If you're jumping into online discussions only to throw hate and insults, you're just being an asshole, regardless of the cause.
If you're jumping into online discussions only to throw hate and insults, you're just being an asshole, regardless of the cause.
There’s nothing wrong with criticism or calling out bad behavior. However, shouting "ACAB" in a thread about police violence, making jokes about beheading rich people, or throwing "muskrat" comments in discussions about Elon Musk, just to name a few examples, makes you an asshole and part of the reason why social media is so incredibly toxic.
If you're doing that while also explaining why you feel that way, then it’s still not the best approach, but at least you're contributing to the conversation instead of just making noise. Throwing out insults without adding substance doesn't challenge anyone or encourage meaningful discussion; it just perpetuates the toxic environment that so many of us complain about.
ACAB is not an insult, it's shorthand for an ideological shift in how we perceive civil servants. It's a reminder, or a clue for those who haven't seen it before, that we have a very real problem.
Similarly, references to the guillotine should serve as a reminder that the social contract applies to everyone. When the rich devalue the lives of the poor, enriching themselves at the expense of human suffering, they need a reminder that they are outnumbered. The downtrodden need a reminder that basic human decency is a reciprocal requirement.
I'm with you on personal insults, even against shitbags like Leon, but I also enjoy clever or novel insults, so it's more about how repetitive they are for me.
Thought-terminating clichés like "ACAB" never changed anyone's view on civil servants. It's virtue signaling to the in-group and baiting the out-group. The intention is to fish for upvotes and provoke outrage, fitting the very definition of slacktivism.
If the goal is to inspire real change in the world, spreading awareness and writing thoughtful, engaging comments is a far better approach.
I don't think you're wrong, but I think you expect too much from people. Some people don't have more to offer than virtue signaling and proviking outrage. Not everyone has the capacity to write a thoughtful and compelling argument. We're hanging out on Lemmy writing comments to each other. It's an open forum. There's no entrance exams or rules against slacktivism.
And I don't think there's anything wrong with a slogan or a chant or a meme or a bumper sticker or a tshirt or a hat or a button or a plaquard or a tweet or an emoji being the summary of your message. It's easier to share and easier to remember. Calling it "slacktivism" is itself a clever portmanteau to convey a much broader concept, instead of a thoughtful and compelling argument. But I'm not mad, because I understood what you were saying and do not need additional convincing.
If you're reading yet another article about police protecting a criminal because the criminal wears a badge, then "ACAB" is sufficient to share your point of view. It would be really cool if we didn't live in a society where the term had any relevance, and nobody knew exactly what it meant. Sadly, the things we have shorthand for tell us the things we see a lot.
"thought terminating cliche" is a propaganda term made up during the cold war by a US academic who was trying to claim that we have reasoned, rational ideology whereas communists only have slogans that prevent them from realizing how wrong they are.
It's a catchy collection of words, but calling another's argument a thought terminating cliche is just using a cliche to avoid thinking about their point.
part of the reason why social media is so incredibly toxic
Hard disagree. Commercial social media is incredibly toxic because of individuals like Musk, Zuckerberg, etc. They increase their profits to the determent of society. They create the echo chambers that cause that behavior.
You don't think the users contribute at all to the toxicity and it's all because of Zuckerberg, Musk, Dorsey etc.?
Then why is Lemmy filled with the exact same toxicity? Exhibit A: Comment by MedicPig below.
Feels like victim blaming the people who are currently being manipulated by algorithms which specfically draw people deeper and deeper into content designed to make them angry.
"It's your fault for being manipulated!" You scream at the top of your lungs. It's like when my state asks me to preserve water, but it barely regulates industrial water supply. Which is somewhere between 90 and 95% of total usage.
Maybe you are trying to treat a symptom, and maybe ignoring the direct cause is a bit of a problem.
The one ending with "have a nice day" ?
