this post was submitted on 24 Feb 2025
145 points (95.0% liked)

Asklemmy

45457 readers
696 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy 🔍

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

  1. Open-ended question
  2. Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
  3. Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
  4. Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
  5. An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Just wanted to prove that political diversity ain't dead. Remember, don't downvote for disagreements.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] pineapplelover@lemm.ee 35 points 6 days ago (3 children)

Y'all don't need to keep adding things to lgbtq or lgbt+. The q or + takes care of everything

[–] jsomae@lemmy.ml 14 points 6 days ago

I think this is a better argument that "queer" is the best catch-all phrase. Honestly, come to think of it, if we can phase out LGBT in favour of "queer" entirely, then that gives republicans a harder time to separate the T.

[–] Bamboodpanda@lemmy.world 8 points 6 days ago (2 children)

I'm working on transitioning to using They/Them pronouns for everyone since they're completely neutral and fit every context. If your preference is Xe/Xem, I respect that—but unfortunately, my brain just doesn't have the bandwidth to keep track of multiple pronouns consistently. You get They/Them.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] gerryflap@feddit.nl 6 points 6 days ago

I'm aro/ace and honestly same. I refuse to use any longer acronym because to me it sounds silly.

In a similar fashion, I'm also not a major fan of the pride flags with more than the rainbow. It's fine for special occasions in order to draw attention to a cause that needs it, but not as the default. Adding black stripes, the trans flag, and intersex flag all at the same time seems ridiculous to me, and it only invites other groups to feel left out. Adding the black stripes, the trans flag, the intersex flag, or whatever to the flag for some event, protest, or personal reason is great but imo we shouldn't permanently muddy the flag like that.

[–] HelixDab2@lemm.ee 21 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (18 children)

I'm mostly an anarchist. But.

I think that there needs to be some degree of authoritarian, arbitrary power. Mostly because I've been in anarchist groups in the past, and when everyone has input into a decision, shit gets bogged down really fast. Not everyone understands a given issue and will be able to make an informed choice, and letting opinionated-and-ignorant people make choices that affect the whole group is... Not good.

The problem is, I don't know how to balance these competing interests, or exactly where authoritarian power should stop. It's easy to say, well, I should get to make choices about myself, but what about when those individual choices end up impacting other people? For instance, I eat meat, and yet I'm also aware that the cattle industry is a significant source of CO2; my choice, in that case, contributes to climate change, which affects everyone. ...And once you start going down that path, it's really easy to arrive at totalitarianism as the solution.

I also don't know how to handle the issue of trade and commerce, and at what point it crosses the line into capitalism.

[–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 6 points 6 days ago (1 children)

You might be interested in the essay The Tyranny of Structurelessness, which goes over the same concept you speak of with requiring some degree of formalization of structure in order to prevent unaccountable structure from forming. I'm not an Anarchist, though.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (17 replies)
[–] ziproot@lemmy.ml 28 points 6 days ago (2 children)

I believe that the stance against nuclear power (specifically, nuclear fission, as opposed to radioisotope power used by spacecraft) by greens undermines the fight to stop global warming, and that many of the purported issues with nuclear power have been solved or were never really issues in the first place.

For instance: the nuclear waste produced by old-gen reactors can be used by newer generations.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] pet1t@lemm.ee 33 points 6 days ago (14 children)

I am very very very left wing, BUT I can get really annoyed with a lot of those "on my side" advocating for the most idealist of all idealism, as if it's a contest. Feels like a competition of "who's the bestest and mostest leftist of all". You scare people away and - not justifying it - but I get why some people get upset with "the left" because of this...

[–] Kacarott@aussie.zone 19 points 6 days ago (3 children)

I believe that the vast majority of people are inherently good, and that tribalism and political divisiveness are some of the biggest issues we have to face.

Political differences arise mostly from different values, fears, education (or lack thereof), etc, but most people if you get to know them believe what they do because they believe it is genuinely good. But increasingly politics is focused on vilifying others, instead of trying to understand each other.

