1) Be nice and; have fun
Doxxing, trolling, sealioning, racism, and toxicity are not welcomed in AskLemmy. Remember what your mother said: if you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all. In addition, the site-wide Lemmy.world terms of service also apply here. Please familiarize yourself with them
2) All posts must end with a '?'
This is sort of like Jeopardy. Please phrase all post titles in the form of a proper question ending with ?
3) No spam
Please do not flood the community with nonsense. Actual suspected spammers will be banned on site. No astroturfing.
4) NSFW is okay, within reason
Just remember to tag posts with either a content warning or a [NSFW] tag. Overtly sexual posts are not allowed, please direct them to either !asklemmyafterdark@lemmy.world or !asklemmynsfw@lemmynsfw.com.
NSFW comments should be restricted to posts tagged [NSFW].
5) This is not a support community.
It is not a place for 'how do I?', type questions.
If you have any questions regarding the site itself or would like to report a community, please direct them to Lemmy.world Support or email info@lemmy.world. For other questions check our partnered communities list, or use the search function.
6) No US Politics.
Please don't post about current US Politics. If you need to do this, try !politicaldiscussion@lemmy.world or !askusa@discuss.online
Reminder: The terms of service apply here too.
Logo design credit goes to: tubbadu
+1 for:
Left-Wing
Anti-AI
Tech People
Anti Capitalism
Coming from someone left wing, messing with tech since I was a kid, terrified of late stage capitalism, and who hates Sam Altman's lying, con artist guts even more than I hate Musk.
But… jeez. I’m like a far right tech bro on Lemmy.
From what I've seen Lemmy is pro-EU, pro-privacy, pro-Linux, very left-leaning, anti-capitalism, and strongly anti-AI.
American bias, millennial bias, left wing bias
I've got 2 out of 3!
Already mentioned was the pro Linux and everything else sucks. Also, the Nintendo hate.
What I haven't seen is the high acceptance/love of furry content. I didn't know people could draw animals that hot. Not that it awakened anything in me.
You made me realise all the shit I've filtered. Def a furry bias and a anime girl bias here lol
For as politically Left as Lemmy tends to run there still seems to be a high level of mysoginy.
I think that comes with the techy side of lemmy. IT is still very much a male-dominated field and while it's better now than it was maybe 10 years ago, the mentality lingers and women in tech still run into a lot of misogyny. It makes sense that more tech minded users who tend to work in or have a big interest in IT have that mentality.
Even posting this, I'm a bit hesitant. To be clear, Lemmy is significantly less awful in terms of a lot of things, but I agree that I have seen some loud voices when it comes to misogyny.
I think that comes with the techy side of lemmy
That's kinda what I've always figured.
Even posting this, I'm a bit hesitant.
Yeah, honestly surprised I haven't been hounded for even suggesting it.
Techy bias and recruiting from Redditors in the first place
Most folks here seem to lean to a moderate left also, Conservatives are apparently grouped in with Republicans an MAGA.
While it’s nice to see the community grow there really isn’t any diversity, for lack of a better word, in the political discussions made here.
Good
Two things that I haven't seen yet.
Much higher general tech and math/stats literacy than other spaces on the internet
An overwhelming hatred for Nintendo when most of the rest of the internet swallows their boot in order to play their new games because let's face it, they make some of the most well-polished 3D platformers.
I'll go first.
I'll add:
All capitalism is bad, and any attempt to rein it in is failure before any attempts.
Don’t pay attention to the trolls from .ml and hexbear.
I’ve seen people advocate for communism here and asked them to name an example of a communist government of a major country that hasn’t devolved quickly into a dictatorship, and let me tell you, the hysteria and rage could power a small city. I’m fairly progressive, I like to think, but it seems like a lot of lemmings have gone so far down the anti-capitalist rabbit hole they’ve literally come out the other side in China and are wearing Mao stickers.
an example of a communist government of a major country that hasn’t devolved quickly into a dictatorship
I'm not feeling rage or hysteria, but I find a number of issues with this "test" that could easily cause frustration with anyone who has major criticisms of capitalism. My response is long not because of some irrational anger, but because things are complex and nuanced.
You consider yourself to be "fairly progressive"? I'm going to give you an analogy. It's not great, but it hits on a few major issues relevant to your "test". Imagine a MAGA fan asked you in 2026 to "name a thriving woke government agency" or "a government agency that still advocates for DEI" to make a point about your ideals. How does that sound to you?
