Hi lemmy! So this is kind of controversial, but hear me out. Let me start off by saying I’ve been on a few reddit alternatives, as I’ve mentioned in different posts, and I’ve seen language that is very hateful. I was disgusted by the language, but after seeing it over and over again, I just got sad. These people only know fear and hatred. I’m not sure anyone’s shown them kindness.

Should we be kind to those that we disagree with or that use hateful speech?

  • Invisível
    16·
    3 years ago

    Yes. Let kindness be the norm not only for common good but for your (and others) individual well-being.

    • sinewyshadowOP
      2·
      3 years ago

      I mean, from what I’m seeing, they are scared, weak, and fragile people. You just wanna give them a weighted blanket a cup of hot cocoa and tell them it’s gonna be alright. So fragile egos.

      • Invisível
        2·
        3 years ago

        Not really, just saying be kind to all people. Be kind and demand kindness. Say what you think, don’t forget your values, but say it in a way that promotes healthy discussions. You don’t need to be a servant of kindness to be kind. Maybe some language bias in my interpretation of your words, but I think that behaviour breeds behaviour.

  • Ephera
    151·
    3 years ago

    My experience has been that it’s basically futile. Their past and their whole present situation have entrenched this hatred. One kind soul on the internet isn’t going to fix that.
    They might even turn you away, because they have fundamental trust issues and basically see it as a form of aggression when someone is inexplicably nice to them.

    You also need to be wary of the Paradox of Tolerance, i.e. don’t be too tolerant towards their views.

    • sinewyshadowOP
      6·
      3 years ago

      I’m not saying to tolerate their views. Definitely call out their bullshit.

      • Ephera
        5·
        3 years ago

        I don’t just mean that you should call them out when they’re actively spewing bullshit.
        They will often start out with discussions of slightly controversial topics and, you know, only playing devil’s advocate, only discussing that because it’s “interesting”, and of course some bullshit related to free speech.

        But then they won’t stop there. The topics will get more controversial, more and more about violence and the worth of humans.

        And I’m saying, if you notice them drifting off into that direction, to stop being nice. Don’t try to reason with them anymore. Do take it personal and show that to them, if they’re glorifying violence against a group of people (even though you’re not in that particular group).

        Like, I’ve told my own dad that he should go fuck himself when he suggested that it’s good when more Afghans get killed, so that they can’t flee and seek asylum here.
        And I think, he understood that I’m willing to cut ties, if he continues being a racist asshole. Because he did shut the fuck up after that.

        That’s my two cents. Obviously your mileage may vary.

        • sinewyshadowOP
          4·
          3 years ago

          I told them that a certain word was hate speech against a marginalized group of people. They called me a bunch of names. One guy said his hate speech was directed at me, and not at a group of so it couldn’t be bad or something like that. These people are quite backasswards in their thinking. They make illogic out of the logical.

      • a_Ha
        1·
        3 years ago

        “Tit for Tat with forgiveness”. When the opponent makes war, on the next move, the player sometimes makes peace anyway, with a small probability.
        Ref : Peace war game

  • salarua@sopuli.xyz
    9·
    3 years ago

    don’t engage them in public. engaging them in public gives them a platform to spread their vitriol and gives them visibility, which kind of defeats what you’re trying to do. as for dms and other private settings, use your discretion. i believe nobody is beyond saving, but it’s not your job to fix these people. don’t expend too much energy on them.

    • imdabreast
      1·
      3 years ago

      Why not engage them in public? It doesn’t just mean that you platform them, they also platform you. Now obviously don’t be a strawman who misrepresents actually good positions, you actually have to do a good job at debate for it to be effective. Not everyone is qualified to debate every topic either. But silence is a kind of speech.

      When I see comments telling people to disengage I can’t agree with that. I want places like Lemmy to be free of hate because that shit is obviously not welcome, not because we don’t engage with it. I do believe a tactical nuke (ban) is a useful thing, not arguing against that.

      • southerntofu
        1·
        3 years ago

        Oh, don’t worry we have plenty of hatred of the rich and the powerful available ;) ;)

        More seriously, i’m always open to answer good-faith questions, even when they’re framed from a very reactionary perspective. But many you have to draw the line because what appears to be good-faith questions is in fact a psyops led by an actual neofascist group trying to infiltrate public forums (entryism).

