Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

celebratedrecluse wrote

This site has a problem with pile-ons and collective self-congratulation.

I believe it is necessary for raddlers to push against our own tendencies toward dogmatism and herded thinking, and this will be a protracted process before we see real improvement of the discourse and a noticeable diversity of viewpoints.

It's also irrelevant how old someone is, let's not take this to an ageist place regardless of whether its a "positive" or "negative" stigma/treatment of difference.

8

GlangSnorrisson wrote

I’m sorry but I can’t agree here. Pile-ons happen when some dipshit tankie comes over here to spew a bunch of accusations at us and insult us. I see no issue with making fun of them en masse.

Second, I’m not sure what you mean by “diversity of viewpoints”, but I really hope you don’t mean some “marketplace of ideas” thing where we’re supposed to be nice to fascists or whatever. Either way I don’t see how treating genocide apologists with hostility is an issue.

I’ve also seen plenty of disagreements between users often leading to interesting and enlightening dialogues. I don’t see how opposition to authoritarians and bigots is a dogma.

2

[deleted] wrote

3

celebratedrecluse wrote

I mean, yeah, I think it's pretty fucking obvious I'm not saying we should have more genocide apologia or reactionary viewpoints on the website. Ironically, putting those words in my mouth is itself a decent example of how there is a big problem with groupthink on Raddle, lol.

Having conversations where everyone doesn't completely agree and masturbate about being correct together, doesn't mean i believe all beliefs are equally correct...quite the opposite, you need to have intellectual conversations in order to get closer to the truth and common understanding. If people want to rhetorically equate this reality with capitalist marketplaces, and reject talking about ideas except to agree...you've become an anarcho-tank.

in fact, any form of disagreement on raddle is often interpreted as an attack, which is something i very recently felt compelled to call out and push back on at some difficulty. It's hard to have any sort of good discourse on here without people expressing they feel attacked and getting defensive.

4

GlangSnorrisson wrote

I’m sorry for putting words in your mouth. Really, I am. It’s just that I’ve never seen the concept of “diversity of ideas” to mean anything else than “be nicer to people with terrible politics”. Especially since this thread is about a tankie who did an ama. In context, it does sound like authoritarian apologia to me.

I think that a lot of the hostility to disagreements comes from a place of experience. You should take a look at reddit threads where anticiv gets mentioned if you want to see nasty reaction. Having come from there myself I don’t and can’t blame anyone anticiv for having their guard up all the time.

2

celebratedrecluse wrote

I mean, having your guard up all the time and refusing to interrogate one's own ideological inconsistencies/problems is something that makes ones politics...bad. I don't care if it's "justified" or "understandable", you know? That doesn't change it being bad politics.

On raddle, a demographic which is normally marginalized in discussions are instead protected from having to have totally normal conversations about differing points of view, and it makes their own points of view atrophy visibly. The same thing appears to happen with many ancoms and their fellow chomskyite breadtube travellers on r/@ from the threads that are archived on here. It's a process which, from the experience you are referring to, you would think people on here would want to avoid given how annoying those people become as a result.

However, as with most political subcultures online, a major driving force for speech here is not the desire to attain greater understanding or achieve greater ontological efficacy (increase praxis) but rather find a parasocial validation for what one already thinks. Which, even if understandable, is negative and will only bring problems by reinforcing contradictions without addressing them.

4

GlangSnorrisson wrote (edited )

I’ve never seen anyone on here actually refuse to discuss ideas honestly. What I meant by “having your guard up” was more about having little patience to rehash the same old debate over and over. Especially when they almost always turn nastily vitriolic towards green anarchists.

You’re also making a mistake by assuming people here aren’t active elsewhere. I know for a fact that some here have reddit accounts where they either are still active in political and anarchist spaces or have given up on them completely (hello!).

Edit: I will also say that unmitigated hostility towards reddit anarchists and chomskyites in general actually helped me grow. I was one of those annoying reddit anarchists until I saw a few people mercilessly criticizing that ideology.

2

celebratedrecluse wrote (edited )

I’ve never seen anyone on here actually refuse to discuss ideas honestly.

Happened in the last serious discussion i was part of on here in the last few days, took a while to get to the point where I was being seriously engaged with. Don't get me wrong, it is possible to do this on Raddle and we got there (I'm now quite pleased with where the conversation is going), but I had to really stick my neck out and coax it out of the other person at first. So my suggestion is, just start looking around more, sort by Most Commented or Controversial should help you understand where I am coming from.

