Yeah, we haven't had an update in a while. Apparently the next one is going to be pretty big. Ernest said he's aiming for the end of September, but I'm assuming that may slip.
I may disagree with what you have to say, but I shall fight to the death to defend your right to say it.
When you ban people, you tell them to go form an echo chamber where they'll flourish.
A more intelligent approach is to imitate Daryl Davis, who has convinced hundreds of KKK members to leave the KKK, simply by respectfully talking with them.
You might actually learn a thing or two in the process.
For every Daryl Davis who can successfully talk down 100 Klansmen, you'll find 100 Black people begging for their lives trying to reason with the Klan in their last moments. For every thought of "I can fix them!" that you may have, you have to weigh that against how many more people you'll need to fix if you platform their ideas and treat them as something worth "respectfully debating".
Convincing people to leave hate groups is a great thing to do, but if respectful debate were effective on the large scale, and we have no shortage of people respectfully arguing that hate is a bad thing, why is the far right a bigger threat now than it was ten years ago? Do not tolerate the intolerant, do not debate the undebatable, do not respect the unrespectable.
Globally the Overton window has shifted drastically right these past few decades.
Not too long ago leftists were holding ceos hostage and fighting armed conflicts, it’s so watered down people think someone like Bernie Sanders is a radical communist when he’s basically centrist.
You sound like you've never argued with fascists online.
They only exist in echo chambers, anyway, and do not debate in good faith. There is nothing similar to what Daryl Davis did except in the most superficial way possible. Go visit /r/conservative and you might actually learn a thing or two.
I was active in r/Conservative, and here I'm the primary contributer to m/Conservative. Hi, nice to meet you. When I'm engaged in arguments involving the word "fascist", it's rarely me using that word (unless we're literally discussing Mussolini), and usually me who's called that for favoring levelheaded conservative principles. I enjoy mutually respectful debate, but I find most others prefer to fearfully call me a "fascist," downvote everything I've ever written, block me, and walk away feeling sanctimonious.
Fascists haven't existed since 25 Luglio in 1943. You can find a tiny number of exceptions over the years, but as a broad statement it's true. I'm not old enough to have argued with fascists, and I bet you're not either.
a political philosophy, movement, or regime (such as that of the Fascisti) that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition
Yea wow, we've never seen that in the last 7 years!
I can see I really triggered you with that word. It's hilarious that you self-identified with it and got defensive.
It certainly does sound like typical leftists if you squint. Everyone in this thread opposing free speech is an authoritarian. But if you actually read that definition word for word, it's a position almost nobody supports. What's more, the definition has been changed from the original political affiliation. I'm not surprised Miriam-Webster's open to redefining words, but try as they might, words still mean what they originally meant. Still, their definition is close enough to the original to demonstrate my point that there are no fascists left, unless you squint and look at modern leftists.
a political philosophy, movement, or regime (such as that of the Fascisti)
Could be leftists, conservatives, or any other political group.
that exalts nation and often race above the individual
Well that excludes conservatives, because conservatism celebrates rugged individualism.
Leftism, by contrast, embraces groups above individualism. This is what conservatives usually refer to as neo-Marxism. It's also known as identity politics. It's this idea that we're all members of a group, and that group gives us our identity. Then with intersectionality, you have multiple groups defining identity.
Two caveats:
Christians are the exception to the rule, where many conservatives do embrace an identity that can be defined as a group.
Leftists do exalt groups above the individual, but those groups are not normally the nation (at least not in the US).
and that stands for a centralized autocratic government
Yes, in general, conservatives support small government, while leftists prefer government regulations over private business, government handouts for the poor, government taxation of the wealthy, and government control of every little thing in life — basically big government.
Centralized? In the US, centralized means federal control whereas decentralized means State and local control. Leftists generally prefer the former, whereas conservatives generally prefer the latter.
headed by a dictatorial leader
Not applicable in the US, but I wouldn't put it past the Left in the near future.
severe economic and social regimentation,
Yep, see this thread for instance. Leftist love regimented control over what we're allowed to think, and they love silencing the opposition.
and forcible suppression of opposition
Oh, you mean like when Biden has his primary opponent, Trump, tied up in court with accusations and a threat of imprisonment? Or, you mean like this very thread where leftists are trying to silence the TERFs? Yes, leftists absolutely love the forcible suppression of their opposition.
