What if we want democracy but nothing to do with Liberalism? Let’s work towards a more progressive, humanity focused social agenda. Let’s make people happy again.
You can have that. But I also want conservatives in the Fediverse to simulate societal debate better here. Defederation still exists, of course.
It’s not about agreeing on everything but about finding common grounds again between opposing parties that at least share some common values.
Why would anyone want debate with a conservative?
They have no ideas to contribute to society.
That’s black and white thinking and undemocratic. Conservatives respect democracy and should therefore be a part of it.
Also they obviously something to contribute, next to Liberalism and Socialism, Conservatism is one of the biggest political traditions. Let’s not be so stupid to assume that it’s complete bullshit.
Conservatism protects traditional institutions, watches that change is not too fast and traditionally, also warns against too much destructering of traditional societal structures by the market. Maybe modern conservatives don’t necessary do all of that, but it’s a tradition that has earned itself.
Conservatives are the only people out here actively trying to erode democracy. They do not respect it, quite the opposite in fact.
As for actually conserving, they do very little of that as well. It’s mainly bitching about change and holding back the world until their generation dies off, it’s a net negative on the betterment of everyone on earth.
Just look at the harm it’s done to causes such as climate change. We’re running out of time as a society, there’s no time to argue with them about if women should have basic human rights or if we should move towards a non-polluting lifestyle.
Maybe 3,000 years ago when the biggest change a generation had to worry about was your son a slightly different style of toga instead of what the last 10 generation of your family wore it had some value, but I haven’t seen case for it since.
Can you define how Liberalism is different from Progressivism? I’ve always self-identified as progressive because I don’t feel liberal democrats go far enough, but I don’t actually know what makes Liberalism distinct from something more progressive.
liberalism aligns with capitalism. most progressives are anticapitalist.
sure, liberals are normally progressives too, the counterpart of the moderates and the conservatives which are all capitalists, but they are usually perceived as not real progressives by the socialists, etc.
It’s my (fairly uneducated) observation and understanding that liberalism is often significantly more aligned with conservatism than socialism, for example. It’s ultimately under the umbrella of ideologies that support and prop up capitalism.
It’s ultimately under the umbrella of ideologies that support and prop up capitalism.
I think that’s a good summary.
“Classical liberalism” is basically what modern libertarians want: a laissez-faire capitalist economy, a secular representative government with very limited powers, prioritizing individual freedom over collective well-being, etc.
In my part of the world “liberalism” is now commonly used to refer to a different set of priorities: creating economic safety nets, regulating business, promoting universal healthcare, unions, gender equality, racial equality, etc. Though capitalism and a secular representative government are still part of the mix.
Absolutely shit takes.
also make unusual allies for example with neocons, traditional conservatives or yes, J.K. Rowling; the more democratic forces are in the boat, the better, the rest is solved by federation)
Do not make allies with war mongers and bigots.
Create a space free from their shit for once, defederate from every capitalist instance, and don’t allow their companies and ideologies in here.
You may prefer Beehaw or one of the Chinese instances.
Yeah, nah.
I’ll take the sane middle ground between tankie and corpo.
I don’t want to save the liberal democracy, thanks.
Actually, I’d say the fediverse nature is pretty much contrary to liberal values, at least in the state it exists right now with most instances being maintained by volunteers and donations, not corporations (let’s obviate Threads for the moment because there’s no full federation)
I’d say that Threads or the former Twitter allign far better with the values of liberalism, being for-profit private companies.
Firstly: commerzialization will come eventually anyways.
Secondly: what has all of that to do with democracy? I would hope that the Fediverse thrives to become a democratic place.
Also, the Fediverse is currently still rather small. If it should benefit humanity as a whole, you will not be able to avoid corporations completely.
I don’t want to save the liberal democracy, thanks.
Wow, that’s great. Only the thing that our society is based on for last decades with a tradition of hundreds of years. Great, down the toilet with it! Hope you got some idea with what to replace it …
Firstly: commerzialization will come eventually anyways
And it’s going to make the fediverse way worse.
