Yes, but it's also potentially part of the problem. We can wall them off from the good-Fediverse, but the nature of the thing is that the dark mirror fediverse continues to exist and to connect the worst people.
Truth Social was born out of Mastodon And so were a lot of extremist instances which are still active and popular.
The nature of the Fediverse and by extension most FOSS is that they are open and unrestrictive with their software access/usage.
On the other hand, it did also give rise to a lot of political groups from varying parts of the political spectrum.
I think so social media platforms shouldn't lean towards one side of the spectrum. A diverse set of views and opinions should be welcome. But it almost never is the case. Each platform is known for having one kind of bias or the other.
Take Bluesky, it's filled with Left-leaning people who left Twitter because of Musk/Trump. There's a homogeneity to the politics of the opinions shared over there. Some would call it an "Echo Chamber."
Truth Social- Only MAGA idiots.
X- a bit of both.
Fediverse- Depends on the instance. 😀 One can interact with all kinds of people here, and I think that's a good thing as far as exposure & bias is concerned.
I may be wrong but I think that basically "normal" people (I want to exclude those that are really motivated to be fascists or that kind of stuff) move to the far-right because of a lack of critical thinking. They fall in the trap of "easy solutions for difficult problems".
The place where you build that kind of immune system is the school.
I can see this path:
Bad school -> lack of critical thinking -> populism is OK.
Rebuild a good school system and you'll have better citizens, better citizens can tell a lye from a truth.
yeah - it's architecturally freedom-shaped in a way that forces people to deal with what is harmful, who is part of what community, and what is unacceptable. Centralised platforms are shaped like unfreedom and have difficulty with nuanced pluralism, tending to ignore issues (see Meta in Myanmar) or simply decide on a single stance which is enforced (the many things you can't say on TikTok or get demon(it)ised for on YouTube. For better or worse we hash things out here.
IMHO, anyway. It's not the prevailing leftism, but the structural pluralism.
yes, but becoming insular is what we have to watch out for. Silly Fedi-vs-Bluesky spats, for example, will get us nowhere. People use what's convenient and what the people around them use.
no technology is neutral, but no technology is capable of solving social problems on its own.
Furthermore, the advance of the shit-right among the population is not a spontaneous problem, but is determined by enormous investments that the timocracy has allocated and continues to allocate to orient public opinion, ensure the loyalty of publishers, finance politicians and manipulate elections.
The closed and manipulative algorithms of the platforms modify democratic balances, while open ecosystems consolidate democracy, stimulate diversity and incentivize participation.
The Fediverse can therefore be a solution to the extent that it constitutes an alternative to manipulative technologies.
As for the advance of the right In fact, the problem is not the populist right in and of itself, but rather the fact that the populist right constitutes an extraordinary vector for bringing the predatory aristocracy of large technological companies to power.
This may be a Masto-specific problem but it sort of feels like everyone is raising alarms non-stop without coming up with solutions. People screaming "Trump is doing this" or "ICE is doing that" but barely a word is devoted to calls for action. It's just non-stop doomerism almost designed to make the reader feel helpless and despondent.
I think if the fediverse is going to play some sort of role in pushing back on these things, we need to start, well, pushing back.
It's a haven for those of us who are already here, but without a way to draw the masses (something which not everyone wants), @gangrif is right.
It provides a welcome respite from places like Bluesky, but it's far from an antidote to corporate run, billionaire owned social media. It's hard to convince the average person to use Mastodon, especially when big names/accounts that dominate those other places trash it all the time, perpetuating the notion that it's hard to use and characterizing its users in a negative way.
If you’d like a way to feel that a better path for us is not only possible but within reach, I strongly recommend you spend as much of 100 minutes as you can with this conversation.
It’s with Audrey Tang.
We would need also to strengthen digital and especially media literacy. Populists (especially those on the far-right) play with fear and psychological terror to manipulate people.
Media literacy has worsened at least in the western world – if not globally.I also would guess that this is why bipartisanship seems so unthinkable for many.
Thanks, everyone. My answer is "Yes, but". The "but" being that we have to continue to make it more of a part of the lives of more of the people on the planet.
Mx. Eddie R
in reply to Evan Prodromou • • •frankie (auto-rebootable)
in reply to Evan Prodromou • • •Truth Social was born out of Mastodon
And so were a lot of extremist instances which are still active and popular.
The nature of the Fediverse and by extension most FOSS is that they are open and unrestrictive with their software access/usage.
On the other hand, it did also give rise to a lot of political groups from varying parts of the political spectrum.
I think so social media platforms shouldn't lean towards one side of the spectrum. A diverse set of views and opinions should be welcome. But it almost never is the case. Each platform is known for having one kind of bias or the other.
Take Bluesky, it's filled with Left-leaning people who left Twitter because of Musk/Trump. There's a homogeneity to the politics of the opinions shared over there. Some would call it an "Echo Chamber."
Truth Social- Only MAGA idiots.
X- a bit of both.
Fediverse- Depends on the instance. 😀 One can interact with all kinds of people here, and I think that's a good thing as far as exposure & bias is concerned.
