Here are some reflections on my personal experience of federated social media.
A bit of background. In the 90-9-1 trichotomy, I am one of the 9%: an occasional active participant. As of 3 years ago I had been dabbling in social media since I was a teenager in the 90s, but never very deeply. Newsgroups and IRC; a bit of invisible blogging; various techie web forums; Twitter from 2008 (hardly any tweets); Facebook in the early 2010s (a post or two per week at the peak); then Reddit. As of 2023 I had been “on” Reddit for nearly a decade and not even written 100 comments. Then I decided on a whim to join Lemmy.
The good
Three years later I have written nearly 100 original posts and over 3000 comments! This is an order of magnitude more than I used social media in the previous 25 years. How to explain it?
A bunch of things. I liked the UX instantly, it’s much better than Reddit. No ads, so no nagging feeling that you’re bankrolling a corporation. A (slightly) higher level of conversation quality than Reddit.
Probably the single biggest explanation is just that it’s quieter. On Reddit I always arrived too late to the party. It’s hard to find the motivation to say something when a thread already has 800 comments. On Lemmy, I’d arrive 12 hours after the post and there were only 6 comments. If I take the time to compose my thoughts, somebody might actually see it! I get the paradox here (there are tons more eyes passively looking at Reddit), but the “quiet room” effect is real.
Highlights
Hands down the best community I’ve found here is (no surprise) a specialized one: !birding@lemmy.world. Lots of original content and genuine expertise, zero vitriol or toxicity. Perfect. In a similar vein, !pigeon@mander.xyz, where you can literally post pics of pigeons to an adoring audience.
I’ve also got some value out of !linux@lemmy.world and !privacy@programming.dev for one of those reasons: the ambient expertise. It’s not really breaking news: Linux and FOSS and privacy are really the only subjects where the fediverse can go toe-to-toe with the corporates in terms of expertise. IMO that’s already an achievement that should not be squandered!
Quite a few of my 96 posts are original content (“OG”, ugh). A whole bunch are photos from my bike-touring escapades, which I posted somewhat arbitrarily to !bicycle_touring@lemmy.world , !bicycling@lemmy.world, and !solarpunktravel@slrpnk.net. I rationalize this as an alternative to blogging: instead of hosting your own invisible vanity website, you can write what you have to say in a place where you have less control but where people may actually read it. It’s the logic of social media, basically, but minus the ads and opaque algos and shareholders. As expected, my holiday photos were not viral sensations, but they did attract some love and a few nice comments. Success!
The less good
My experience on Lemmy has taught me something that I knew in theory but (somehow) not quite in practice: Socializing via text on a screen is quite hard to pull off successfully. The lack of physical accountability, the inherent difficulty of text communication (avoiding ambiguity without the help of a face or body language), all this tends to make people into worse versions of themselves. Me included to some extent, I’m sure.
And then there’s the echo-chamber problem. It turns out that when people have an option to avoid dealing with ideas they disagree with (even slightly), very many of them choose that option. IMO this is a major (perhaps fatal) problem with social media. The fediverse is not magically immune from it.
Lowlights
The first - and definitely worst - experience I’ve had was 2 years ago when I got banned from !europe@feddit.org for “racism and gaslighting” on the basis of, well, pretty much nothing except the moderator’s paranoia. Shut out of the single community that had most drawn me to Lemmy, I tried !europe@lemmy.dbzer0.com and in short order had a similar experience. I am a European liberal who votes green, and a moderate on social questions, although admittedly I do enjoy debate. To be shut down so brutally for daring to question progressive doxas in the politest terms - for me this was quite a shocking confirmation of the intolerance of a certain section of the (mainly US) left.
On !degrowth@slrpnk.net I got a virtual slap on the wrist for posting an article offering constructive criticism of degrowth. I’m basically a degrowther myself but I believe it’s important to stress-test one’s ideas (cf. J S Mill). The moderators politely disagreed. Fair enough. I deleted my post and unsubscribed.
The problem on !china@sopuli.xyz, meanwhile was (is) slightly different. It’s that the community is swamped by a single hyperactive member who posts relentlessly on exactly the same themes with the same POV, and - the echo chamber, again - responds badly to any pushback. I contacted the moderator in private and received a virtual shrug.
So I decided to ditch all politics and stick to photos and niche subjects. But even here it has not been plain sailing. A (slightly whiny) post I wrote a few months ago about the difficulty of installing Linux on cheap hardware (a pretty niche subject!) received an avalanche of mockery and insults that really took me aback. And then I really stirred up a hornets’ nest quite recently in this very community when I proposed a feature which would hugely improve my experience of Lemmy without affecting anyone else. Can’t link to that because it got (very belatedly) deleted, ostensibly because offtopic but in reality because the proposal was unpopular. In fact this was my last post on Lemmy to date. Probably not a coincidence.