[–] dependencyinjection@discuss.tchncs.de 2 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago) (4 children)

How do we tackle those problems you mentioned?

The reason I ask is I support your view here, but recently I’ve been downvoted a lot for having the opinion that I don’t blame people still using Twitter as I believe, like you, that most people are good people and can be reasoned out of what we believe are the wrong beliefs and that staying in those places to converse with them is better than Twitter becoming a right wing place and us chilling here in left wing ideology but at the end of that nobody learns anything they didn’t already know.

The hardest challenge in changing someone’s beliefs is that people don’t want to admit they were wrong or lied to or used or whatever and this makes it challenging if we can’t take our ego out of the equation.

Anecdotal proof that people can change is a YouTuber called JimmyTheGiant and he has mentioned several times how he went down the alt right pipeline but started to question things and now makes left leaning content.

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] EsmereldaFritzmonster@lemmings.world 24 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Stop out-woking one another, it's okay to be right silently in order to bring in fence sitters.

If someone says, "my spirit animal told me late-stage capitalism is evil" welcome them to the club with open arms, focus on how you're alike and trust them to work out their faux pas over time spent among like-minded peers.

Also cultural appropriation ≠ exploitation, we can stop clutching our collective pearls over these faux pas.

[–] jsomae@lemmy.ml 8 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (1 children)

I vote we move to a new term, "cultural plagiarism," which more clearly relates to e.g. a white person stealing a black musician's work (as opposed to covering it and giving credit and royalties, which should be fine!)

[–] EsmereldaFritzmonster@lemmings.world 9 points 6 days ago (1 children)

In the spirit of my post, I'm glad you see a disparity in the term cultural appropriation like I do.

In the spirit of clarifying what I mean, cultural appropriation is using elements of another culture. What you described is exploitative, is very serious, and not what I'm referring to.

But I appreciate your input all the same.

[–] jsomae@lemmy.ml 7 points 6 days ago (1 children)

I figured your objection to the term "cultural appropriation" is that people use it to refer to exploitative things as well as what I view as innocent things like a professional dancer who is white dancing to an anime song or something. That's why I proposed a new term, to help differentiate these things.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] PerogiBoi@lemmy.ca 13 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (3 children)

You can be Jewish and even support the idea of a Jewish homeland while also being fervently appalled by the actions of the state of Israel (Netanyahu, West Bank settlements, unarmed Palestinians shot/killed, houses being bulldozed, mass displacements).

[–] AntiOutsideAktion@lemmy.ml 5 points 6 days ago

Liberal zionists are still zionists

[–] dawnglider@lemmy.ml 4 points 6 days ago

There's countless invaluable Jewish voices in the anti-zionist movement of course, but what Jewish homeland could you support that wouldn't be an ethno-state? /g

[–] jsomae@lemmy.ml 4 points 6 days ago

Agreed. Antisemitism != antizionism.

[–] SlothMama@lemmy.world 16 points 6 days ago (10 children)

Freedom of speech for absolutely everyone, especially people I disagree with and that disagree with me

[–] UniversalMonk@sh.itjust.works 6 points 6 days ago

Yep. Lemme isn't really a fan if free speech and they usually say it leads to nazi things. But I'm all for free speech even if bad guys use it too.

load more comments (9 replies)
[–] mrodri89@lemmy.zip 5 points 5 days ago (5 children)

Im left leaning on many social issues but pronouns was never a necessary social construct hill we needed to die on.

I think that useless fight got us the full hard swing to the right.

Especially because you shouldn't give a fuck about how people perceive you. You should be whoever you are and not care about labels.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] random@lemmy.blahaj.zone 7 points 6 days ago (1 children)

I'm anarchist left, but I do think every human should have the right to defend themself and thereforce should be able to bear arms

I'm not american if anyone's gonna ask

[–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 5 points 6 days ago (4 children)

Is that an uncommon stance among Anarchists?

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] vfreire85@lemmy.ml 5 points 6 days ago (3 children)
  • permanent revolution;
  • that parties should be democratic institutions;
  • that burocratization leads to deformed proletarian states.
load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›