free speach absolutist community. Here, we value truth. There, they value all speach even objectively false. Here, you’ll see false info removed there, definitionally, or is not.

      Lastly, for fascism, death of truth is a defining reality. To paraphrase Mussolini let not truth stand on a pillar except insomuch as it assists in our goals. In the places where absolutist freedom of speach reigns fascists, famously very good propagandists, thrive. This is a danger above a left winger repeating false statistics around racism in the police force, or the rates of spousal abuse. Or even myself lying about that Mussolini quote at the beginning of this paragraph

      Thank you for the responce however and the respectful tone you took, I hope I clarified

      • howrar@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        8 months ago

        So if I understand correctly, you’re saying that

        1. you’re more likely to be exposed to lies on a right wing forum compared to left wing forums
        2. the types of lies you’re exposed to are more dangerous in a right wing community compared to the left.

        So first of all, how do you determine that #1 is true? I’ve seen my fair share of misinformation on Lemmy and the left-leaning parts of Reddit getting highly upvoted and vice versa. But I’m basing this on what I personally know (and who knows if I’m right?) and in general, there isn’t much objective info going around. It’s mostly people sharing their sentiments on a topic with little to no factual information (e.g. “fuck [entity X]”).

        #2 also assumes that you’re right to begin with and that sharing these false statistics would lead to a better world. Take false statistics on police racism for example. This can be a problem in many ways. Let’s say hypothetically that there is no police racism, but we say there is and we convince everyone that we need to fix it. This can divert resources away from other problems (e.g. working on reducing spousal abuse), and thus making problems worse elsewhere. Moreso if the police force is tasked with handling spousal violence and they’re now tied up in internal investigations, maybe losing funding, and thus reducing their capabilities. It’ll also be fuelling an unnecessary conflict (possibly violent) between people who should otherwise be allies in the struggle that is life. More people get hurt, more people can die. That’s a pretty dangerous outcome.

        • sorrybookbroke@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          8 months ago

          You do not, and there’s no reasonable way you could have gotten that from what I’ve said

          I said fascists, not right wingers. Your association of the two is entirely your own. I am honestly tired of this one sided weirdness where every time I say fascist, certain people hear right wing. The two very much differ

          Yes, general left wing propaganda is less dangerous than fascist propaganda. I hope we can agree on this basic fact.

          Also, my point is that here we value truth more than a freedom of speech absolutist community. Lies and false info is speech, by definition a freedom of speech absolutist community will, always, allow lies to be spread. It’s fundamental to their belief system. The same would go for a normal, non absolutist, right wing community. Lastly, I said, clearly, that fascist thrive in absolutism. Where they can lie continually without recourse

          I never said it was good to spread this false info. I said the opposite

          Less dangerous means it’s still dangerous. I was clear on this point, it is a danger, and you should still be cautious. Here though, once more, obviously false info may be taken down.

          Please re-read my comment. You like so many others in this digital age decide what a person is saying rather than trying to understand it. You gave no respect for conversation nor do you truly wish to discuss this topic. It’s exhausting. I said none of what you’ve claimed and in fact stated the opposite several times.

          You are the reason debate is dead (metaphor)

          • howrar@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            8 months ago

            I’ll go over this again later when I have more time, but for now, I just want to say that I don’t appreciate spending so much time trying to understand what you’ve written only to be met with accusations of having deliberately done the exact opposite. I may not be particularly smart, but I’m putting in the effort.

            • sorrybookbroke@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              edit-2
              8 months ago

              I am really, very sick of saying one thing before having to confirm it applies to “both sides”. I say you are not immune to propaganda, you hear don’t listen to the other side. The term “you are not immune to propaganda” is neutral. You were the only one here to bring up “left” or “right”.

              I’m sick of people ignoring my words and ascribing new meaning. I say, left wing propaganda is in no way different from right wing propaganda and that absolutist freedom of speech leads to fascists thriving, you hear me saying that lies from the left are good and that the right lies much more than the left. The only person I said lied were the fascists, who thrive where they can lie, in the absolutest freedom of speech alternatives

              This is continual. I say none of these things yet you accuse me of this. I don’t appriciate you suggesting the antithesis of what I said is what I meant. I don’t appriciate this strange conflation of the entire right wing with facism nor the suggestion I did so. I may be left wing, but I’m not going to suggest the right wing is fascist. That is inflammatory and idiotic

              No, there’s no rational way you could have gotten what you claim to from reading what I wrote. I was perfectly clear. You have not put in the effort.

              • howrar@lemmy.ca
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                8 months ago

                So my efforts didn’t yield the correct understanding. I recognize that it happens and that’s why I put a short summary of my understanding right at the start so that you can easily correct it without having to read through everything else and expend unnecessary energy trying to parse it out. If you don’t want to continue the discussion, that’s fine. I can find my answers elsewhere. There’s no need to be a dick about it.

    • lemmyreader@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      8 months ago

      I never understood this argument. How is it any different for leftist propaganda? This just feels like telling someone to stop thinking because you’re on our team now and we want to make sure you don’t leave.

      Your argument seems to suggest :

      • Listening to far right voices is not too bad if you keep being alert.
      • The brain of the listener who thinks for themselves will be strong enough to distinguish leftist propaganda and lies from facts and truth.

      I fear, looking at the millions of people who are not well informed about some things (say privacy + GAFAM), that this is wishful thinking. Remember the experiment with people in the cinemas where some soft-drink images were almost invisible merged into the movie and made people thirsty and buy more drinks during the break ? In my opinion the human brain is unfortunately not as powerful as people make it believe it is. And I have no big issues in general with leftist propaganda as I’d like to see the planet saved rather than destroyed.