Conclusions
For me personally, the jury’s still out. I’m pretty ambivalent about social media in general. Since The Atlantic introduced a discussion space a few months ago, I admit that I’ve transferred some of my energy there. And yes, it’s been a better experience. But the reason is no indictment of Lemmy: It’s that The Atlantic has a paywall, which essentially means I’m talking only to privileged people like myself there. I enjoy Hacker News even more, but that’s because it’s super specialized (politics is mostly banned), and professionally moderated, and also (attention: wild POV!) because it’s full of engineers and other spectrumy types who take a Spock-like approach to communication. The problems I’ve had on Lemmy are problems of all generalist social media, not specifically of the fediverse.
In my case what remains are the figures. Despite everything, I have contributed more, and more personally, on Lemmy than I ever did on the R-site or anywhere else. That has to count for something. Corporate social media is a manipulative money-driven spyware-fueled nightmare. The federated decentralized type is obviously, plainly, better. That’s why it has to succeed.
I mean, if it looks/sounds/smells/walks like fascism, then at some point we should start to wonder if it is fascism? Even/especially when people who notoriously do not tell the truth and are extremely well-known for hiding their true intentions say otherwise.
I am less interested in political theorizing, and more whether I will be grabbed off the street and sent to a concentration camp (personally).
After all, you know what the Bible says: fuck the poors, let them eat
cakeeasily-prevented diseases and die, no need for justice or mercy, just lower taxation on the wealthy and it’s all good bro, just trust me.Or perhaps we could be skeptical and not simply do things because people attach a label next to them that we like. Anyway I am not stopping you from moving to North Korea if you like, where everything is wonderful, in theory.
Fascism and authoritarian communism are different things. Fascism is built on and relies on expansion through war, whereas authoritarian communism can survive without that.
Fascism is built on the idea of purity and strength, and the pollution of the blood of the pure race by dirty foreign influence. Fascist rhetoric holds the Leader as the ultimate ideal, the perfect man to emulate and sacrifice yourself for, whereas authoritarian communism upholds the ideal of the Party or the Revolution.
This is not nitpicking, this is important, because of that expansionism and reliance on an enemy I talked about. Fascist nations must be at war, it is part of their support structure, they cannot survive without a war to fight. Their society is built to support the military. You cannot make peace with a fascist nation. They will always attack you. Also, their obsession with purity means they purge their ranks of anyone not considered racially pure, or male, which is a big disadvantage compared to communism.
Authoritarian communism can survive by focussing on conversion of their society into the communal ideal of a Marxist system, and their security structures are all built around that. Thinking correctly, not believing in capitalism, being educated in socialist modes of work, etc. Education is emphasised, with a strong bias towards one correct way of thinking, to make you a perfect worker, no matter who you are or where you came from.
When authoritarian communists purge, it’s usually not for race, or sex, it’s for your beliefs and ideals or your class loyalty.
Learning how to recognise different kinds of danger is important, because it lets you make the right choices to survive.
You seem to be speaking sincerely, yet while entirely missing my points. I was not speaking against communism, I was speaking against “communism” in name only, while actually being fascism in disguise. For example, if you think about it, doesn’t almost everything you say work well as a description about Putin and modern Russia, both of which many call “communist” (despite being ostensibly a “democracy”, while in reality a totalitarian regime, and definitely capitalist rather than “socialist”)?
This idea that the likes of Russia, China, and North Korea are simply going through a fascism phase after which they will eventually emerge into being ideologically pure seems the height of naïveté to me. Never once in the entire history of the world has that ever worked out in practice, and there is no proof that it ever will. However, this idea that in the meantime all other forms of government must be converted into your theoretical ideal, despite going against all logic and history, THAT style of thinking is going to LITERALLY get me ACTUALLY killed irl.
Some modes of thinking are actually genocidal in their outcomes - and yes I know the counterargument is that “it’ll be worth it later, just trust me bro”, but as I said I do not believe that.
Anyway, this is not a politics community and thinking ahead to how my death can better serve someone else’s theoretical ideological agenda is somewhat triggering to me for some reason, so let’s not go any further into this tangent. I’ve had this identical discussion over and over before and it never seems to solve anything at all ever.
I want to disengage here, but I hope you will continue to think about the points I raised. Fwiw, I promise you I’ve put literally decades of thought into your points already.