What's going on Canada?
π Meta
πΊοΈ Provinces / Territories
ποΈ Cities / Local Communities
π Sports
Hockey
Football (NFL)
unknownFootball (CFL)
unknownBaseball
unknownBasketball
unknownSoccer
unknownπ» Universities
π΅ Finance / Shopping
π£οΈ Politics
π Social and Culture
Reminder that the rules for lemmy.ca also apply here. See the sidebar on the homepage:
I'd say the best way is probably to post and comment stuff you'd want to see. Participate actively.
It's harder to change a community's vibe after its been established, so now is the best time to get some social inertia and make this into a more pleasurable space than /r/Canada.
It might be hard, but they did it. /r/Canada used to be a great community. It was attacked, invaded, and destroyed. This post is tongue-in-cheek, but if there is any significant Reddit migration, I don't doubt that the community really will be attacked.
I observed that crazy transition too. I think the big question was whether it was coincidental/series of unfortunate decisions/mistakes that led to it, or if it was a concerted effort by a group.
It isn't coincidental. I'm afraid I don't have much of a source for this, but back in the day I lurked (out of morbid curiosity and misplaced sense of "know your enemy") on stormfront, one of the earliest and biggest neo nazi online communities.
There I saw a lot of talk about how to specifically target and subvert local subreddits. Their plans were detailed and long, involving very slowly transitioning the subs content further and further right. Local subreddits tend to be easier to subvert than typical subs of their size because they tend to have a less "online", critical audience and everyone is in the same time zone.Lots of people who only show up once a month or so.
The impact of propaganda on a local sub is also much greater than when it is spread out over a more general international community.
/r/Canada was definitely a successful target of their hate and even though they have faded now the damage is still done.
I didn't think that there was doubt about that but it was a while back and I pulled way back from all the big subreddits after that. I wonder if there is a history written.
No doubt, I appreciate someone bringing this topic up because as you say, right-wingers will try to sabotage any healthy online community. They do seem to especially target local, provincial/state and national subreddits, which can be fertile grounds for propaganda. I'm pretty active on /r/newbrunswickcanada where there are definitely a ton of right-wing shit-stirrers trying to establish their perspective on issues.
But while moderation is important, the community has to be actively involved in making this space into what we want to see. A big reason /r/Canada sucks isn't only the presence of the /r/metacanada types, it's the absence of reasonable people. I also remember when /r/Canada was decent, and I didn't leave when I first starting seeing fashy takes, because you'll see those everywhere on the internet. I left because eventually I realized most people I could enjoy discussing with were leaving/had already left.
The more one participates in an online community, the more one can attract like-minded people to that community.
I think in the interest of building a healthy community we can acknowledge that the problem is not "people with right-wing views" despite whatever other problems might be fair to blame on them as a block. We're talking about aggressively anti-social people who don't really believe in governance and humanism at all. They appropriate right-wing politics when its convenient but they aren't really political in that sense. They're just assholes.
Weβre talking about aggressively anti-social people who donβt really believe in governance and humanism at all.
...so, your typical modern conservative?
I say that slightly tongue-in-cheek, but I do stand by that the people you describe are almost exclusively going to be right-wing.
That's definitely not to say that there's never been any online communities negatively impacted by left-wing politics. I can't even remember the number of subreddits I used to enjoy that have been overtaken by tankies/Stalinists/Maoists/Soviet-apologizers.
I would say that they almost exclusively adopt a right-wing persona, but I don't think that someone who isn't trying to constructively engage really fits on the left/right spectrum. We might have different values, and we might even disagree on what it means to do so, but ultimately we're all supposed to be pulling for the common good. I think that anyone who is not working towards the common good is better described using other terms, so that we don't alienate our allies. A kleptocrat is not left or right. A corporate agent engaging in legislative capture is not left or right. And a bunch of vandals who get a sexual thrill out of upsetting people on the Internet are not left or right.
Honestly, I think this is being a bit generous to the right. Maybe the right thirty years ago was as you describe, but not anymore. Major right-wing institutions have done little to nothing to push back these people supposedly "adopting a right-wing persona", because they realized these people are an amazing way to push the social narrative to the right and amass more power.
I think respectable right-wing politics are dead (or at the very least, on life-support) in a post-Trump era. The Republican Party was initially pretty hostile to Trump and his style of politics, until they realized they could exploit it to garner more power.