You’re also making a mistake by assuming people here aren’t active elsewhere

I know you all are talking elsewhere, frankly I don't care tho, imo i'd like to see you all make Raddle a better site when we share it together. I don't really feel strongly about whether any of you add value to corporate reddit, twitter, lemmy, etc, you know? If you want to talk about marketplace of ideas, those are literal marketplaces where your data and social role in rhetoric is monetized/controlled. Raddle is supposed to be different, and it could be if we took it a little more serious imo.

edit

I will also say that unmitigated hostility towards reddit anarchists and chomskyites in general actually helped me grow.

That's great, and it's probably because those instances of "hostility" were actually well reasoned critiques that the other side refused to engage with, rather than just mostly shitposting or rhetorical deflection.

It is possible, imo, to have a conversation that is very helpful and good, which has both ends of it engaging in a dialectic/oppositional points of view. This, presumably, is why you mentioned you do this on other websites...why not here, too? That's my point, I guess.

3

GlangSnorrisson wrote

I know you all are talking elsewhere, frankly I don’t care tho

Well I can’t help you there. You say that there are conversations we should be having and I’m saying those conversations are happening.

Also please bear in mind that when I used the phrase “marketplace of ideas” I was being pretty tongue in cheek, I’m more than aware that it’s a ludicrous concept.

I’ve also sorted plenty of threads by controversial and apart from some drama a while back I haven’t really seen anything all that outrageous.

People here can be somewhat harsh, yes. But I don’t know that I’ve ever seen anyone genuinely attacked for disagreeing with the dominant attitudes here.

1

celebratedrecluse wrote

You say that there are conversations we should be having and I’m saying those conversations are happening.

Yes, and I said that they should happen here, on Raddle website, not on the other ones. You can disagree, or believe to the contrary that they are already happening here, but right now you are acting as if I didn't say a coherent point of view or something. Strange tbh

I’ve also sorted plenty of threads by controversial and apart from some drama a while back I haven’t really seen anything all that outrageous.

Confirmation bias imo.

Also please bear in mind that when I used the phrase “marketplace of ideas” I was being pretty tongue in cheek, I’m more than aware that it’s a ludicrous concept.

Actually it's useful, especially when we are talking about commercial websites or ones run by genocide/fash apologists, etc.

2

GlangSnorrisson wrote

they should happen on here

That’s a valid position, but you mentioned peoples politics atrophying. I pushed back by saying that people’s beliefs are challenged all the time, just not really here. Sorry if I’ve misrepresented your position.

confirmation bias

That’s more than likely. I’m also accustomed to pretty confrontational political discussions and I rarely see any value in being especially polite to people who’s politics I dislike.

As far as “marketplace of ideas stuff goes” I suspect we’re not talking about the same thing.

1

celebratedrecluse wrote

just not really here.

ok well, let me explain why I think this is an issue. i think any discourse is most relative to its immediate context more than anything else. If people don't feel the need to define their terms or think critically about ideas in their immediate arena, then they will gradually over time be likely to not engage seriously with that platform or improve their thinking. In fact, they may grow to value other arenas more intellectually, and just use raddle as a shallow echo chamber. Which kind of makes the experience worse for everyone who isn't also posting on commercial sites, which I find a bit disappointing. Everyone is entitled to do what they wish, but I'm going to continue prodding people to come back from this type of interaction with the site, that I perceive to be a little pervasive/ dominant.

but it's alright if you disagree, I think I've expressed all I can at this point about the topic.

1

GlangSnorrisson wrote

I respect your position. I understand better now, thank you. And do feel free to prod as much as you like!

All I can say is that as someone who came here after being completely and utterly disappointed in reddit anarchist spaces, the idea of reds flooding the place is not one I’m keen on.

1

celebratedrecluse wrote

For sure, i don't want that either, and I am still a communist (among other things) lol

2

GlangSnorrisson wrote

Oh so am I (more or less).

1

celebratedrecluse wrote

it's very hard work, abolishing work. i may just go on strike, lol

2

GlangSnorrisson wrote (edited )

It can require creativity that much is true. But I’ve found that turning as many “work-tasks” as possible into play is a lot of fun.

3

celebratedrecluse wrote

true, or setting challenges and other parameters, or making it collaborative, or doing it on your own in your own way

the disruption of all firm habits, the unyoking of all sturdy ploughs

2

GlangSnorrisson wrote (edited )

I mean, reading through the AMA I only saw one person being rude to her. I wouldn’t call that a pile-on personally. Everyone else seemed to be honestly interested in her worldview.