Secondly: what has all of that to do with democracy? I would hope that the Fediverse thrives to become a democratic place.
I’m not sure I understand your idea of democracy. Isn’t the fediverse “democratic” already? Everyone is free to federate and defederate with anyone.
Also, the Fediverse is currently still rather small. If it should benefit humanity as a whole, you will not be able to avoid corporations completely.
Corporations are not humans. They use us and see us as nothing more than numbers. They don’t give a shit about people or humanity as a whole.
I’ll make sure to block every corp I’m aware of. You’re still free to do otherwise, of course. Isn’t that democracy for you?
Wow, that’s great. Only the thing that our society is based on for last decades with a tradition of hundreds of years. Great, down the toilet with it! Hope you got some idea with what to replace it …
You have idealised liberalism. It only has brought crisis after crisis, provoked unnecessary wars, given birth to monstrous cynical corporations, etc.
I’m not saying democracy is broken, just liberalism and capitalism.
create an opposition to Twitter; prevent split of democratic forces; instead unite democratic forces, overcome trench warfare, show Trumpists how actual discussions look like; division of the left might be softended through this; also make unusual allies for example with neocons, traditional conservatives or yes, J.K. Rowling; the more democratic forces are in the boat, the better, the rest is solved by federation
Nevermind that the Neocons helped build the Trump State, by dint of our government being unwilling to prosecute the War Crimes of Bush and Cheney. People seem to forget that Project 2025 was already around, and didn’t specify who the Republican nominee needed to be, it’s ready-made for any Republican to take the reigns. The Neocons always wanted to be permanently in charge. It’s not about the Trump, it’s about the party. Project 2025 was literally spearheaded by The Heritage Foundation, which has a long history of neoconservativism. These are the people they want us to make inroads with??
Nevermind that JK Rowling and others literally are making life more dangeous for trans people in general and for cis women. The number of women who “don’t look feminine enough” and are being harassed in bathrooms by cis men is fucking astounding. The only reason they’re harassing cis women in their own bathrooms if fucking trans panic bullshit, helped along by fuckwits like Rowling. Rowling claims her position is to help women, but I guess only certain women, who look feminine enough. Eat shit, Rowling.
Anyone who even passingly suggests bullshit like this shouldn’t be taken seriously, period.
We don’t make the world better by telling bigots that its okay to be a fucking hateful bigot.
This was literally this articles first point. I couldn’t make it any farther. I kind of don’t give one fucking shit what else they have to say. They already lost the fucking plot. What even is this fucking garbage?
I’m not saying that your instance needs to federate with her. But it would be good to have her as part of the Fediverse and say: look world, in the Fediverse, people can discuss things much better than on Twitter.
That’s all I’m saying. I’m not even saying she is a good or bad person. I do think some of her statements are transphobic, but I also think she got radicalized because of the cultur war. I’m pretty sure in the Fediverse, once discussions are not heated up by algorithms, some people might become more moderate again.
Will this be the case for Rowling? Not necessarily. But she should still be in the Fediverse.
(Or at least at some point; counting her in this early may have been too provocative)
No?
Lets send an even better message, “Look world, we’re not the hateful scum who give platform to promote hate against people for how they were born”.
Let’s make a stand and say we’re not like every moral less corpo site. That we value humans over advertising dollars and never ending growth targets.
That’s still possible without banning corporations completely from the Fediverse (which will not be possible anyways). It’s just melancholic daydreaming.
prevent split of democratic forces
Yes, if there’s one thing the fediverse is good at, it’s preventing splitting lmao.
What do you mean? Sure with Nazis and Tankies I’m okay to split with permanentaly, but other instances its a dynamic, always changing process. This is much more what societal debate looks like than on Twitter/Threads currently.
In the Fediverse, finding together is encouraged because it increases your user base. On Twitter, fight means more money for the owner, so fights and splits are encouraged there.
So yes, Fediverse is better at simulating societal debate. My article was never about preventing splitting in the Fediverse COMPLETELY (this will and should never happen), its about preventing a split of democratic forces into tribes that fight each other and don’t manage to unite and that are in constant fight like on Twitter/Threads.