#Politics #Fediverse #Mastodon
Max - Poliverso 🇪🇺🇮🇹
in reply to Evan Prodromou • •@Evan Prodromou
I may be wrong but I think that basically "normal" people (I want to exclude those that are really motivated to be fascists or that kind of stuff) move to the far-right because of a lack of critical thinking. They fall in the trap of "easy solutions for difficult problems".
The place where you build that kind of immune system is the school.
I can see this path:
Bad school -> lack of critical thinking -> populism is OK.
Rebuild a good school system and you'll have better citizens, better citizens can tell a lye from a truth.
like this
Evan Prodromou e Joshua Chalifour like this.
серафими многоꙮчитїи
in reply to Evan Prodromou • • •Sensitive content
yeah - it's architecturally freedom-shaped in a way that forces people to deal with what is harmful, who is part of what community, and what is unacceptable. Centralised platforms are shaped like unfreedom and have difficulty with nuanced pluralism, tending to ignore issues (see Meta in Myanmar) or simply decide on a single stance which is enforced (the many things you can't say on TikTok or get demon(it)ised for on YouTube. For better or worse we hash things out here.
IMHO, anyway. It's not the prevailing leftism, but the structural pluralism.
MrCopilot
in reply to Evan Prodromou • • •Use every available tool. They will/are.
Floaty Birb
in reply to Evan Prodromou • • •Sensitive content
Ulrik Nyman ⬡
in reply to Evan Prodromou • • •Jamie T
in reply to Evan Prodromou • • •Evan Prodromou
in reply to Jamie T • • •Tattie
in reply to Evan Prodromou • • •macfranc
in reply to Evan Prodromou • • •no technology is neutral, but no technology is capable of solving social problems on its own.
Furthermore, the advance of the shit-right among the population is not a spontaneous problem, but is determined by enormous investments that the timocracy has allocated and continues to allocate to orient public opinion, ensure the loyalty of publishers, finance politicians and manipulate elections.
The closed and manipulative algorithms of the platforms modify democratic balances, while open ecosystems consolidate democracy, stimulate diversity and incentivize participation.
The Fediverse can therefore be a solution to the extent that it constitutes an alternative to manipulative technologies.
As for the advance of the right In fact, the problem is not the populist right in and of itself, but rather the fact that the populist right constitutes an extraordinary vector for bringing the predatory aristocracy of large technological companies to power.
reshared this
informapirata ⁂ e Poliverso & Poliversity reshared this.
Evan Prodromou
in reply to macfranc • • •macfranc
in reply to Evan Prodromou • • •certainly yes; and
...is my answer (in addition to the "yes, but" of the survey)
What comes before is the permise
What comes after is just a corollary
(if I said something weird, it might have been me, but I'll basically blame the Italian-English machine translator 😅)
kaffando
in reply to Evan Prodromou • • •zonnewin
in reply to Evan Prodromou • • •Zalasur 🐸🇺🇦
in reply to Evan Prodromou • • •This may be a Masto-specific problem but it sort of feels like everyone is raising alarms non-stop without coming up with solutions. People screaming "Trump is doing this" or "ICE is doing that" but barely a word is devoted to calls for action. It's just non-stop doomerism almost designed to make the reader feel helpless and despondent.
I think if the fediverse is going to play some sort of role in pushing back on these things, we need to start, well, pushing back.
[nate@social0 ~]$
in reply to Evan Prodromou • • •Evan Prodromou
in reply to [nate@social0 ~]$ • • •[nate@social0 ~]$
in reply to Evan Prodromou • • •@dulcedemon How so? unless we unite, all we get is more fighting. That eventually leads to terrible things.
What the fediverse could do is lead humanity to a social platform without the outrage cycle. But people need to be here for that to make a difference.
TL Jordan
in reply to Evan Prodromou • • •@gangrif
It's a haven for those of us who are already here, but without a way to draw the masses (something which not everyone wants), @gangrif is right.
It provides a welcome respite from places like Bluesky, but it's far from an antidote to corporate run, billionaire owned social media. It's hard to convince the average person to use Mastodon, especially when big names/accounts that dominate those other places trash it all the time, perpetuating the notion that it's hard to use and characterizing its users in a negative way.
Jonathan Schofield
in reply to Evan Prodromou • • •voted “Yes, but”.
Here are some nice buts mastodon.social/@urlyman/11424…
Jonathan Schofield (@urlyman@mastodon.social)
MastodonPhoenix Paulina Schmid
in reply to Evan Prodromou • • •Yes, but it's more like part of the solution.
Far-Right populism doesn't only abuse algorithmic tendencies but also psychological functions of people.
Evan Prodromou
in reply to Phoenix Paulina Schmid • • •Phoenix Paulina Schmid
in reply to Evan Prodromou • • •We would need also to strengthen digital and especially media literacy. Populists (especially those on the far-right) play with fear and psychological terror to manipulate people.
Media literacy has worsened at least in the western world – if not globally.I also would guess that this is why bipartisanship seems so unthinkable for many.
Evan Prodromou
in reply to Evan Prodromou • • •Evan Prodromou
Unknown parent • • •