In conclusion, no, it's not a perfect fit for leftists, but it's loosely close — and it certainly doesn't fit conservatives even slightly.
You can't just make up whatever you want when you're not in /r/conservative. You are constrained by reality. Nobody is here to delete my posts and ban me for you.
Yes, well the MAGA crowd isn't very conservative if you ask me, and personally I support DeSantis. I think Democrats are strongly pushing for a Trump nomination because they know he's unelectable, and it's an easy play.
But to your point, I concede that most people do consider MAGA to be right wing, and that Trump has on several occasions said things suggesting he'd like an autocracy. I think we can agree that'd be undesirable. I just don't think it's very conservative.
Like Jan 6th.
All that was, was a group of jaded voters who believed (rightly or wrongly) that there was election fraud. Personally I see no evidence of fraud substantial enough to change the election. But at the same time, I recognize that for someone who truly did believe there was election fraud, they were upset and they wanted to protest about it. That's all it was — a protest that was legitimate based on what they believed.
You are constrained by reality. Nobody is here to delete my posts and ban me for you.
And I'm glad about that, 100%. I wouldn't want you banned.
But back to the definition, you can't just pluck a couple of words out of there and say it's a match. The whole definition fits the left way better than the right, and yet in truth doesn't fit either completely.
"lol, I hate the main conservative group in the US because they're not the right kind of Scotsman conservative. Instead, I love the guy who been pushing the most extreme book-banning policy in the US."
did you forget that this was a conversation about fascism when you brought DeSantis up, or do you not know who he is?
(rightly or wrongly)
lol no
But at the same time, I recognize that for someone who truly did believe there was election fraud
who do you think tricked them into believing that? or do you think it was all one massive coincidence?
I’m just pointing out that the „fascist“ label got thrown around by people like you so inflationary that it lost every meaning or sense, making you sound similar desperate as those you seek to oppose. What this does have to do with the age of my account here is beyond me, on the other hand I sense a hint of alt tech elitism that fits the picture just right.
like, fuck terfs, fuck the anti-trans movement, but the connection between the anti-trans movement and fascism is framed in this suuuuper abstract way that no meaningful definition of fascism would allow. It kind of just makes fascism sound like "statism."
There are plenty of terfs (again, fuck terfs) who are not calling for government action, but trying to exclude trans women from feminist spaces on non-governmental levels, arguing for a limiting social or academic definition of feminism or of a woman and holding exclusionary events. Fascism is an incorrect label for that behavior.
Furthermore, to call terfs fascists implies that they are generally for other things fascists are for, like a command economy, which I don't think is common.
And to be clear, there is an overlap between terfs and fascists, and an even bigger overlap between anti-trans people in general and fascists. We all know the Nazis fucked up a lot of good gender research, but they were never pretending to be feminists.
... did you link to the wrong article by mistake? that article doesn't really have anything to do with fascism, except insofar as most fascists also happen to be racists.
I could link articles all day but I have better things to do than entertain (presumably) a cis guy while he plays devils advocate about the people who want my friends thrown in camps not being fascists.
that's literally the first article you linked to. Do you have a point at all? You can link to articles all day, but only two of them, and only one that argues for your point at all, which I've already addressed?
I'm not advocating for terfs or fascists, they're both villains, but to say they're the same is like saying the KKK and the muslim brotherhood are the same. Just because they're both evil and there are some common threads between their ideas doesn't mean they're the same. I think we should learn how to talk about the terrible groups out there instead of just equating all of them and dancing around our own ignorance. I'm not advocating them, I'm advocating against them as strongly as I can, and you're promoting ignorance instead of responding to the one damn point I've made.