As far as anticiv goes it’s true that it’s a pretty dominant attitude on here but honestly: I’ve only ever seen anticiv folks treated terribly in anarchist spaces that aren’t raddle. I can’t blame green anarchists for carving themselves a less shitty and hostile environment really.

2

willow wrote (edited )

when i first came here i was definitely put off by the number of posts and comments attacking or making fun of ancoms, and actually stopped coming here for a while because of that. since ancoms are by far the most common sort of anarchist these days i can only imagine some other people had a similar experience.

this is likely at least in part due to raddle's small user base (so a single person's opinions are disproportionately amplified) and it does seem to have died down a bit more recently, but i wouldn't come to raddle for a nuanced discussion of left anarchism.

that isn't necessarily a problem and maybe raddle isn't trying to be the place for that, but... it is what it is.

edit: you edited your post while i was writing that; i agree that "I can’t blame green anarchists for carving themselves a less shitty and hostile environment really".

3

ziq wrote (edited )

I really only lash out at reds when they start it by attacking me

I have an obsessive personality so I can't really help it

I do monopolize the conversation a lot since so many of the posts are made by me

but typically I'll post 20 diverse things in a day and the one controversial thing will get replies and get amplified because it's what people want to talk about

usually the things that start conversations are controversial

2

GlangSnorrisson wrote

I agree that raddle can be quite hostile to red anarchists at times. But I’ve also never seen the kind of vitriol on here that I have in redder spaces. The dunking-on-ancoms thing also seems to be largely about reddit ancoms and I see nothing wrong with making fun of them. Spend some time on r/anarchism if you want to know why I think that.

2

willow wrote (edited )

i do spend a lot of time in reddit's anarchist subs and i find the ideological dogma there at least equally annoying.

i think a fundamental difference between reddit and raddle is that on reddit, you only read the content you specifically want. reddit is full of absolutely awful content but you're never going to look at r/all (or r/politics or whatever) so you don't see it. maybe all the people in r/anticiv are making cathartic shitposts about ancoms, but i wouldn't know because i don't read that sub.

on raddle the site is so small that i (and i assume most users) read the front page of all posts rather than subscribing to specific forums. without that filtering you're exposed to the dominant ideology of the site whether you want it or not. it would be like reading every post on reddit without filtering. so if someone is making cathartic shitposts about ancoms on raddle, it's instantly on the front page of the site and everyone sees it.

the upside of this is it makes individual forums less likely to become echo chambers, because every time you visit the site you see other opinions. the downside is that the site itself can become, or at least seem like, an echo chamber to outsiders.

edit: to be clear this comment isn't meant as a complaint. i just thought that difference was relevant to the discussion.

edit 2: i will say that when posting on reddit, especially in somewhere like r/DebateAnarchism, i find i miss the assumption of good faith that exists on raddle. perhaps that's one of the big upsides to a smaller community; plenty of people here might disagree with me but if they decide to engage i know they'll do it in an attempt to have a discussion or explore ideas, not to "win" or prove someone wrong. that's really missing on reddit.

2

GlangSnorrisson wrote (edited )

Yeah I definitely hear you in terms of not being able to filter out anything on raddle.

Personally their dogma isn’t the biggest part of what bothers me. It’s the constant and ever-present brocialists that shit up the place. That and the fact that they all have this weird CNT-FAI larp thing.

2

kin wrote

I think the main point is to understand how a GenZ (idk how old a GenZ can be, if 15 is a good sample or not) Anarchist evolved to an ML.

Everyone have their own journey in politics, philosophy and ideology in general so maybe this can be useful to understand some stuff.

For myself I found it useful because I don't have contact with any GenZ in real life. And by some of their answer you can tell that they still have a crude understanding of some theory (not that Im more well read, just some points that looked very confused)

All said, I really appreciate their honesty and courage to came here and stand an AMA

6

ziq wrote (edited )

Gen Z is ages 10 - 25. I thought they were on the higher end of that scale. They mentioned bayarea415's videos a lot (someone who is a literal red fascist and even MLs refuse to work with), so now I can see exactly how they've been manipulated into third positionism by reading their responses. I found it very enlightening that people like bayarea, beatnik and parentis_shotgun are quite literally grooming kids into their obscene ideology.

Knowing what we know about the chapo.chat admins trying to solicit nudes from minors, and beatnik not taking any action against it, this is all really concerning.

