I discovered this after upgrading our instance yesterday, which also upgraded all frontends to their latest versions as well. After I did, our Tesseract frontend stopped working and I noticed immediately as it's been my primary for a while. Initially I thought it was an API version mismatch, but no, it was much worse.
Someone pointed out that the developer of the frontend added an explicit hidden and unmodifiably blacklist which includes any and all instances to the left of Kissinger. There's a commit which also explains their specious reasoning about our instance specifically, as it seems we've been on their shit list for a bit longer than that.
This instance and its admin staff encourages identity politics, groupthink, mob mentality, and extremist solutions to societal problems. Users who advocate violence are not moderated so long as the admins agree with the target. Caution and critical thinking are advised when interacting with this instance or its users.
When you use tesseract to connect to one blacklisted such instance , you just get a message informing you that Tesseract is "incompatible with that instance" which leads one to think of a technical issue, like an API mismatch, rather than the dev being an opinionated coward.
Isn't it funny how all the software developed by turbolibs, like Piefed and Tesseract, end up with hidden control mechanisms from developers who think they know better than everyone else? That they don't just think they deserve to tell you what you should think, but they should manipulate you to think it? Isn't it funny how libs go on about how bad it is to support lemmy due to the ideology of the devs behind it, and yet lemmy has 0 opinions as a software? It does make one think...
Anyway, I forked - it as one does - and disabled the blacklist, but since this is a massively ideologically compromised software, I'll doubt I'll keep this frontend up after Lemmy 1.0. I think we'll bring up mlmym again now that someone's maintaining it again.
It’s right wing yet it censors every remotely right wing/conservative source?
It doesn't, though, outlets like BBC, the New York Times, etc. are allowed.
The New York Times is a left wing publication through and through, what are you talking about?
The BBC is centrist but left leaning. Definitely not right wing.
Which wars have the NYT's RNN against, again? Which policy of W's were they against again?
I agree with Cowbees definition, but the NYT's isn't left wing BY YOUR OWN DEFINITION of left wing.
New York Times is precisely as left wing as liberalism. You've been raised to implicitly think of liberalism as the "normal amount of left", and that is not accurate. That's my assumption at any rate, because I was raised that way and carried around a similar misconception.
It’s not a misconception. It’s the way left and right wing works.
If everyone but you agrees on a definition, your definition is wrong. The democrat party is not right wing. Anti-right wing media are not right wing.
...in this case, you simply need to expand your definition of "everyone".
Roughly everyone in the US is conditioned to see our tiny slice of the political spectrum this way, as you're describing. Democrats left, Republicans right, the precise middle between them being...what? "Moderate"?
US politics sits within several broader contexts - it is not some magical thing with the power to redefine global and historical political thought. We simply grew up thinking it's mostly all there was and probably the ~best out of other worse sets of ideas.
And all of us suffer for that, you help us all suffer for that, by simply accepting (defending!) the self-defeating idea that Democrats are as far left as one should go. While Republicans just sprint further right, without penalty. And complicit orgs like the New York Times "report" like everything is mostly normal, instead of a goddamn historic, violent assertion of all the worst fucking things that basically NO ONE agrees with, going on today.
Okay. Democrats are left-wing. How?
I’m not in the US, so your entire diatribe goes out the window.
The left is moving further left than the right is moving right. Much further, much faster.
You are so wrong it's amazing. Sounds malicious, even deceitful, frankly. Think we're all done huh?
Both are right-wing. Both uphold capitalism, imperialism, and Zionist genocide. Leftism begins at socialism.
You can’t just redefine right and left wing like this lol.
I'm not redefining it. Historically, leftism has been used to describe those who wish to advance to the next mode of production historically, ie those who are progressive, while rightism is to conserve or turn the clock backwards. BBC and NYT are both on the side of dying capitalism, wishing to drag the moribund body of capitalism, while leftists would be the socialists and communists. In the French revolution, capitalism was left, because it represented a movement beyond the monarchy and into capitalism.
You guys don’t seem to understand where the center is. Just because communism is far, far left, it doesn’t mean “slightly left” is “right”.
No it is unfortunately you who does not understand what left right and centre means. The centre is those who hold up the status quo. The right are those who long for tradition and a return to the old. The left are those who strive for progress and the new. Liberals lie between upholding the status quo and wishing for a return to status quo of a few years ago when imperialism was less nakedly obvious. Liberals are thus centre-centre right.
Your definitions are just flat out wrong though lol. Right wing isn’t “those who long for tradition and a return to the old” lol. The left aren’t “striving for progress” lol.
You have literally no idea what these terms mean. That much is clear.
It's literally exactly what they mean.
LeftWing: Socialism Communism Anarchism Etc All trying to push society to progress beyond the now to new modes of production and organisation.
RightWing: Conservatism(liberalism) Nazism Libertarianism Feudalism Etc All trying to return to the mode of production and organisation from their imagined golden age.
The centre then if course is simply upholding the status quo of the current mode of production and organisation be that through inaction or actively.
You seem think left right and centre are concrete static labels floating above reality as opposed to what they are in reality which is a quick way to note the direction of an ideology in regards to the present.
The "center" is a pretty worthless intangible the moment parameters are defined beyond "left" and "right". It is interchangeably used as an arbitrary midpoint in policy and as a whole range of politics between, if not including, socialism and fascism.
Determining how 'far, far' right you need to go to calibrate for the 'far, far left' stretches and constrains where anything falls.
But let's be real, centrism itself relies on being able to switch sides in that 'slightly' range.
The distance left and right doesn’t have to be the same in each direction.
Which makes the center arbitrarily defined in the exact way I stated. Precisely.
You don't seem to get what makes something left vs. right. It's about what direction they take us, in the direction of the status quo, being right wing, or if they take us forwards to socialism, being left wing. In the future, socialism will be right wing, and communism will be left wing. That's just how it is, we must proceed forward exactly as much as we can without letting idealism cloud our judgement.
That’s complete BS mate lol
You're arguing with a communist and an authoritarian. Anything right of Stalin is considered right-wing.
Cowbee is deep in that camp. You will get nowhere with him.
Ah ok thanks for the heads up. Won’t waste my time.
What part, and how so?
All of it. Every part. Because it’s wrong.
Socialism will never be “right wing”. This is the problem with you full on leftists - you think moving further left makes everything to your right “right wing”, when all that has really happened is you’ve gone even further down the communist hell hole.