I don’t know if you’ve noticed, but recently U.S. one the U.S. political parties turned hard right to fascism.
They certainly have. People who whine about political content are usually just whining that the prevailing consensus is not consistent with their opinions. I imagine a good chunk of it is people being upset that lemmy is on the whole fiercely opposed to bigotry and is populated with people who are frustrated with corporate-owned social media.
Lemmy has always been overtly political. The whining is from the sort of people who move in near a live music venue so they can make noise complaints.
People who whine about political content are usually just whining that the prevailing consensus is not consistent with their opinions.
Are you implying that there’s a problem with not holding the same set of opinions as the majority? Reasonable disagreement without implicit immorality is possible on many issues.
Are you implying that there’s a problem with not holding the same set of opinions as the majority?
No. I’m saying that the whiners are only whining about political content because they disagree with it. They would rather have no political content than content they don’t agree with. It’s the same impulse that dismisses all representation of marginalized groups in media as “political.”
Earlier in this conversation, it was stated that the prevalent political stance here is left-wing, and that people who complain about politics usually disagree with the prevalent stance.
If that’s true, that means the people who don’t care about politics are usually centrist at best, or right-wing.
You decry not caring about politics because not caring helps the fascists, but if the people who aren’t caring would lean right anyways (and you presumably believe right-wingers are fascists or fascist-enablers,) then getting them to care is only going to harm your cause.
Even if they somehow don’t have a stance, if you tell them they’re not allowed to be ambivalent, do you expect them to join your side?
They certainly have. People who whine about political content are usually just whining that the prevailing consensus is not consistent with their opinions. I imagine a good chunk of it is people being upset that lemmy is on the whole fiercely opposed to bigotry and is populated with people who are frustrated with corporate-owned social media.
Lemmy has always been overtly political. The whining is from the sort of people who move in near a live music venue so they can make noise complaints.
Fair, I assumed your comment was meant a different way than it was.
Are you implying that there’s a problem with not holding the same set of opinions as the majority? Reasonable disagreement without implicit immorality is possible on many issues.
No. I’m saying that the whiners are only whining about political content because they disagree with it. They would rather have no political content than content they don’t agree with. It’s the same impulse that dismisses all representation of marginalized groups in media as “political.”
Or… maybe some people just don’t care about politics and would rather see dank memes than “Nazis are bad” even if they agree that Nazis are bad.
Not caring about politics is how the nazis and other fascist regimes came into power.
Earlier in this conversation, it was stated that the prevalent political stance here is left-wing, and that people who complain about politics usually disagree with the prevalent stance.
If that’s true, that means the people who don’t care about politics are usually centrist at best, or right-wing.
You decry not caring about politics because not caring helps the fascists, but if the people who aren’t caring would lean right anyways (and you presumably believe right-wingers are fascists or fascist-enablers,) then getting them to care is only going to harm your cause.
Even if they somehow don’t have a stance, if you tell them they’re not allowed to be ambivalent, do you expect them to join your side?