5

GlangSnorrisson wrote

this is all really concerning.

Yeah cults have a strong tendency towards sexual abuse. Authoritarian power structures and beliefs enable it. I’m actually really worried now about a lot of the kids on that site. I suspect some nasty stuff is going to come out of this.

2

kin wrote

And btw the age thing for me is nice because kids sometimes can have very good insights.

My best social insights was in the childhood

4

willow wrote

i didn't post in that thread because i didn't want to be part of a pile-on, and after reading it a bit, i don't really know what value it had. okay, some people find MLism compelling; i don't think that's any more surprising than people finding liberalism compelling, and we aren't about to do an AMA with an ex-anarchist liberal. sometimes i wonder if anarchists worry too much about people who aren't anarchists.

5

ziq wrote

I would totally do an AMA with an ex anarchist liberal. I'm fascinated by how people go from anti-authoritarian to authoritarian and the processes and influences along the way.

5

ziq wrote

had no idea they were that young, or I wouldn't have done the ama. Thought they were in their early 20s

5

ziq admin wrote (edited )

I banned her until she's old enough to use the site without breaking the tos. Sorry Grace. Thanks so much for doing the AMA and giving us insight into the ML perspective though.

4

Nuktuk wrote

why is raddle not open to people under 16?

3

ziq wrote (edited )

Both legal liability and ethical reasons.

For example look at how chapo.chat admins have been caught trying to solicit pornography from minors. I don't want children here because I don't want raddle users to ever get accused of grooming or manipulating kids in any way. When someone on raddle says they're a kid, there's no way to know if lurking pedos would then pm them. That's why I instantly ban anyone that admits to being under 16.

Anarchists need to be very careful about optics because our enemies will pounce on anything they can use against us.

6

ziq wrote (edited )

And really the age limit should be 18 but meta democratically decided on 16 years ago - probably because a lot of the people voting were 16 and 17.

5

celebratedrecluse wrote

Online, most sites are restricted 13 and up, and as per your concerns the age of consent is 16 in many places, so I think it is a good compromise so we do not ban under 18. But I see what you mean, too. Perhaps we should revisit the conversation?

2

onymous wrote

Ethical reasons?

Overall this logic feels...I dunno, I was considering saying hypocritical or something, but maybe it's more that I'm not sure how strong one's argument for self-protection would have to be to justify(?) open discrimination against an entire demographic of people.

1

ziq wrote

like I said it's not just self protection, it's also ethics. if someone admits to being a kid on the internet, they're gonna get groomed by pedos. if someone isn't savvy enough to lie about their age, they're not ready to be on a website filled with anarchists and illegalists. any radical needs to practice basic security culture.

3

onymous wrote

and part of what they need to be culturally secure from here is the site itself.

1

mofongo wrote

Primarily to cover our asses. Secondly, we do discuss things that are outside of acceptability, like /f/illegalism which would not be appropriate for people in the younger end.

5

onymous wrote

Again, this feels blatantly discriminatory. Unless there's some more cover-our-asses logic there I'm missing, that's pretty openly ageist gatekeeping.

1

mofongo wrote

Yes, it is. ngl. Unfortunately, it was a decision that had to be made for the continued existence of the site. If it's any consolation, we don't ask for date of birth upon registration nor we id anyone.

2

onymous wrote

sorry for the late reply.

appreciate the honesty. and that is actually consoling. feels important to at least acknowledge

1

ziq wrote

tough shit

unless you're also a kid, this whole 'ageist' line is giving me a bad vibe

2

onymous wrote

apologies for late reply.

I don't mean to attack you in particular, or act entitled to any sort of labor. Just pointing it out.

unless you're also a kid, this whole 'ageist' line is giving me a bad vibe

Well, I shouldn't admit it if I were, should I? And if I weren't, maybe I'd be speaking from my own past experiences of humiliation and degradation being treated and viewed by the world like that. It's not like there's ever a stable body of people that can maintain any sort of constant identity to speak from here.

1

Ennui wrote

Let’s get a 70 year old tankie on next.

3

ziq wrote

I doubt you'd be able to tell the difference between a 70 year old tankie and a 70 year old conservative.

2

videl wrote (edited )

Glad that AMA didnt turn into a huge shitshow. Grace seemed like yet another lonely alienated teen who's latched on to some dreadful online community & ML identity for some easy solace & purpose.

2

Pop wrote

Question: what proportion of tankies are teenagers?

1