I highly recommend watching Innuendo Studio's video on YouTube, The Alt-Right Playbook: You Go High, We Go Low. The whole series is worth a watch, but this video in particular shows how good faith attempts to reach across the political spectrum are easily exploited by fascists.
Well, I am trying to be generous. We must.
I totally get and appreciate that, I just want to caution that that generosity can and will be exploited by alt-right fuckheads. A community that wants to be tolerant must be intolerant of intolerance.
And I would once again like to distinguish between intolerant people acting bad faith with bad intentions from people with whom we disagree with politically.
Is there a difference when the people we disagree with politically actively associate with these intolerant bad-faith actors whenever it's politically expedient for them?
Hate and violence are not acceptable. There are hard lines. Many if not most right wingers are able to stay on the right side.
You and I disagree deeply about some very important things (not mentioned in this conversation), but if I flip the bozo bit, we'll never understand our differences. Sometimes people don't have to agree, merely understanding one another is enough for everyone to get what they need and work together in mutual benefit.
I think there's a difference between real-life interactions and online communities.
Anecdotally, I've seen a couple full blown, queerphobic, "I would beat the gay out of my children" type bigots grow into loving and accepting allies of the LGBTQ+ community through exposure, conversation, and mutual understanding. I'm not in any way denying the power of those things, and while marginalized people of all types shouldn't be expected to be constant teachers (as it's really quite emotionally and mentally taxing), having open conversations is probably the best way achieve a more loving and accepting society in general. It's a lot harder to hate someone/something when you're directly confronted with someone from that group being thoroughly reasonable and maybe even enjoyable to talk with, contrary to what you might believe.
However, in online communities, things work differently. Anonymity, asynchronous communication, the public nature of conversations, with immediate reactions and commentary from an incomprehensible number of people. These are all massive barriers to attaining that mutual understanding you describe.
At the end of the day, if I have a queerphobic or racist or sexist or otherwise bigoted person in my life, say a coworker, I don't have a choice but to interact regularly with them so I will at least try to steer them towards a kinder perspective. Sometimes you might have to give up on a particular person, but most times we both learn some stuff and both come out of it slightly better.
On the other hand, if I enter an online space and it's bigoted, I (and I'd wager a large number of not-bigoted people) will just leave. And then you end up with /r/Canada.
All I am trying to say in all this is, don't say right wing when you mean fascist. Hate isn't political. When hate is used to influence politics, that's fascism and terrorism. They try to make us afraid to use the word but that's what it is. Demonizing marginalized people for power is fascism.
I suppose I am using a remarkably uncynical sense of "political" here. I think that when a person expresses hatred, uses bad faith arguments, misrepresents facts, etc., they are not "doing politics" but rather trying to corrupt politics to use our collective power to harm the common good. I don't tolerate the intolerant; I see them as outside of all meaningful political expression. But from everyone else, I think we can afford to assume good faith and aught to try.
A key characteristic of fascism is that it attacks left-wing politics, but that doesn't make fascism right-wing politics! Fascism is really the exploitation of voters with authoritarian personalities by a small number of charismatic personalities who know some basic human psychology.
Fascist voters are scared. They are not really looking for political expression, they are looking to have their psychological needs met. They want to feel powerful. They don't really have anything in mind to do with that power, because their whole deal is they are afraid of a future they don't understand and feel like they can't control.
I think when we blame things on "right wing politics" it needlessly poisons our own perspective, scorns innocent bystanders, and fails to be critical of the actual problems. Bigots and fascists are hateful, and I think we should call them what they are. Yes, most of them are right-wingers, but most right-wingers are not bigots and fascists. They're Liberals and swing voters.
I've watched those, they are excellent.
I see you still believe. Good on you. At this point, breathing smoke from a wildfire brought to us by right wing policy, believed and voted for by right wing people, I can no longer believe. I've ran out of benefit of the doubt to give.
I know this is going into the weeds but this thread is all weeds.
What policy are you referring to?
I imagine they're referring to Fox News and similar outlets describing the current situation with forest fire smoke as "liberal propaganda", and implying that the dangers of smoke inhalation are false, a leftist hoax.
