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?
It potentially opens you up to radicalization in the wrong direction.
Generally radicalization in any direction is bad.
Why? Shouldn’t the measure of good and bad be with respect to how correct it is, not how closely the position aligns with the status quo?
The word implies an unhealthy and incorrect degree. Otherwise you’re not radicalized, just representing an opinion.
Not necessarily, it implies conviction and separation from the norm.
Learn how to mask your IP using VPNs or other open proxies before any of that.
Also tracking protection in the browser to prevent reading browser history and such. Security and privacy practices are absolutely paramount if you’re planning on visiting services like that. Of course the best thing is to not visit them at all but some people feel they need to see it for themselves, if they choose they should be prepared and keep themselves safe.
Go into chud spaces and generally be a wrecker. Accuse various factions of being feds/antifa false flag/etc.
Perhaps an unpopular take, but my suggestion would be to think if you can come from the perspective of love: do you love these people, and care about them, though they’ve believed lies? Can you converse with them with respect, listening to why they feel how they do, and be patient to bring truth only to help them, not to self-righteously vindicate yourself?
Then again, this is the internet, so if you jump in, post inflammatory memes, pat yourself on the back for being so clever, and jump out again, and show us the results; perhaps I’ll giggle along with the rest of us.
For a different take, you might like to note that part of the effectiveness of propaganda is not a good rational explanation but repeated asserted lies. Jumping into a different set of assertions can help pop you out of ones you’ve wrongly believed from your own background - but it can also wear you down to believe, or half believe, what the other community is saying even if it’s without merit. Keep a check on the things you read: What’s the actual source behind this? Could these be repeatedly misconstruing that thing in the same way (so they look coherent but aren’t)? Is there some useful truth in here I missed? And is there a subtle lie attached to the truth? And there’s lots of other helpful questions you can ask: but keep a sensible head and be prepared to step back and look at something else.
This is the right answer. Hatred just breeds more hatred. If you approach with love and understanding (or at least a desire to understand), you’ll have a much better chance of changing hearts and minds. Try to meet in the middle and you might be able to point them in the right direction.
They’re not looking for freedom of speech but freedom from consequences.
You’ll get banned there real quick.
wtf is freedom of speech if not a freedom of consequences from what you say?
People telling you you’re and arsehole and treating you like what arsehole is then expressing their freedom of speech.
It’s also a consequence of your speech.
That’s fair but I don’t think there’s much freedom of speech if someone will murder you for what you’ve said
Where the fuck did murder come from?
That’s a possible outcome that I subconciously included in the list of consequences
I mean sure, if you leap all the way from 0 to 1,000 for no reason.
No reason? Being murdered is still a consequence, isn’t it? Why wouldn’t I include it?
There is a distinct difference.
Freedom of speach means that the government can’t punnish you for talking shit, except in limited circumstances.
Freedom of consequences from what you say, means that no one should be allowed to let what your say affect them in any way, this means that no one would be allowed to be offended by what you might say, nor that they would be allowed to act on such offence.
In a functional society you want to have freedom of speach, but not freedom of consequences from what you say. This allows you to express opposing views in mostly resonable ways.
As long as the consequences are words and non-violent actions. Advocating violence as a consequence for someone expressing an idea is imho dangerous and should be avoided.
Good luck man, you’re about to learn how easy it is to get banned on those free speech alternatives. Still funny though.
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
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.
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>
deleted by creator
That’s a bad idea and you’re a bad person.
Join Hexbear, all of Lemmy says it’s the most toxic instance if that’s what you want.
