this post was submitted on 03 Jul 2025
92 points (89.0% liked)
Fediverse
35109 readers
471 users here now
A community to talk about the Fediverse and all it's related services using ActivityPub (Mastodon, Lemmy, KBin, etc).
If you wanted to get help with moderating your own community then head over to !moderators@lemmy.world!
Rules
- Posts must be on topic.
- Be respectful of others.
- Cite the sources used for graphs and other statistics.
- Follow the general Lemmy.world rules.
Learn more at these websites: Join The Fediverse Wiki, Fediverse.info, Wikipedia Page, The Federation Info (Stats), FediDB (Stats), Sub Rehab (Reddit Migration)
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Hate speech has no place here, no matter how comfortable these creeps feel around their fascist politicians and policemen at home.
Hating Jews was "pretty mainstream" in the NSDAP.
Hate speech is hate speech no matter how many bootlicking pieces of shit might agree, and this is not a platform that's friendly to the miserable fuckers who have nothing better to do with their lives than to spread hate and intolerance. They have Twitter and Truth social to spread their shit.
And here lies my point. A vast majority of people don't think its hate speech. And a vast majority of people believe free speech supersedes hate speech.
Please define hate speech.
I've seen many people defending violence against Jews in the name of Palestine right here on lemmy so I'd say hating Jews is pretty mainstream in the fediverse right now.
I believe the right to free speech grants you the right to express hatred as long as ur not calling for violence u should have the right to say whatever the fuck you want.
That's a pretty mainstream belief for a lot a people who have been completely ostracised and discriminated against by the fediverse as a whole.
Muntedcrocodile: "I believe in the right to spread hatred as long as it's not calling for violence."
Lemmy: "Um, okay. Let's give that a try. We hate hateful right wing views, and call people with those views total assholes."
muntedcrocodile: "Wait, not like that! You should tolerate us so there's a diversity of views!"
Ironic.
Nice straw man.
U see I also believe in equality (of opportunity) if you have the right to spread hate against right wing views then said right wingers should have said right to spread hate against your views.
I'm tolerant of your hate speech and combat it with ration argument. Your not tolerant of my speech and combat it with deletions, bans, and personal attacks. We are not the same.
Actually, a vast majority of people don't support being a shitbag to other people. You're confusing popular sentiment with the whims of the conservative elite. If you don't just hide in right wing echo chambers all the time you might be surprised to find out how unpopular your terrible views are.
I frequent many forums both digital and physical under a multitude of identities and the only ones who despise free speech are the extreme left. Pretty much everyone likes it. Lemmy is the most echo chambery of all the places I visit.
If your views are so popular how did trump win the election? Why have almost all right wing parties across Europe gotten a larger percentage of the vote? Why did almost every state in the us shift more right in the last election? These are the facts. You are objectively wrong
Those are not facts. You are wrong. Nice try though.
Prove me wrong.
I've provided more facts to support my claim than you have for yours. I've provided nothing, whereas you have actively lied about the nothing you've brought forth. I don't need to prove anything to you.
Not that I could, conservatives don't think anyway, and you can't logic someone out of a position they felt their way into.
Alright I'll bite: https://yonkersobserver.com/early-results-show-a-red-shift-across-the-u-s/
Proof almost all the us moved right in the last election.
https://www.statista.com/chart/6852/seats-held-by-far-right-parties-in-europe/
Proof of my Europe claim.
Here's the important charts for ya
Prove me wrong
See, you don't read.
Me: I don't need to prove anything to you.
You: Prove me wrong.
Like, no. You can't even read and parse one paragraph, and you want me to compile a bunch of research you won't understand? You want me to explain the difference between a scant majority of the population who decided to and were permitted to vote and a vast majority of all people everywhere to someone who struggles with basic reading? What a laugh.
Shifting the goalposts.
I made 2 claims u said I was wrong because my claims where wrong I proved my claims where true. Now ur refusing to provide evidence to support your claims. Engage in good faith. Stop being a hypocrite. Have some honour lest I lose what little respect I used to have for u.
You seem to be confused. This isn't a debate.
Ahh so what's it meant to be?
The definition of UN should be simple enough:
A related reading would be the paradox of tolerance, which goes far in explaining why we do not want this shit anywhere near our communities.
As for anti-Semitism, I've seen some of it in response to Israel's ongoing genocide, and of course the current context makes both anti-Semitism and anti-Muslim sentiments a very real problem. However, I think people on here mostly seem to be able to distinguish Israel and Judaism, and when they don't it seems moderators are generally doing a better job than on most platforms in my experience. But I doubt you're here in good faith, so I don't see much point in discussing something like this with you.
If you feel discriminated against because people don't want you around, feel free to vote with your feet.
First I always discuss in good faith its a far more rewarding and enjoyable way to engage with the shared human experience. Second the condescending attitude isn't particularly pleasant I'm not speaking with you in such a way I ask you have the same respect for me.
Sure that's a fair definition.
I would argue the paradox of tolerance is widely misunderstood the full quote in which it is based is as follows:
"Unlimited tolerance must lead to the disappearance of tolerance. If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them.
In this formulation, I do not imply, for instance, that we should always suppress the utterance of intolerant philosophies; as long as we can counter them by rational argument and keep them in check by public opinion, suppression would certainly be most unwise." - Karl Popper (The Open Society and Its Enemies 1945)
I think most people ignore the second half of it as its convenient for them to do so.
Ahh yes vote with my feet and leave the fediverse hence why op is asking why the fediverse has stagnated and doesn't seem to be growing. You have expertly just proven exactly the original point I was trying to make.