I read it, and responded to it. You've been ignoring my response because you don't have an answer to it. So again. The core argument that terfs are fascists is:
To that end, Butler does a good job of laying out that the anti-trans movement ultimately is about strengthening government oversight — restricting access to medical care and generally seeking to ban LGBTQ+ people from the public sphere, which fits pretty neatly into just about every standard definition of fascism. That includes gender critical feminists, the self-professed “leftist” equivalent of the more extreme right-wing fundamentalists.
Which, again:
Pretends the entire social-focused aspect of the anti-trans movement doesn't exist, when it obviously does, and there are obviously many, many terfs focused on non-governmental oppression. The article itself describes governmental forms of oppression, but this does nothing to imply that the anti-trans movement is actually all about focusing on government oppression
identifies an extremely superficial relationship between two positions as both being statist and therefore being the same. The police state is also about increasing government oversight. A command economy is about increasing government oversight. The founding of the CFPB was about increasing government oversight. Having courts is about increasing government oversight. These are not all forms of fascism.
fails to describe fascism at all. Fascism is a specific thing with a specific definition, it's not just the idea of having an active government. Fascism is a form of nationalism with a dictatorial government, a strong military focus, a hard command economy that exists to support the state and the military, expansionist policies, suppression of opposition to the government, denigration of the individual in favor of the collective in the form of the state... Now, the terf movement, overall, is doing some of those things, but the article doesn't reference any of them.
fails to establish that most terfs, or the core proponents of the terf movement, or terfs in general, are fascists, let alone that a terf is categorically a type of fascists.
If you have a point, then instead of linking to the same article again or linking article that isn't about fascism, please make your point.
who gains from making up a new definition of fascism? why do you want people to be ignorant?
know thy enemy.
I'm not nitpicking here, I'm not being pedantic, your article didn't even vaguely touch on what fascism is. Maybe the underlying article did, but I'm having trouble imagining what the point is.
Does it piss you off you spend all this effort flailing about defending fascists and I still tell you (correctly) you're wrong and spend a fraction of the effort?
does it piss you off that you don't have any response to anything I've actually said? does it piss you off to discover that this publication you like just published a point it didn't understand at all? does it piss you off to see a person argue that we should attack terfs for being terfs and fascists for being fascists and not just assume that all bad people are the same kind of bad person?
is that why you're afraid to read any of my comments?
Having no time for a jackass in a month old thread dredging up his lack of reading comprehension and pathological need to defend fascists from true accusations of being fascists is very much different than being afraid.
You are correct that I am not reading your replies at this point, nor is anyone else.
you didn't read any of my replies, and you kept accusing me of shit I'm not doing, because you are, in fact, not interested in defending your bullshit. Blaming me for that is sad.
also... I just found this thread today, how did that happen?
I'm upset that you're promoting the Westboro Baptist Church!
I'm upset that decent people are being tricked into a stupid opinion about bad people. Just because fascists are evil and terfs are evil doesn't mean we should be making up confused bullshit about them, we should make coherent arguments and insult them for what they actually are. Making fun of terfs for being fascists is not effective because intelligent people will see that they're not fascists, and then not understand the actual issues with terfs. This is doubly problematic if your argument that terfs are fascists is as superficial and weak as the Them article you posted. You'll alienate people that absolutely want to be on our side.
Why are you so cut up about arguing in a thread you're not reading?
I'll be here for as long as you keep defending Tucker Carlson.
I'm not doing this for the fascists. The fascists love it when people get confused about who they are.
I'm doing this for your benefit, and for the benefit of any other decent people reading. Decent people don't like being lied to, decent people don't benefit when you tell them that cake is a type of potato, decent people don't suddenly get smarter when you tell them that Rush Limbaugh is a Scientologist. Labels have meanings and degrading those meanings is not a progressive act.
I spend my cis-ass time helping progressives avoid ignorant people like you who are helping terfs and fascists recruit. I spend my cis-ass time attacking terfs and fascists.
the worst thing you can do to a terf is tell the truth. The worst thing you can do to a fascist is tell the truth. They have no defense against the truth. Their ideas are genuinely that bad.
