For people saying it's a weakness because it causes or is caused by censorship from the mods, are you directly experiencing it? If yes, on which instance?

I got involved in a few heated discussions with members, but I was never bothered by any moderator/admin. I'm not sure if this is due to my views (anarchism / libertarian communism) but I don't think so since they are not the ones of the main instances I roam (.world which seems quite soc-dem to me and all the tankies one).

To me all of this seems like an overall positive thing : the lack of hardcore far right dudes is a big plus, and I don't think the political views can really influence the quality and quantity of content you can propose otherwise (which is to my eyes why there is not that much people here). Like I don't think rightwing people will flee from Lemmy because of the political thing, but like i think most people do: mostly because there is not that many people and therefore that many content to begin with. But there again, I never directly experienced or witnessed political censorship or exclusion, and it seems a common experience so i might not have the best point of view.

It's a strength because we finally get to interact amongst the left without having to explain how society works to every ignorant conservatwat who thinks they can conservasplain some bullshit. It's what makes it great.

"For example, in terms of attracting new users" - meaning that's the whole point of the question, so I'll address that.

Lemmy isn't a corporation and doesn't have to think like one. Market share means nothing. The goal is a high-quality app that does what its users want. If a majority of those users have a similar range of political views, that's just how it works out. There's nothing stopping ultra-conservatives from spinning up Lemmy instances if they want, blocking communities whose overall personality they don't like, and banning users they don't like. If this balkanizes the lemmy userverse, I don't see that as an issue.