I’ve been using Lemmy for a while now, and I’ve noticed something that I was hoping to potentially discuss with the community.
As a leftist myself (communist), I generally enjoy the content and discussions on Lemmy.
However, I’ve been wondering if we might be facing an issue with ideological diversity.
From my observations:
- Most Lemmy Instances, news articles, posts, comments, etc. seem to come from a distinctly leftist perspective.
- There appears to be a lack of “centrist”, non-political, or right-wing voices (and I don’t mean extreme MAGA-type views, but rather more moderate conservative positions).
- Discussions often feel like they’re happening within an ideological bubble.
My questions to the community are:
- Have others noticed this trend?
- Do you think Lemmy is at risk of becoming an echo chamber for leftist views, a sort of Truth Social, Parler, Gab, etc., esque platform, but for Leftists?
- Is this a problem we should be concerned about, or is it a natural result of Lemmy’s community-driven nature?
- How might we encourage more diverse political perspectives while still maintaining a respectful and inclusive environment?
- What are the potential benefits and drawbacks of having a more politically diverse user base on Lemmy?
As much as I align with many of the views expressed here, I wonder if we’re missing out on valuable dialogue and perspective by not having a more diverse range of political opinions represented.
I’m genuinely curious to hear your thoughts on this.
Of who? Just the ruling class, or everyone? Because if you are talking about oppressing the ruling class, revolution is the most authoritarian act there is. By your definition, Marxism is lib-left the whole way through.
Everyone. How do you keep the working class capitalist simps in line until classes are abolished?
A counter-economic revolution could be anti-authoritarian. The creation of parallel institutions that bypass and outcompete existing structures.
Marxists are ideologically liblefts the whole way, sure. But through an auth praxis
Anarchism, “libleft” if you want to call it that, can be seen as more auth than Marxism as it demands immediate ends to any hierarchy whatsoever. They have more “auth” praxis than Marxists.
Seondly, I have no idea what you mean by 'counter-economic," the latter part of that statement describes the Dual Power method employed by the Bolsheviks in creating the first Socialist state though. You called that “authoritarian” though.
See why the compass is worthless?
It doesn’t demand an end to hierarchy not sure what you mean.
Counter economics in the agorist sense.
The very core of Anarchism is individualism taken to the maximum. The purpose is to eliminate hierarchy, the means, ending formalized hierarchy, aka the state. The core of Marxism is collectivism, and the abolition of classes.
What you describe with agorism is quite “authoritarian.” You seek to turn the economic structure inside out and oppress the ruling class. I won’t shed any tears, but this is the same mechanism as building dual power with the implementation of Soviet Democracy.
What is it about Marxism that has more “auth” praxis than Anarchism? The Anarchists employed labor camps in Revolutionary Spain, after all, and while the victims were largely fascists and thus deserved it, the fact remains that that fits your definition of authoritarian.
I am telling you to abandon such a method and describe ideologies by what they actually are.
That sounds more like the ancaps. Anarchists want to dismantle all hierarchy not just the state. With various different flavours of solutions of voluntary collectivism.
Agorism is not authoritarian because it doesn’t rely on coercion or centralized power. The goal is to undermine the state and oppressive hierarchies through voluntary counter-economics, not to seize or reverse the mechanisms of control like Soviet Democracy does. It’s about opting out of their system entirely, not “oppressing” the ruling class…any harm they face is the result of losing their ability to coerce others so I’m not sure why you think it’s authoritarian.
Marxist praxis depends on centralized authority, party structures, and coercion to achieve its goals. Historical Marxist revolutions institutionalized these mechanisms long after their revolutions, whereas anarchist praxis, even in Revolutionary Spain, aimed for decentralized power. The labor camps you mentioned were temporary measures during wartime, not inherent. But yeah it’s a spectrum not binary ‘auth or not’, some types of anarchists are more likely to resort to authoritarian measures during the transition. Agorism aims to side-step most of that by building parallel systems.
No, I mean Anarchists. The commune structure is individualist, not collectivist, it seeks absolute freedom of association and not full collectivization. I am not making a moral case here, this is the fundamental divide between Anachists and Marxists. In order to create such a system, authoritarian means are required, ie revolution regardless of how you coat it. No ruling class will give up authority voluntarily.
Marxists seek to create a fully centralized and democratic structure devoid of classes. This is more democratic than Anarchism, as Anarchists only have influence over their immediate sphere, not the whole globe. Anarchism however offers more direct control over their surroundings, usually.
Put another way, why are you an Anarchist, and not a Marxist?
It’s not ‘full collectivisation’ in the Marxist sense. But many branches like anarcho-communism and anarcho-syndicalism are pretty explicitly collectivist in nature. And most types of anarchism rely on voluntary collectivism to work. Mutual cooperation based on a set of logical accepted principles. Individuals can’t dismantle hierarchy. So I reject the notion it’s individualism to the extreme. It simply rejects enforced collectivisation. Instead emphasising voluntary and decentralised participation.
Anarchists seek to create a fully decentralised and democratic structure devoid of classes. Centralised structures alienate individuals from decision-making and consolidate power at the top, reducing actual democratic participation. Anarchism, while focusing on immediate spheres of influence, fosters direct democracy, ensuring individuals have a meaningful voice in their communities. Federated networks allow for broader cooperation without sacrificing local autonomy. To be truly resilient we need to rebuild from the bottom-up.
So I’m an agorist because I don’t think a classless, stateless society can be achieved through coercive or centralised means. The methods of change have to reflect the desired society, ensuring that the revolution does not replicate the hierarchies it seeks to abolish.
And it seemed like the only praxis where I could make tangible contributions and help push us forward in a world growing increasingly distant from any traditional revolution of the proletariat.
See, Anarchists can’t get rid of classes with a commune focused system, unless they only interact within the commune and do no trade elsewhere. Otherwise, they are all Petite Bourgeoisie, interested in the success of their Commune by their shared stake in only their commune. To extend collectivization and end classes requires a government and administration, which is more Marxist.
Your understanding of Classes is a bit off, I’m a Marxist and you’re using a presumably entirely different definition of “class” if that’s your understanding. Same with the state, if you don’t get rid of classes you retain statist elements.
See where we end up? The Political Compass is entitely useless for any actual understanding of what someone believes, it reinforces liberal notions of ideology. I’m not even trying to debate the validity of Anarchism here, but how to categorize it. I used to be an Anarchist so I’m more sympathetic to y’all than many other Marxists.
I will say, I do think your understanding of Marxism is lacking, so if you want to call it “auth” or if you legitimately think Marxism doesn’t unite means and ends (spoiler: it does), then I recommend reading more Marxist theory. I will shamelessly plug my intro reading list, feel free to give it a look.