I didn't know how unpopular that is, but the "elites" of our society like you mentioned (billionaires, police, government, giant corporations) think they're above reproach or that they don't even have to care what we think. That's why comments qualify as discussion even if they're short. I don't think that rises to the level of "hate"...
People get angry, and sometimes they need to vent that anger. There's nothing inherently wrong with being angry, just like there's nothing wrong with feeling any of the feelings a person can have. There's not even anything wrong with expressing that anger. The body keeps the score, and it will not forgive someone for their unprocessed emotions. Expression is often a part of that processing.
Everything after this is my opinion and should be taken as opinion, not any sort of expression of fact.
It is my opinion that an angry statement like "ACAB" isn't harmful as long as the audience is right. I have no issues with someone saying "ACAB" under an article about police brutality. I would be displeased with an ACAB comment as a direct response to someone who is a cop and was expressing vulnerable feelings about being a cop. It's been my belief and experience that that type of moment is where the right words can actually change someone's mind a little bit, whereas the wrong words can cause harm and push someone to double down on their beliefs. The only times I've managed to change minds is when I first try to express some degree of understanding before attempting to reverse the connection to show the other person why they would benefit from understanding.
I do see the irony present in my specific example here, since bad cops generalize and act out those generalizations on individuals in painful (and sometimes lethal) ways. I am not able to feel or act that way, so the bad cops get to do something that I can't. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Basically, as long as a commenter is venting at a distance, I think it's relatively harmless. It makes me unhappy when a human is being directly and aggressively dumped on, because the chances for real harm are greatly increased.
I don't know if I feel quite the same way about "muskrat." Like, that's very much about a specific person, but the dude is literally never going to read that comment. I very much dislike Elon Musk and usually don't say his name in conversation without the word "fucking" in front of it. I personally don't believe that an internet comment can ever make that man act in a better way, so I don't know that there's any point in trying to treat him nicely. I dunno. Feelings and shit are hard.
EDIT: I should also mention that ACAB is not an insult, it is a symbol of a movement. That symbol can be insulting to some, but it can also provide a sense of solidarity to others. I am a very privileged person that hasn't had bad experiences with the police, so my understanding of the anger behind it is the product of empathy and relating it to my own traumas. I would not personally say that to a cop in a situation where I might be able to change their mind a bit, but I haven't suffered from oppression and pain at the hands of the police. Props to themeatbridge for their comment, because it made me realize that I was framing ACAB as a pejorative rather than what it is.
Yeah OP smells like tone policing, fuck that shit.
I think if you're angry to the point that you're just shouting angry things with no intention for discource, then they're actually being what I mean by "asshole". It's not so much a criticism of them as a person, but rather a description of what they are. I'm calling out specific behaviour typical to assholes.
I would be displeased with an ACAB comment as a direct response to someone who is a cop was personally expressing vulnerable feelings about being a cop.
This literally happened here yesterday. On the spectrum of being an asshole, that's even shittier than just shouting ACAB. Pun unintended.
I have some perspective on this that's a bit hard to share, but I'll try to do so briefly. My partner had a very traumatic upbringing and has spent several years processing all of that trauma in therapy. She has occasionally said things while in an activated state that she later came to deeply regret. When she has said these hurtful things, I've been able to see an injured and frightened 18, 15, 12, 10, 7, or 5 year old kid lashing out as the only defense to an existential threat. There was no existential threat in our time or place, but the trapped knot of trauma that was smashed into her brain by her circumstances saw it as one and tried to survive. With that understanding, it became hard to feel anything but sadness and compassion on the very rare occasion when her anger turned to me.
This has had a profound impact on how I view angry discourse out in the world. Most people haven't been through the shit my partner has, but most people have absolutely been through something terrible that has wounded them. Those wounds often turn into trauma, and that trauma can sometimes explode out into the world.