  • marmulak
    91·
    3 years ago

    Of course be kind, but that doesn’t mean you shouldn’t act in an otherwise appropriate manner. If someone for example is on the site writing hate speech or such things, it is a kindness to remove the content and/or ban them. Sometimes that’s just what you got to do, but if someone is abusive should you be abusive back? Of course not. Being kind doesn’t mean you don’t do what’s necessary.

    • sinewyshadowOP
      3·
      3 years ago

      I’ve been doing yoga more, and trying to be kind to my anxiety. I’m not saying yoga is helping, but it does make me more relaxed.

  • Wrenaissance
    3·
    3 years ago

    There are some people who their role is to do outreach and deredicalizing. I think that’s a very rare type of person to be though. If you feel like that’s your calling, go for it. I find for myself that the best way to deal with hate is to disengage as quickly as you can because they won’t stop.

    • sinewyshadowOP
      1·
      3 years ago

      That’d be an interesting job. Sounds similar to a therapist, though. “Why do you think that way?” “What shaped your views on so and so?”

  • daojones
    1·
    3 years ago

    I don’t know. Nice v Mean are subjective. I suggest you be honest. When you approach someone with complete honesty, if they are being disingenuous, eventually they will reveal themselves.

    Once someone has revealed themselves you go ahead and treat them that way until they change. There is no simple answer to this question. It’s not cut and dry as “if a person does x then y.”

    But I don’t personally surround myself or waste my time helping people who I think are bad people or, at least, too confused for me to help. But a criticism against me might be that I don’t spend enough time helping people. It’s a personal decision.

  • pingveno
    16·
    3 years ago

    When you’re talking about an online community, you should be kind but set clear rules that are enforced in an even-handed way. But beware that if you ban speech that’s deemed bigoted, you’re likely forming yet another echo chamber. The only way to confront bigoted beliefs is for them to be brought out in the open, and even then there will be plenty of failures and half-victories.

    • southerntofu
      2·
      3 years ago

      1. Why would echo chambers be bad? Why are commenters lecturing tech-savvy teens for their echo chambers on Facebook/Reddit, and not bourgeois people when they organize a “rally” (at least that’s the word in French)? Why is it bad for people to meet with people they feel comfortable with? Dismantling echo chambers means imposing a single, unified dominant ideology on everyone and preventing any form of counter-culture from emerging. That’s a very authoritarian stance, to say the least.

      2. Except in specific circumstances where everyone is open to debate, publicly debating bigoted views that are not based on facts risks to trigger a chain-reaction of confirmation bias : “Some other people are advocating for white supremacy, they’re being downvoted and debated, so it must be true that the’re victim of a global black-jewish conspiracy and i should join the secret white resistance”. Of course it’s possible to engage in education with people holding bigoted views, but organized disinformation campaigns from the alt-right are an entirely different species.

      • pingveno
        3·
        3 years ago

        Echo chambers aren’t bad in and of themselves. They can be fine in the context of, say, a safe space for LGBTQ where they don’t have to deal with people who want to debate their very existence. They can also be good for developing ideas where everyone’s already on the same page. But echo chambers are problematic when there is little to no crossover between echo chambers. They produce a fractured, tribalistic society where ideological rivals are dehumanization and reduced to existential-level enemies. That’s happening right now in the United States, and it is a major driver behind the paralysis in our politics.

        • southerntofu
          2·
          3 years ago

          Dehumanization is the problem, indeed. But having separate tribes is definitely not a problem. I think you’re overplaying how much dehumanization takes place: that is certainly a feature of privileged/dominant cultures to try and eradicate others, but i’ve never seen that as part of a counter culture. As much as we can make a liberal cis white man uncomfortable, or give a nazi a few punches in the face or joked about eradicating them, i believe most of us have some form of empathy preventing it from going too far. On the other hand, nazis and masculinists (among others) are very determined to genocide/sexocide people who don’t follow their rule. And it’s not just talked/joked, they did it throughout history, and they’re still doing it on the margins. Polarization is not a bad thing, kyriarchy is.

          About a paralysis in politics, residing outside of USA i don’t exactly see this from here. It appears your politics are business as usual full of psychopaths running the show.

    • sinewyshadowOP
      1·
      3 years ago

      You mean like borat does? He’ll bring out people’s biases, and expose them.

      • pingveno
        1·
        3 years ago

        Nope. Borat isn’t about discussion or improving society. He’s about making a spectacle out of bigotry and awkwardness.