First, you'd like argue that the term "woke" and "DEI" means different things to different people. That the term has been transformed into some deranged negatively charged approximation used as almost a slur colloquially. The same is true for "communist/ism" and "socialist/ism". The current US "powers that be" have taken ownership of terms originally used by progressives. Woke was an "eyes open" state of awareness of the systemic racism baked into society. Now it is often considered "naively believing that forced equality makes things better". DEI was an attempt to correct these systemic issues by encouraging or even enforcing diversity in groups of people who make decisions and influence decisions. Now it, and I'd argue "Affirmative Action" as well, is starting to mean a movement to "give power/opportunity to people because they are minorities whether or not they are sufficiently qualified". Understand, I'm not in agreement with the transformation of these terms or the sentiment of the new "meanings" but I see them being used in the US in this manner more often. This makes every conversation confusing if you want to have a legitimate discussion of the ideas. It doesn't help that the terms socialism and communism were never concrete terms to begin with.
Second, you'd be aware that there is literally a powerful force actively attempting to purge the original concepts of "woke" and "DEI" from government agencies. The current administration is working very hard to sabotage any agencies that recognize inequality or try to diversify. The administration has likely broken the law in its efforts to oust any agency leadership who promote these concepts. The administration wants to make the lives of any workers who agree with those concepts very difficult. Any agencies that are based on those core concepts are being spun down or turned into shells that somehow still have a name that implies they haven't changed but in reality their leadership is working to ensure that the agency now serves the opposite function.
That's what it is like being openly socialist or communist in today's world. Everything bad is "socialist" or "communist" - it has been since the revolution in Russia. People have a knee jerk reaction on hearing those words. It's strongly associated with North Korea, Stalin, and the CCP. Endless stories of violent authoritarianism, surveillance states, and the suppression of free speech. Tons of media - Animal Farm, 1984. As an aside, consider the violent suppression of climate or pro Palestine protesters, or the use of surveillance technology to spy on citizens... in capitalist nations.
Back to my point - if you are advocating for socialism, the West will work diligently to prop up existing capitalist leadership to prevent your success, possibly even help them rig elections. Propaganda will be spread among your population. If you manage to get elected, expect to be labeled extremist or even terrorist. Expect embargos, sanctions, and other economic warfare. Expect actual terrorists funded by the West to attempt to sabotage your nation. Expect or attempt to perform coups. Lobbyists would be throwing money you desperately need at your nation if it would just capitulate. Yes, even citizens might work against you because they are quite wealthy and powerful and your going to upset that. Or maybe honest citizens who've heard capitalism is great and socialism is bad and they don't want to live in a bad nation. What's the most effect method to survive a situation like that? You are under siege, paranoid, distrustful, woefully outmatched. Use your authority to defend your ideals and your hold on the government, sell out and become corrupt, or get squeezed out by a political opponent (or ally, trust noone) that is working for and funded by the West looking to restore their influence over your nation. Now you have a dictatorship.
You made a lot of assumptions about me in your comment. I’m not going to bother with them, because that’s honestly your job to handle.
I don’t equate communism with (democratic) socialism. I consider myself a democratic socialist, and that’s part of the reason I consider myself progressive. The main difference is that democratic socialism makes room for multiple political parties, while communism accommodates only one. This is the essence of tyranny. No progressive should advocate for communism, because communism is another form of authoritarianism: subjugation to state rule.
I have my problems with “woke” culture, just as I do with conservative culture. But most of my problems with woke culture have to do with their rhetoric and means of achieving their goals, rather than the goals themselves. A racially mixed workplace is something I highly value; achieving it by means of affirmative action is not something I support, because I think 50+ years of it have shown that it doesn’t really work. Yes, it has been shown to improve interracial relations in the workplace, but it has also been shown to cause workers to question the competency of coworkers that benefit from it, and make those who don’t feel discriminated against. This is not what it was intended for. It was supposed to counter inherent racist biases in corporate hiring systems. Instead, it’s become a system that is the very least viewed as a loophole for non-white employees. Obviously, not every case is an example of a non-white employee gaining an unfair advantage over a white employee, probably only a small fraction qualify as such, but as a system it has created the perception that Whites are being discriminated against. And its proponents have done virtually nothing to address that. That needs to change. I’m not saying the spirit of affirmative action needs to end, but its implementation need to change.