I don't think that having trauma means that adults aren't responsible for their actions. My philosophy is that every person has a duty to take care of themselves and to not harm others, in that order. Harming someone else is not acceptable to me unless it must be done to protect your present self. I just no longer feel like I am able to assign blame or worthiness to these types of comments and the people making them. When I see someone saying something like "ACAB" and expressing really painful trauma, I think of my partner and all the pain she's gone through and all the work she's done to get to the bright place she's at today.
All of this is to say that I just can't agree with calling them assholes. I think that there are times when they could be misguided and hurtful and even harmful, but that makes me sad rather than angry. The comments that make me angry are the ones made in bad faith, but thankfully the block and report buttons are easy to reach.
I'm curious about the incident you mentioned. Would you be able to link it to me? I might like to comment over there if possible.
EDIT: I was not, in fact, brief.
EDIT: Found it: https://kbin.earth/m/[email protected]/t/353424/-/comment/2994009
I'm shit at the fediverse so sorry for my dumb link. I think there's a better way to link stuff, but I don't know what or how even.
I think these short, punchy comments do serve a purpose and are worth having, little things like that add up for people questioning their own stance etc
the one point I agree on is that these comments aren't creative: they could certainly contribute more and could also be more hopeful rather than simply angry
Would you feel that way if it was also the right-wingers writing their own inflammatory thought-stoppers here too? On Lemmy, these comments are for the vast majority coming from the left and are ideas 90% of the people here already more or less agree with.
No, because right-wingers are fucking wrong. That's a core belief of mine developed over decades of political observation, interaction and consideration. I do not see any benefit in constantly reassessing my views on whether this or that ethnic/sexual minority or impoverished class deserves dignity. I don't need to hear Nazi arguments any more. There is no value there. If you think this space is too left-leaning, there are plenty of other places you can get a more "bAlaNcEd" discussion.
It’s almost like what these catchy slogans represent is completely different and we don’t agree with right wing hatred of innocent people, so of course we wouldn’t be okay with it.
To summarize: You hate phrasing the indicates solidarity. Further, you feel you are entitled to a specific level of discourse and consider anyone who does not pass this gate you keep to be toxic. To that I say: NO U!
Really muskrat is what you are worried about? That's the least you could say about him. That's tame. Maybe the real reason social media so toxic is because said muskrat keeps promoting and endorsing pedophiles, literal Nazis, racism, and general hatred.
That's not particularly fair interpretation of what I said. I named 2 other examples too, which you conveniently ignored.
This is for sure an unpopular opinion lol
It's a tough call whether or not this is unpopular, though I think it is.
I also agree with most of the expressed opinion of the post, though I would argue that it isn't always toxic.
Those one word comments are a waste of space.
You can express the same thing in a better way. I'm not saying people shouldn't be allowed to do it, but it's not going to do anything useful other than signaling other people that already agree.
However, that has its benefit. You used a perfect example where a post about police violence is made. ACAB popping up in a thread about that is a sign of solidarity as much as a signal.
It's when there's a post about something like a police department releasing information about an event that it becomes toxic, even though it is still a sign of solidarity.
In other words, there's nuance to that kind of symbol. It's the text equivalent to a raised fist in a crowd. That can be a good thing or a bad thing, depending on context.
Respectability politics and it's consequences.
The opposition will gladly call you a cat eating demonic rapist pedophile without breaking a sweat, and you're here worrying about Elon Musks feelings or some shit.
Being "respectable" doesn't make you better, kinda just makes you a rube.
There is a fundamental difference between insulting the powerful and insulting people.
Having high status or power changes your brain, suppressing empathy and making you more capable of hurting others. Power makes people neurologically more evil, so it's correct to apply different standards to the powerful.
Insulting is a way to chip away at someone's social status, so 'punching up' has a (minor) positive leveling effect whereas 'punching down' tends to reinforce inequality and it's enabler: prejudice.
Disrespecting the powerful is important, necessary and beneficial.
Who are the rich you're insulting by commenting on Lemmy?
It may be a toxic environment to you, but it's full of vital nutrition for me. I guess you could find a new place where you fit in more easily.
👏