EDIT: no, I don't sympathize with nazis (neither I sympathize with those who call everyone nazi when they're losing an argument ;)
Most defederation isn’t because people are disagreeing though. It’s because the people they’re defederating from are assholes.
OP is a three day old account. They know this, this meme is just them crying about it.
Instance know for trolling and being assholes is eventually defederated
You just don't understand us!
Lol right? And if you even try to engage it’s constant sealioning, memeing, and dunking.
Sealioning? No, you just won't read my 10,000 word post that is copied from someone else's pHD.
Edit: No joke, after posting this I got this message from a Hexbear user:
I’ve read all three volumes of [Das Kapital] around a month ago because I had an autistic urge to do it
tell me with full seriousness that you’ve even glanced at it
Have you even read Gramsci? You really can't disagree with anything I say until you've read Gramsci. Sorry, I don't make the rules!
This is why my instance is defederated with them though. It's just bad faith nonsense all the way down.
To build on this point: I don’t get the whole “anti-echo chamber” thing and this demand we entertain said assholes. We select people to be friends we generally like and agree with. We often don’t associate with people we don’t like or disagree with. Why should our forums be some totally egalitarian social exposure? That’s literally never been the case ever. We read what we want to read. We talk to who we want to talk to. I’m not going to be guilted into listening to some jerk who thinks gay people shouldn’t marry and belong in hell. I don’t want to share a beer with them, I would never invite them to dinner in my home, so why should I have to deal with them living rent free in my mind because I saw some ignorant post of theirs and they called someone a slur? Hell, why should I be forced by some arbitrary, inconsistent moral code to deal with people who are simply disruptive/obnoxious?
I have plenty of work colleagues and family I disagree with, I read sources I don’t always love. I get plenty of exposure to other ways of thinking and ideas, at least no less than anyone else does. Do I think people can go too far and literally only surround themselves with “yes men” socially? Sure. But come on. How many of us actually spend equal time with people we both agree and disagree ideologically with?
The only people whining about defederating either don’t understand what it is or are butthurt because people are collectively showing them the door, and there is little they can do about it. 
Yeah you're right. It's not a binary choice between echo chamber and non-echo chamber. It's just an open community where trolling antisocial behaviour is discouraged. If admins of an instance are encouraging antisocial behaviour then the only solution is to defederate.
You mean hexbear, kbin, and lemmygrad?
I hope so.
What's wrong with kbin?
Yes, let's enter discussion with the literal Nazis so we can try to understand them. There might be nuance to their calls for mass genocide.
Fuck off OP.
It's funny how people always use play it like "oh, it's just differing opinions" when what they're actually defending is indefensible malarkey like nazis and tankies. They know if they made a meme saying we should "try to understand" nazis and tankies, they'd be downvoted to oblivion. And so they hide behind a shield of "differing opinions".
These cretins have a right to post nazi and tankie shit on their own instances -- them's the beauty of the fediverse. But I also have a right to not want hate speech, genocide denial, and Hitler/Stalin/Mao simps polluting my feed. It's not mere "differing opinions" when one person's opinion is "Holodomor didn't happen, and if it did, the Ukrainians deserved it" or "Holocaust didn't happen, and if it did, the Jews deserved it" or whatever apologia they wanna peddle.
It’s funny how people always use play it like “oh, it’s just differing opinions” when what they’re actually defending is indefensible malarkey like nazis and tankies. They know if they made a meme saying we should “try to understand” nazis and tankies, they’d be downvoted to oblivion. And so they hide behind a shield of “differing opinions”.
There's an actual term for this: Motte and Bailey. One of many hallmarks of disingenuous shitbirds.
HiTlEr WaSn'T aLl BaD
Hitler wasn’t all bad. After all, he did kill Hitler.
Only a good Hitler with a gun can stop a bad Hitler doing genocide.
Fuck that. Defederate all Nazis.