If and when you respond, I would encourage you to not make assumptions about my stance. I don’t fit into the political boxes neatly.
It seems to me that the problem stems from you thinking communism necessitates authoritarianism. Communism is an economic system. You say you consider yourself a democratic socialist, while there is obviously a bit more nuance, in the absolute basics, that is saying the economic system you believe in is socialism, and the system of governance you believe is a democracy. Someone saying they are a communist would be the same situation as you saying you are a socialist, it's true but it doesn't state your full political beliefs. I obviously don't speak for the person you are responding to, nor can I assume that they have the same belief about this subject as I do, this is simply my interpretation of the disagreement, and my stance on it.
Additionally, I would like to respond to your earlier mention of asking a communist to give you an example of a communist country that worked out in the end. The reason many people respond negatively to this is because of the history of communism, especially in relation to the US which is where much of Lemmy is from. The US has a history of intentionally destabilizing communist(and socialist) countries, as communism is inherently a threat to a country so heavily built on massive corporations. Because the US and other countries make such a point of preventing communism from succeeding, it can be frustrating when a lack of successful large scale communism is used as proof that communism can't work. Additionally, because this same argument is used so often, it can really begin to grate on someone's nerves after being asked it over and over again.
I have tried my very best to not make any assumptions about you, other than the political ideology you stated you had, but if I accidentally did, please tell me. I do not wish to offend you, and rather just want to provide my input on what you have said.
It seems to me that the problem stems from you thinking communism necessitates authoritarianism.
It doesn't technically necessitate it, it just makes it very likely to happen, due to its insistence on there being only one political party. Communism isn't just an economic system, it's predicated on a government-run economy in a way that most other economic systems aren't.
Someone saying they are a communist would be the same situation as you saying you are a socialist
If they mean socialist, they should say 'socialist.' Most people understand this to mean that you're for things like free education, medical care, etc. When you say you're a communist, at least in the West, you're signifying to others that you either like or support governments like the USSR and CCP. I understand what you're saying about there being some overlap in the terms, but the main distinction to me is that communists believe in a single political party system of government, whereas socialists don't.
Because the US and other countries make such a point of preventing communism from succeeding, it can be frustrating when a lack of successful large scale communism is used as proof that communism can’t work.
While the U.S. has certainly put a lot into preventing communism from spreading, it hasn't always succeeded. I would argue that the communist states that do exist demonstrate its main problem quite clearly: a single political party system puts a government on the fast track to authoritarianism. Multiple political parties mean there is always an opposition to a government that becomes authoritarian; it's not a fool-proof defense against it, but way better than with only one party.
I have tried my very best to not make any assumptions about you, other than the political ideology you stated you had, but if I accidentally did, please tell me. I do not wish to offend you, and rather just want to provide my input on what you have said.
No, you didn't make assumptions, and I appreciate your cordiality.
I unfortunately don't know how to do the fancy qoute thing, so this won't look as organized as yours.
"due to its insistence on there being only one political party." Firstly, I disagree about communism needing to have only 1 political party, and to be honest don't really why that would even have to much of an effect on it. Sure, it makes sense that communism would begin with 1 party in many cases, as it pretty much always requires a revolution of some kind, but if left time, that party would likely split over other issues. The other reason I could see this, is if the country is in a 2 party, or similar system, where 1 party is the communist party, and the other is an anti-communist party of some kind.
"it's predicated on a government-run economy in a way that most other economic systems aren't." I would also disagree about it requiring a government run economy, though that has more to do with my personal political beliefs, than communism. What I more so disagree with is the bit about other economic systems requiring a government run economy. I feel that if there is a government, and an economy, one will be run by the other.
"If they mean socialist, they should say 'socialist.'" Really, I was more so using this as an example of the difference between an economic system and a government system, not saying they were the same.
"When you say you're a communist, at least in the West, you're signifying to others that you either like or support governments like the USSR and CCP." I do agree that this is a common perception in the west, it just isn't true. I am a communist, I don't like or support the USSR or the CCP, I have never met another communist in person that supports either. These people obviously do exist, they just aren't nearly as common as most people assume.
