Saidit entry on rationalwiki.org: "Saidit is a far-right version of Reddit. Imagine Reddit but if R/Conspiracy, r/The_Donald, and r/GenderCritical decided to make their own social media platform. This webshite is best described as when TERFs and Trump supporters decide to make their platform..."

submitted by neolib from rationalwiki.org

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–][deleted] 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

There are some exceptions obviously, but this is largely an accurate portrayal of the majority of users here for a simple reason - with the exception of r/conspiracy, these are the subs that were banned on Reddit, providing one of the only incentives there is to use a reddit clone with a nonexistent user base instead. Now this doesn't describe me, but I am not surprised by the demographics of the few sites that allow relatively free speech having majority right-wing users. The majority of people right now trying to avoid censorship are conservative, although for most of US history it has been the other way around.

[–]Alienhunter 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

Is it that different? I think you've always seen cases of the left censoring the left. Often because they fear the reaction of conservatives hurting their ability to implement policies?

I think what you see now is a "communications cultural revolution" where the tech changed faster than the laws and the old left got totally supplanted by a new radical left that understood the new means of communication. It's like how when the printing press was invented it spurned revolutions across Europe.

[–][deleted] 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

Is it that different? I think you've always seen cases of the left censoring the left.

I do think its different, the ACLU is actively against free speech in some instances which is unheard of in their history. They once defended the rights of the KKK to march. Not all leftists have supported free speech, but the people who have supported free speech have mostly been leftists and a few libertarians, with right wing christians always enacting censorship, and these roles have reversed. Progressives want a new morality, and (some) conservatives want to defend the old liberal values ironically enough, like free speech, and anti-war

I think what you see now is a "communications cultural revolution" where the tech changed faster than the laws and the old left got totally supplanted by a new radical left that understood the new means of communication. It's like how when the printing press was invented it spurned revolutions across Europe.

You might very well be right about this, it's a better explanation than anything else I have heard

[–]Alienhunter 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

The ACLU has definitely fallen far. I think that's a difference between the youthful, zealous strains of political action where they want to fight everyone and show no quarter with the older more tempered strains where you understand that treating your enemies with dignity and respect, where it is due, and giving them the same "rights" in a fair fight is the winning move for any number of reasons, not the least of which you don't waste effort fighting ghosts. In the KKK case, as I've said in the WBC case, you're best bet is to just let them say what they wanna say, the KKK is going to have to give a good case for racism in the public square and if you're confident your side is right you have nothing to fear from their argument. It is easily countered. Same with the WBC, I think it's absolutely horrid they went out being cunts at funerals, and well, if we are going to make a very specific law, for this very specific problem, that applies to everyone, like "you can freely protest funerals anywhere except for within 500 meters of the funeral itself" or something I could get behind that, but again, the best option is to ignore these cunts and horrid as their behavior can be, especially if you were on the pro-lgbt side the WBC is basically winning the argument for you anyway since they are alienating the general public.

I think we are seeing another political shift. As we always do really. We have always been at war with Eurasia after all. The Republican party was a radical anti-slavery party, the democrats were absolutely the party of the racists, until is switched. Indeed it switched again? It's hard to say exactly where these switches occur. But they seem to change generation from generation. The Dems are the pro-corporate establishment party. The GOP the pro-corporate anti-established establishment party. Until the next election of course. Then they're going to be the pro status quo party while the other party is the anti status quo party? Filter in some new flavor of the month cultural war issues and you'll have your fun. St. Patriarchy Day is Elf-phobic anyone? Perhaps we get at the true evil in our society. Toilet paper and how it kills the trees! I am the Lorax I speak for the trees because the trees can't speak for themselves. No trees shall be cut down before the third-trimester!

Before I have a psychotic break thinking about the poor poor plight of the Elf-phobic trees and the rampant discrimination of them and the arborphiles by the flora-sexual-phobes. I must remind you that we have always been at war with Eastasia!

[–]Alienhunter 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Will add that I think the association of the religious people with the "conservatives" is a relatively recent phenomenon. I think the religious "conservative" moral panic types are a lot closer to progressive liberal ideals than conservative positions. I mean if you think about it they are anti-alcohol, anti-drug, anti-gambling, etc, all these anti-vice positions were a big part of progressive movements and were and are largely driven by women, partly because women have more empathy and see the legitimate problems all these vices cause, but also partially because on some level they don't want to compete with men's attention with various vices. In the past these women tended to be highly religious because well, the church was the primary social institution and that's where women did their socializing. (It's not like they were the ones going to the saloon.)

Now I think it's changed and the internet has become the primary socialization hub. I think you'll see that with the mass adoption of cellphones, there's a huge increase in women using it along with the rise in social media.

Again somewhat anecdotal but when I first got on Facebook made tons of friends with women (hell yeah why not) and noticed that in general they tended to post a lot more often and a lot of the, what I'd call non-humorous memes, political populist points, etc. Even if it was still at a point where I largely agreed with them I thought it was rather a waste of time.

[–]Vulptex 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

It's because what we've been calling "conservatives" were never really conservatives at all; rather the communist left labeled libertarians conservatives as it sought to destroy them both.

This triggered fusionism, so the conservatives kind of went into hiding behind the libertarians. "Regain the freedom to say what we want first, and then we can worry about taking over." Now for some reason they've taken the mask off again even though they haven't been able to do that. I suspect they largely forgot their plan after fusionism took full effect, but now the recent unrest has led the new generation to rediscover the old truly conservative ideology.