More like de-head-erate all nazis lmao
What if i just loudly accuse myself of being a nazi? Is this a strategy worth pursuing? Maybe the nazis wont expect you attacking yourself. Uno reverse. "everybody says so, all the people are saying it."
This post assumes that a meaningful amount of defed instances are caused by simple lack of agreement. Often, it's an orthogonal matter - it boils down to instance A actually understanding something about the userbase of instance B and saying "I'm not dealing with this shit, it'll make the instance worse for its own users". For example: the typical user of B might be disingenuous, or preach immoral prescriptions, behave like a chimp, or be a bloody stupid piece of trash that should've stayed in Reddit to avoid smearing its stupidity everywhere here.
Are instance admins too eager to pull the trigger for defed? Perhaps, in some cases; specially because it handles groups of users instead of individuals. But those cases are better addressed through actual examples, not through a meme talking on generic grounds.
Yeah, let's try to understand child abuse images /s
Let’s find the middle ground with Nazi’s too!
I want to stab you in the back 8 times, you don't want to be stabbed at all.
Let's compromise and I stab you 4 times.
If someone says, "you just can't handle that my views are different than your views", they are either a Nazi, or a tankie.
Isn't dbzer0 defederated from a bunch? That kinda sucks.
452 (and counting) defederates
'people posting stuff you consider harmful' is not a simple, black and white issue. Anyone who pretends that allowing all opinions has no consequences is full of shit, anyone who claims that tightly policing opinions has no consequences is full of shit.
Like almost everything in life, you will have to navigate a tenuous balance between these two things and you will never know if you got the balance right. You are just a sack of meat doomed to die.
Nazi is a communist term for delegitimizing a legitimate sovereign nation. Cope with it. Churchill said so.
Lmao "try and understand them" fuck off, OP. You're not fooling anyone. There's no point trying to understand assholes.
No offense but this is kind of what happens in real life too. Nazi shows up to local bar. Barman or owner doesn't throw them out. Eventually they invite their friends. It winds up being known a Nazi bar. People who don't want to associate with Nazis no longer visit the bar. This is why intolerance of the intolerant is a thing.
Funny thing is, the Nazis would use those same guilty by association tactics to silence and crush dissent.
If the 'thing you dont agree' with is hate speech or shit promotting violence for example that's the only sane option you have lol
Yes. Tolerance should not extend to intolerance, and intolerance should never be a thing we tolerate.
If it were that simple, then it would be fine.
But the point is, people just start to label anything that whiffs of a different opinion as "intolerance".
Funny how one instance is the one everyone wants to defederate from.
Currently. Of course in the past it was exploding heads for being Nazis, Lemmygrad for being insufferable tankies, then Burggit for lolicon, now hexbear for being insufferable tankies.
I'm so glad that the comments have (mostly) finally unified in agreement that defederating Nazis and other hideous people is the right move.
Unless the nazi wears red, then let him spew his holocaust denial because "western propaganda imperialism butwhatabout they deserved it it never happened."
Defederating brigaders and trolls is necessary to maintain a healthy community. If your instance is defederated from all major instances, perhaps you should look examine what sort of company you keep.
With that mentality we'll all become beehaw. The cesspool of don't look at me funny.
It's intriguing how everyone that views themselves as moderates/liberals forget (or are unacquainted with it) about the paradox of tolerance.
Tolerance implies everyone has a right to express their ideas and you want that. You want everything out in the open, so you can pick at it, dismantle it and render it pitiful, ridiculous and useless.
You want the intolerant crying out loud that you are intolerant as that means you are doing the right thing. The intolerant want silence, forced, while the tolerant want noise, anger, tension.
Remember that anything worthwhile needs to be fought for. Don't regret being vocal and harsh towards intolerance.
That is a pretty ironic comment because that is not what the paradox of tolerance is at all. The paradox of tolerance is that intolerance needs to be suppressed for tolerance to exist, since tolerance can't exist alongside intolerance.
The paradox is that tolerance needs to be intolerant towards intolerance in order for a tolerant society to exist, literally the exact opposite of what you wrote.