"the main distinction to me is that communists believe in a single political party system of government, whereas socialists don't." I already said why I disagree with this, but I should probably say that to me, and I believe most other communists, the difference is that communism has no money or similar system, and socialism, like you said, has government funded systems such as health care, education, etc.
"While the U.S. has certainly put a lot into preventing communism from spreading, it hasn't always succeeded." I agree that the US hasen't always fully succeeded in stopping communism, but it(or another government) has always succeeded in greatly harming communist countries.
"a single political party system puts a government on the fast track to authoritarianism. Multiple political parties mean there is always an opposition to a government that becomes authoritarian; it's not a fool-proof defense against it, but way better than with only one party." I fully agree with you here.
Most of Lemmy is anti-AI, especially generative AI.
Which seems uninformed and ridiculous as Deep Learning for classification and regression problems is an absolute valid tool that cannot be replaced anymore in many domains. I don't care about LLM bullshit, but being "against Deep Learning in general" is stupid.
World == USA
Incredible US bias here to the point where many discussions completely ignore the existence of the rest of the world.
Lemmy is actually worse than reddit here. The only network that at least tries to be cosmopolitan is Mastodon and that's why it just feels so much healthier there.
Linux/SteamDeck = Good Anything else = bad
Porn games should be available for all, but GOG sucks because they did something shitty years ago.
The only thing worse than a right winger is the wrong kind of leftist. (I feel this is a global thing not only US)
Lemmy is not neurotypical and it shows up with various discussions. Discussions here tend to assume autism or AuDHD as typical behavior, when it is only typical for the group of people assembled here.
Also half of all lemmings are transgender. No idea why.
The chemicals in the protocols are turning the nerds gay
Trans people are almost attacked or banned all other platforms or at least astroturfed, it does make sense
Woke and DEI, is why. Now put the damn socks on and get to work. Once Arch is installed, you may indulge in one Blåhaj
Nintendo is worse than EA, Activision, Konami, Ubisoft, Epic, Microsoft, Apple, Facebook, Twitter, Nestle, and the IDF combined.
There may be some things they do that annoy me, but there also a lot of things they do that I like, and I don't think they're anywhere near the worst in the industry right now. It is just so very tiring that it is seemingly impossible to discuss anything related to Nintendo at all without threads immediately devolving into a circlejerk about how much some of y'all hate anyone who dares to even enjoy their games.
People before profit.
Cities should be walkable
AI as we know it was unethically developed and is more marketing than solution.
Trans rights are human rights. Even more, gender is a spectrum, so everyone really, is a tiny bit trans.
Fuck Israel.
Punch fascists.
Instant nudeln eignen gut für MaiMais
I mean if this was an ad for Lemmy, it would work on me. Though I'm not sure what the fuck the last one is but it sounds fun anyway, Melden Sie mich an.
Clearly a severe leftist bias. Not just in the context of US politics.
This probably sounds like a dodge of an answer, but...
It depends on the Lemmy instance. Some are anarchistic, some are very left wing anti-establishment, some are hardcore tankies, and I've heard somewhere there's a right-wing instance? Some hate certain technologies, some love those technologies, etc.
I don't think it's realistic to lump all Lemmy instances (and users) together under a single ideological umbrella. That's like lumping everyone from America or any other county together for their opinions.
IMHO Lemmy feels similar to how Reddit felt 10-15 years ago. The community seems closer to my age. The population is smaller. The content is less formulaic.
The biases shown here feel like a distillation of the broader internet (similar to what Reddit used to be). We like animals and nature, we hate intrusive powerful forces like large corporations or invasive governments. We share a shit-post-y sense of humor. We tend to lean left politically. We love to feel like we know more than we actually do.
On any given subject, if you ask “What would the internet think about this?” you will probably find that same opinion reflected strongly here.
It just struck me from the comments on this thread, but I think there's a correlation between the feeling of reddit 10-15 years ago and the average age here.
If we go by the estimates that most people are 25-45 around here, that's all of us that were probably hanging out on early reddit 10-15 years ago. Like, I joined reddit when I was about 17, I'm 33 now and moved here a year ago and definitely feel those early reddit vibes. It feels similar because that was us. Am I talking crazy?
Nah, you are speaking sense. I think Lemmy was really pitched as a Reddit alternative (or at least that was my experience)and it makes sense that the first flood of people who got excited about that are people who miss how Reddit used to feel.
