Lemmy is more left leaning because the rights popularity seen on other social media are driven by bots that are not here.
Lemmy is more left leaning because the rights popularity seen on other social media are driven by bots that are not here.
Yet.
You're viewing a single thread.
The political discourse seems toned down here, I am already happy with that.
It doesn't to me. It's just communists vs liberals rather than left vs right.
So real progress is being made then. ♥️
It's more easily avoided.
But I am seeing 2010 style cringe new atheism though. It's never a good sign when those people are around, they were the precursors to the cancer we see on the big platforms today.
But that's just as easily avoided too. I only know what you're talking about because I saw like 4 cringe atheist memes while broswing All once. I don't subscribe to any of those pages and so I rarely see it, just like how one could easily avoid political discussion.
When I say easily avoided I mean that I literally don't see them very often. Whereas new atheism seems to be seeping into the feed wierdly often.
This reminds of when people go to toxic subs on the old place, to shit on fat people or something. The end result of these low iq hateful subs is that you grow a base of angry, preaching anti intellectuals who think they're right and who are ripe for a right wıng bot army and bad actors to brainwash them, and ultimately afflict cancer on the space.
That said, I am on all too often.
Yes, I prefer my online culture to be entirely Christian, or failing that, trauma-free ex-Christians that have no desire to talk about how fucked the US is because of evangelicalism. High five, buddy.
There are countries other then the US.
Yup. There are. And if they have governments that are dominated by religious activists, the same message applies.
New atheism cringe is different to being pro abortion, women's autonomy, and advancing marginalised people's rights. Completely different.
If you specifically identify with new atheism and the thinking of Dawkins and his brigade, I'd seriously reconsider.
Here's where I'm at - at the local level, the US is already a de facto theocracy in many places. If you have the privilege of being unexposed to this, great. The issue I have with Dawkins is that he's an asshole that got called out for being an asshole by his own admirers and he doubled down on being an asshole to his own popular detriment. I have no issue with loud pissed-off atheists in a rabidly conservative USA. If the issue is that old school atheists kept their mouths shut, while new atheists are out and proud, you and I are not going to see eye to eye.
If the issue is that old school atheists kept their mouths shut, while new atheists are out and proud, you and I are not going to see eye to eye.
If you think 'new' means modern, as in present day, then you've been arguing with me for hours for no reason. Because 'new atheism' refers to a specific movement, around the 2010s. It's not simply 'atheism' now.
I don't care about shouty atheists or quiet atheists, it literally doesn't matter to me. I am wary of people congregating around easy targets like broadly religious people, when religious people can mean anybody. It can be a white supremacist American, or it could be a Yemeni Muslim getting genocided by Saudis using American and UK bombs. And I don't see that very important distinction made when those low iq anti-theist posts are spammed on c/all.