Steel bands tighten around my heart. My knees knock and my vision wavers. But then I remember I’m not on Reddit, and metacanada has not yet replaced the moderation team with pod people.
What measures are in place to ensure the continuing security of our moderation team? If it won’t compromise them to tell us.
No doubt, I appreciate someone bringing this topic up because as you say, right-wingers will try to sabotage any healthy online community. They do seem to especially target local, provincial/state and national subreddits, which can be fertile grounds for propaganda. I’m pretty active on /r/newbrunswickcanada where there are definitely a ton of right-wing shit-stirrers trying to establish their perspective on issues.
But while moderation is important, the community has to be actively involved in making this space into what we want to see. A big reason /r/Canada sucks isn’t only the presence of the /r/metacanada types, it’s the absence of reasonable people. I also remember when /r/Canada was decent, and I didn’t leave when I first starting seeing fashy takes, because you’ll see those everywhere on the internet. I left because eventually I realized most people I could enjoy discussing with were leaving/had already left.
The more one participates in an online community, the more one can attract like-minded people to that community.
I dunno, I think we’ve come to a point where we really do have to distinguish between potential conservative allies, and outright fascists.
This is a good point, but I’d like to add that we should also distinguish between lower-case conservatives and the Conservative Party of Canada.
I know and love plenty of conservative people. We have different ways of seeing the world, and believe different methods to be best to achieve our goals, but ultimately we all want everyone to live happy, fulfilling lives.
If you align with the Conservative Party of Canada, you are much closer to fascism than I am willing to associate with, and frankly I am too queer to feel safe around these people.
That’s not unfair. I felt genuine dread the day I saw a PPC placard in the window of a business I used to frequent. OTOH, the CPC only exist to fool us into thinking the LPC are tolerable.
The major owners of all the Canadian banks are all the other Canadian banks. All our ruling parties are bullshit. The LPC give us social liberalism when invested capital wants us to have it, and the CPC take it away again when that suits capital more. But they both stay within a very narrow prescribed window where they are allowed to grandstand like they really have any say in the matter. Canada as a state exists to transfer value from natural and human resources into corporate coffers, and all this democracy and civic stuff is just window dressing.
If things get as bad as they can get, the LPC will sell us out just as quick as the CPC. Whatever way the wind blows.
The Liberal Party is also right-wing though, albeit one much closer to the centre than the CPC.
Agreed. These would be many of the potential allies, I suppose. Even if they don’t identify as right-wing!
I think in the interest of building a healthy community we can acknowledge that the problem is not “people with right-wing views” despite whatever other problems might be fair to blame on them as a block. We’re talking about aggressively anti-social people who don’t really believe in governance and humanism at all. They appropriate right-wing politics when its convenient but they aren’t really political in that sense. They’re just assholes.
…so, your typical modern conservative?
I say that slightly tongue-in-cheek, but I do stand by that the people you describe are almost exclusively going to be right-wing.
That’s definitely not to say that there’s never been any online communities negatively impacted by left-wing politics. I can’t even remember the number of subreddits I used to enjoy that have been overtaken by tankies/Stalinists/Maoists/Soviet-apologizers.
I would say that they almost exclusively adopt a right-wing persona, but I don’t think that someone who isn’t trying to constructively engage really fits on the left/right spectrum. We might have different values, and we might even disagree on what it means to do so, but ultimately we’re all supposed to be pulling for the common good. I think that anyone who is not working towards the common good is better described using other terms, so that we don’t alienate our allies. A kleptocrat is not left or right. A corporate agent engaging in legislative capture is not left or right. And a bunch of vandals who get a sexual thrill out of upsetting people on the Internet are not left or right.
Honestly, I think this is being a bit generous to the right. Maybe the right thirty years ago was as you describe, but not anymore. Major right-wing institutions have done little to nothing to push back these people supposedly “adopting a right-wing persona”, because they realized these people are an amazing way to push the social narrative to the right and amass more power.
I think respectable right-wing politics are dead (or at the very least, on life-support) in a post-Trump era. The Republican Party was initially pretty hostile to Trump and his style of politics, until they realized they could exploit it to garner more power.
I highly recommend watching Innuendo Studio’s video on YouTube, The Alt-Right Playbook: You Go High, We Go Low. The whole series is worth a watch, but this video in particular shows how good faith attempts to reach across the political spectrum are easily exploited by fascists.
Well, I am trying to be generous. We must.
I totally get and appreciate that, I just want to caution that that generosity can and will be exploited by alt-right fuckheads. A community that wants to be tolerant must be intolerant of intolerance.
You and I disagree deeply about some very important things (not mentioned in this conversation), but if I flip the bozo bit, we’ll never understand our differences. Sometimes people don’t have to agree, merely understanding one another is enough for everyone to get what they need and work together in mutual benefit.
I think there’s a difference between real-life interactions and online communities.
Anecdotally, I’ve seen a couple full blown, queerphobic, “I would beat the gay out of my children” type bigots grow into loving and accepting allies of the LGBTQ+ community through exposure, conversation, and mutual understanding. I’m not in any way denying the power of those things, and while marginalized people of all types shouldn’t be expected to be constant teachers (as it’s really quite emotionally and mentally taxing), having open conversations is probably the best way achieve a more loving and accepting society in general. It’s a lot harder to hate someone/something when you’re directly confronted with someone from that group being thoroughly reasonable and maybe even enjoyable to talk with, contrary to what you might believe.
However, in online communities, things work differently. Anonymity, asynchronous communication, the public nature of conversations, with immediate reactions and commentary from an incomprehensible number of people. These are all massive barriers to attaining that mutual understanding you describe.
At the end of the day, if I have a queerphobic or racist or sexist or otherwise bigoted person in my life, say a coworker, I don’t have a choice but to interact regularly with them so I will at least try to steer them towards a kinder perspective. Sometimes you might have to give up on a particular person, but most times we both learn some stuff and both come out of it slightly better.
On the other hand, if I enter an online space and it’s bigoted, I (and I’d wager a large number of not-bigoted people) will just leave. And then you end up with /r/Canada.
And I would once again like to distinguish between intolerant people acting bad faith with bad intentions from people with whom we disagree with politically.
Is there a difference when the people we disagree with politically actively associate with these intolerant bad-faith actors whenever it’s politically expedient for them?
I’ve watched those, they are excellent.
I see you still believe. Good on you. At this point, breathing smoke from a wildfire brought to us by right wing policy, believed and voted for by right wing people, I can no longer believe. I’ve ran out of benefit of the doubt to give.
I know this is going into the weeds but this thread is all weeds.
What policy are you referring to?
I imagine they’re referring to Fox News and similar outlets describing the current situation with forest fire smoke as “liberal propaganda”, and implying that the dangers of smoke inhalation are false, a leftist hoax.
Maybe a possible help here is Lemmy’s federated nature? I wonder if it works like Mastodon.
If a certain instance is obviously the source of a significant proportion of the troglodytes then I wonder if their users can be blacklisted from a single community (maybe mod tools could do it??) or if their entire instance would have to be cut off from everywhere else.