I dunno, I think we've come to a point where we really do have to distinguish between potential conservative allies, and outright fascists.
This is a good point, but I'd like to add that we should also distinguish between lower-case conservatives and the Conservative Party of Canada.
I know and love plenty of conservative people. We have different ways of seeing the world, and believe different methods to be best to achieve our goals, but ultimately we all want everyone to live happy, fulfilling lives.
If you align with the Conservative Party of Canada, you are much closer to fascism than I am willing to associate with, and frankly I am too queer to feel safe around these people.
That's not unfair. I felt genuine dread the day I saw a PPC placard in the window of a business I used to frequent. OTOH, the CPC only exist to fool us into thinking the LPC are tolerable.
The major owners of all the Canadian banks are all the other Canadian banks. All our ruling parties are bullshit. The LPC give us social liberalism when invested capital wants us to have it, and the CPC take it away again when that suits capital more. But they both stay within a very narrow prescribed window where they are allowed to grandstand like they really have any say in the matter. Canada as a state exists to transfer value from natural and human resources into corporate coffers, and all this democracy and civic stuff is just window dressing.
If things get as bad as they can get, the LPC will sell us out just as quick as the CPC. Whatever way the wind blows.
The Liberal Party is also right-wing though, albeit one much closer to the centre than the CPC.
Agreed. These would be many of the potential allies, I suppose. Even if they don't identify as right-wing!
Maybe a possible help here is Lemmy's federated nature? I wonder if it works like Mastodon.
If a certain instance is obviously the source of a significant proportion of the troglodytes then I wonder if their users can be blacklisted from a single community (maybe mod tools could do it??) or if their entire instance would have to be cut off from everywhere else.
/r/canada was never great
Thanks for letting me know you have made the migration so I can block you immediately.
I think, oh shit where did onGuardForThee go?
Then I realize that over here not everyone is a NatPo columnist like it seems to be on the Canada subreddit hehe.
This seems a tad dramatic. Be the change you want to be, there are like 4-5 posts a day here. The nice thing about Lemmy as a whole is that no one gets to own /c/Canada forever. (unlike Reddit) if this becomes shit just move to another instance and run a 'better' /c/Canada.
I expect that some instances will become more valuable "real estate" than others, though. So the integrity of some /c/Canada s will be worth taking care to maintain.
I hear what you're saying. But new users are going to just type in their country and under this system may have a series of different options.
With Reddit the only way you find onguardforthee is through an insane routing.
That being said as Lemmy gets more popular prepare for more diversity of thought. Based on the OP's post I can definitely say I'm more center than they are.
Yeah, but is an echo-chamber really better?
I hope this place can become a spot for thoughtful discussions where people from the left, right and centre can come together and have differences of opinion while still having respect for each other.
I also hope we keep opinion articles out as much as possible because they do little to establish thoughtful dialogue.
I don't want to see this place become metacanada or onguardforthee.
I thought that /c/ was a global namespace. Every instance can have its own /c/Canada? How does that federate?
Because if you wanted to access the /c/canada here it would be https://lemmy.ca/c/canada. If you wanted to access it at lemmy.ml it (from this instance) would be https://lemmy.ca/c/canada@lemmy.ml
So each instance can have it's own /c/canada and you can interact with all of them (if you want).
Thanks.
I don't really think metacanada is going to try to physically attack our moderators.
Whatβs pod people
Someone who looks and acts like a human being but is in fact a malevolent alien that has killed and replaced the original human being. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pod_People_(Invasion_of_the_Body_Snatchers)
Are you saying I can subscribe to this community without negatively affecting my blood pressure? I'm slightly skeptical but I'll give it a try.
I've always wondered how to best establish this, and I think the answer (like to many things) is democracy.
Have annual moderator elections and allow mods to serve 2-4 year terms.
That makes sense when we're talking about a constrained resource, like governance over a geographical area. But we are fully unconstrained and we can simply migrate to a community that suits us, rather than trying to change a community that might already suit others.
But then you're inherently limiting the growth of each community. It's the whole idea of nomadic tribes vs. urbanization
And just what is so wrong with nomadic tribes??
It is perfectly fine depending on the geography and it doesn't limit the technological growth of a civilization.
I know the feeling.../r/Canada was and is an embarrassment. Everyone here seems reasonable so far and I really hope it stays that way.