Since Trump, I’m finding the Lemmy.world experience to be increasingly akin to an echo chamber and it’s quite frankly starting to bore me. (Inb4, I’m a left winger and I don’t like Trump, but I’m much more interested in a good spirited debate or novel points of view than I am in Orange man bad Nazi circle jerks)
If I wanted the same repetitive comments to be upvoted and any different opinion at all to be downvoted and even blocked/banned, I’d have just stayed on Reddit.
Are there any instances where different, opposing and novel points of view are celebrated and debated rather than simply derided and downvoted?
This is kind of the derision that I’m talking about. (I am assuming that you are talking about the right wing). Whilst there is some truth to it, you disagreeing with them or their arguments doesn’t mean that it isn’t interesting, or worthy of discussion or debate.
I do agree that hate speech should be banned and that isn’t what I’m interested in.
I’m not interested in the MAGA point of view per se, I’m interested in a diverse spectrum of ideas and opinions that reflect a real cross section of society, where undoubtedly some of them will be MAGA people. Whereas there is a very strong left leaning bias here.
.world is very liberal, it isn’t really accurate to call it “left leaning.” You aren’t going to find many MAGA people on the fediverse.
In the UK there is some similarity between liberal and left wing ideas, despite them being distinct political groups. Liberalism was originally seen as very left wing, a lot of people are now arguing that there is more in common with right wing politics, small state and such.
I’d say my experience here has been much more left wing than liberal though, just my opinion.
Liberalism was only “left” when Capitalism was progressive, which was only true in comparison to Monarchism and Feudalism. Liberalism is a firmly Capitalist ideology, while Socialism is leftist.
It seems like you don’t realize that the world is extremely polarized. It’s not just Lemmy.
The issue is that you can’t have discussion or debate with:
So the issue is once you have removed those, you aren’t left with many people holding a very broad spectrum of viewpoints outside of niche topics (Vi vs Emacs).
It’s extremely big headed to think that only the people who agree with you are arguing honestly and have not based their arguments on any incorrect information.
I’m here to learn and grow, not to circle jerk with my friends about how right we are.
I don’t think it’s always a difficult task to tell if someone is arguing in bad faith or not, and someone basing their argument on incorrect information is not that (and I assume you know that). So trying to say that I see a mere disagreement on a topic the same as one made in bad faith sounds like you’re trying to conflate the two, making it a bad faith argument.
But if pretending a ‘difference of opinion = bad faith argument’ is what you’re looking for I guess good luck. That is what I would call a “circle jerk”, but to each their own. Not sure how that type of discussion with no basis in reality can help anyone to “learn and grow” though.