But when you lie, they party in the streets—that's their whole recruitment model. They say "look, libtards call us fascists just because we don't believe (insert some strawman version of the lies terfs tell)," and they laugh about how many "moderate" votes you gained them in their swing states.
I hope my fellow progressives don't think your ignorance is the norm among progressives.
I'm not talking to a group, I'm talking to a dumbass.
As a Jew, I feel fairly entitled to talk about fascism, and fairly entitled to be upset when people say insert group of assholes are Fascists without any understanding whatsoever of any definition of Fascism beyond "government." I do, in fact, have a stake in how you lie about my oppressors.
But it's also perfectly reasonable for me to be upset when you lie about your oppressors and try to trick trans people and allies like me into believing your lies. Why are you so strongly opposed to the truth?
There needs to be a way to report someone to their instance, not just the mods of a magazine, like you do on Mastodon. People like this being a nuisance across magazines need to be handled at the instance level.
But these settings are just for the in-site notifications, don't they? I mean, I have some of them checked, but never received a push notification in my browser to don't need to open Kbin every time to check of there's any new interaction
Also a major mitigation would be if it redirected you to the page you were on, ideally with what you had written already filled in, after you log back in.
Better yet: if logging in was just a detour to submitting a comment or post. So if you try to post something and you're not logged in, you get presented with the login screen, put in your login information, send, and the post you were trying to make gets posted.
I mean, yeah, you could put "block magazine" under the "more" options. I don't think it would take up that much more space, and you wouldn't even see it unless you clicked "more"
I think in part it's that a few Lemmy communities are extremely active / almost spammy and there's no algorithm filtering how much content you get from each place. In the "All" view, most of the content I see comes from the same couple of Lemmy "meme" communities. So it's no wonder most of the content I'm seeing comes from Lemmy when almost all of it comes from two specific communities which are basically meme factories. If I filter those out, there's suddenly a much bigger variety of content from all around and on my "Subscribed" tab I can see plenty of activity from Kbin communities.
Absolutely. They are doing it with the intention of karma farming because they only post shitposts and useless Reddit crap like this, but this is a serious issue if they move on to opinion posts and politics.
I would like to see subdomains for communities here. like @competitive.kbin.social for lots of sport-like things as an example. Also place (city, state, country) and fandom or other stuff like that. And make it easy for people to block that subdomain with allowances for the things they actually want to see (though I guess if it's still accessible by subscriptions or directly going there, that works too).
As someone who uses Both kbin and lemmy I started removing my upvotes on lemmy because I thought did it by accident until I realized with lemmy it does that automatically when you post something making the default score 1 but on kbin it is 0 because it does not do that. Still the idea of upvoting yourself to get a higher point score just seems silly.
Well, when all your posts will start with a minus 5 and become invisible maybe you will start to care? Because you WILL have your haters too. Some people are that crazy.
I do care because even though these virtual point mean fuck all, users will degrade everyone's experience to try and farm them. We'll be getting low quality, rage-bait inducing posts, reposts being boosted to the top and actual good content being overshadowed just because an arsehole wants bigger numbers
What's dumb is reputation doesn't even do anything on Kbin right now other than make you go "haha I have higher number than you" so reputation farming is a total waste of time. Personally I hope it stays that way as it will deter the farmers, I can see some of the benefits of the karma system in Reddit but it's just too prone to manipulation to be actually useful in any way.
I think you could make a small amount of money for selling a reddit account with high karma...but that's the only thing I ever heard of it being useful for.
It also grants a small amount of credibility of not being some random new account shill or whatever, but given how accounts can be sold, it doesn't really do that if you're paying any attention
That's a fair point, I forgot that was a thing that could be done. Was that useful? Do you think it's something that should be possible here in the future?
As someone who was mostly a lurker on Reddit, it was really annoying, actually. The rare times I wanted to comment on something, only to be hit with being told my karma was too low, so I couldn’t? It put me off those subreddits fast and ended up made me less likely to try to comment on things.
This is exactly what some people are after. It lets them believe they are oh so better for having no life outside of the internet. And content quality on kbin suffers in the process.
kbinMeta
Top
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.