It is good to have open discourse, but generally with things like this, the most vocal and active people determine what is acceptable or not. Rules or not, when everyone in a community disagrees with someone, most people go somewhere else sooner or later. Unless they are a troll or evangelist or masochist.
Open discussion can work in some communities, but there has to be a mutual interesting in finding the truth. If, instead, everyone is out to promote their agenda, it does not work so well.
Flat earth? Were they trolling or really believed that stuff? A lot of flat earthers are just trolls that don't even believe what they are posting. They're just trying to get a reaction.
That seems to be the main issue. They have millions or even billions of dollars to invest in a nice UI. We have volunteers and developers who have a day job. Hard to compete.
China suffers from the same problem the USSR did. When you have one party rule, it does not matter how democratic the constitution says a country is. If you can only elect people from one party, and the party determines who can run for office, voters can only select from a list of candidates that are aligned with the party and its leader. This effectively transfers power to the party leaders and away from elected officials and the people.
The fediverse mostly has two types of people: people who don't want to be part of surveillance capitalism, and those who got banned on centralized social media for bad behavior. Unsurprisingly, the second group causes the same problems here as they did on centralized platforms.
The problem with left leaning individuals on the internet is we have a lot of drive and conviction behind our ideas which is a good thing, but that should translate into real life activism or doing something that will combat the current political system and promote change. But we are beaten down since that’s basically a total pipe dream, we realize what the problem is and feel powerless to fix it.
In many ways, that's what they want you to believe: that you have no hope to change things, so most people never try. That leaves the powers-that-be in charge.
But the reality is that people have the power to transform the country, and it does not have to be through the government. For example, if you are socialist or communist, you can establish your own communes, cooperatives, and employee-owned enterprises yourself, and it is totally legal! And, there are plenty of them already in existence.
People like to complain that someone else should fix their country, but the reality is, they can do it themselves, even when they have no political power whatsoever. But it takes hard work, and that is something most people aren't willing to do.
@Blaze (he/him) I heard someone mention Blacksky a couple of times. I forgot who, but apparently they are trying to set up alternatives for Bluesky on the AT protocol network.
@mortemtyrannis It is pretty simple, really. Don't screw over other people.
So that means I am against big business, monopolies, unfair trade practices, surveillance capitalism, hoarding wealth, etc.
I am also against big government, corrupt officials, police brutality, law enforcement overreach, government surveillance, tyranny, and dictators.
I think we should have free speech, but at the same time, I don't think we should allow harassment, doxing, slander, libel, or intimidation.
I think that people should get paid fairly based on what they contribute. Contribute more, get paid more. I also think that there should be a safety net for people who are struggling.
I think that we should have health care reform, but I don't like the choices that are being presented. Option 1: big business and big health care. Option 2: a government monopoly on health care. There is a middle route where you get rid of both big government and big business in health care. It would require some fundamental changes on how we handle health care, however.
I think we need less big business and less big government, and more small cooperatives, small businesses, and small non-profits. Smaller entities means it is closer to the people and they can chose who they want to deal with. Regardless of whether it is private, non-profit, or government-run, if you only have 5 choices or less, you really don't have much of a choice at all. Because if you have less than 5 major players, they all start to collude to keep policies and practices in place that benefit them and not the consumers or taxpayers.
I can go on. I may be an independent and politically non-binary, but I do have principles.
You probably have not talked to moderates much. They don't like talking about politics because they get attacked by both the left and the right. But they are the swing voters, and they oppose the hate they hear everyday.
@emeralddawn45 It depends on whether we are talking about the hateful far right or conservatives.
Some things frequently talked about by conservatives, classic liberals, and centrists include:
Limitations on government power, including how to prevent a politician from becoming a dictator. This includes checks and balances on power, separation of power, and the dynamic between the states and the federal government.
Protecting peoples civil rights, including the rights of minorities. Opposing police brutality, protecting free speech, protecting the right of association, protections against illegal search and seizures, etc.
The right of people to own firearms, as allowed by the second amendment. This includes minorities and black people, who have the same rights under the Constitution as everyone else.
Health care reform. They want health care reform as much as the left does, but they usually disagree on how to reform the health care system. For example, the left usually wants to create a government monopoly, while the right usually wants to break up monopolies and distrusts the government.
How to give the power back to the people, since corporations and the elite seem to have taken over this country. Like #4, they agree that things need to change, but often have different ideas on how to change it.
I could go on.
Don't confuse the hateful right with the moderate centrists and right-leaning voters. Most people have the same concerns the left does, but have a different perspective on it. And most people aren't hateful. Maybe misinformed, but not hateful.
Interesting. So, basically allowing both.
It is good to have open discourse, but generally with things like this, the most vocal and active people determine what is acceptable or not. Rules or not, when everyone in a community disagrees with someone, most people go somewhere else sooner or later. Unless they are a troll or evangelist or masochist.
Open discussion can work in some communities, but there has to be a mutual interesting in finding the truth. If, instead, everyone is out to promote their agenda, it does not work so well.