Hi! In thinking about how to help the fediverse grow, I wonder if there are more mainstream Lemmy instances?
I’ve pointed a couple folks to Lemmy.world and it’s uhhh, pretty hard Left for them (as one girl, who volunteered for the Democrats said “I just got yelled at because I can’t be Left wing unless I want to destroy capitalism? Which feels weird.”) We’re much farther Left than reddit which itself was definitely Left of centre…
I don’t know if decentralized open source social media actually attracts many mainstreamers but assuming we want to grow the fediverse, I’d like to have somewhere I can point people to without feeling very nervous for them.
Thanks!
Left “wing” in normie US is a broad neighborhood.
Left “ism” in normie US is a study of progressive politics with deviation from center exponentially growing as you go “more left”.
Lots of “left wing” folks in the US are low on the leftism deviation curve, but due to the way things work in the US they are definitely “left wing”.
So you absolutely get fiscal centrists with much “lefter” social opinions. And other “left-lite” view combos.
I think to grow Lemmy non combative, but non compromising spaces should exist. Much how some are warped right by spending too much time in the “manosphere” content, folks can be convinced of increasingly progressive politics by being welcomed here. Mind, I’m not saying anyone should cater to anything they don’t agree with, but God damn Lemmy could be less combative. Purity testing mild left folks drives them right. You don’t have to compromise your morals or positions to accomplish this.
So I’d close by saying Americans aren’t “confused” about anything, they’re just less exposed with further left policy / theory, due to being exposed most to milder progressive concepts.
On the right, maga is remarkable because it’s drawing many conservatives quickly up the exponential deviation ladder at a quantity not really seen before.
IDGAF about what the US is cooking up when it comes to political definitions, much less so when they disagree with the rest of the world. Anti-capitalism is necessary to be on the left, it’s not negotiable.
Just like you wouldn’t call someone who denies god a Christian. There’s no “but they deny god a bit less than Richard Dawkins, so they’re more Christian”: No, they’re still denying god, they can’t be Christian. If they consider themselves Christian despite denying god, then it stands to reason that they’re quite confused about what being a Christian entails, don’t you think?
You’re ina thread authored by an canadian about “normies”. North American concepts matter.
Edit even wherever you’re from “left wing” (the scope of center to far left) exists, just the starting point of center is unique.
Further, your purity test determination leaves no room for the varied mins of people all over the world. For example fiscal centrists who are socially progressive. You may call that a false leftist, but I’d just say they’re a mild left wing voter. I bet if they weren’t purity tested they’d eventually shift their perspective on fiscal matters leftward.
Point being people hold varied political opinions, sometimes in complete contrast to themselves. I bet there’s some completely theory pure fiscal leftists who don’t believe in abortion rights, or some other bizarre combo
So you would call Peter Thiel a leftist? A literal billionaire? A literal neo-feudalist? Because he happens to be gay and proud of it?
You are taking a word that has been, since its literal inception (seating arrangements in the French national assembly, as seen from the lectern), been connected to the struggle of the masses vs. nobility/oligarchy, and you’re attaching orthogonal meanings to it. You cannot be leftist if you’re on the side of the oligarchy, if you’re a capitalist.
“Socially progressive”. You already have a term for it. Good. Use it. Don’t dilute other terms, or even allow them to be turned into their opposite.
There’s no centre point between “believe in god” and “deny god”: Either you do or you don’t, and anything agnostic is not in the centre, it’s not a compromise, but off the axis altogether.
When did I suggest that would be a leftist? Maybe reread. Specifically the end.
He may hold left opinions on LGBTQ+ issues but hold completely contracting, non left wing opinions elsewhere. We can be sure that’s true. He’s certainly not a leftist, and likely not a left wing voter either.
Ultimately I’d highlight that you are doing the.thing: you are purity testing very broad language in a completely useless way
To be hyper clear for you:
Left WING is not leftIST
LeftIST is left WING
Whether -ist or -wing doesn’t matter both still contain the word “left”, don’t they? Therefore, they are either anti-capitalist, or they’re confused. And, yes, much of US politics is terribly confused. The moderate left, in the US, begins with AOC and Bernie, both solid socdems, radical is far a ways off. The Democrat establishment, by and large, supports the oligarchy, they don’t even begin to be on the left.
Don’t expect lefties from elsewhere to play into that confusion.