I assume the source code repo is still up somewhere, so I assume it's the domains that are being taken offline, not the code, and anyone can then trivially spin up their own instance.
What do you mean by "how"? The code is freely available, you can spin it up at will too in just a few minutes. When they disappear, sometimes it's because the maintainer doesn't want the headache, and sometimes it's because a they're threatened to remove it.
If the same thing happened to RedLib (A Reddit front end alternative), it would be better. RedLib is not realiable now due to the limitation from Reddit APIs.
I made a thing that uses Nitter to have a revchron timeline of people in the tech space. No algorithm, every post shows up (unless you filter out an account). Feedback is appreciated: https://techtwitter-lime.vercel.app
Would love to redirect more often to shitter instances with https://xxcancel.com.
But there seems to be a bug loading images (e.g. profile pictures or attached pictures to tweets) in Firefox.
Of course there is, don't be silly. There's also no alternative at the moment, or for the foreseeable future. Sure, there's some knockoffs that try hard, but they're still jokes.
I generally agree but I'm still frequently linked to X and I'm either unable to view the content because I don't have an account or I don't click because I don't want to visit the site. These services allow me to access the user content without having to go through X, itself. I wish hackers/the tech industry moved off of X like most users but here we are.
Those services are available, however, people would not stop using Twitter and will continue to do so until we stop consuming their content, then maybe they will finally get off Twitter...
It's companies. Corporate PR accounts never migrate off to Mastodon/Bluesky/Threads. Many neglects update of updates pages, announcing everything on Twitter.
Some of them would move to Instagram if it makes sense to do so, but Twitter apparently makes the best ad ROI figures among Twitter-like services.
I mean, lots of local and/or small services announce disruptions on Twitter only. Many of those have separate news/service status pages on WWW, and yet neglects updates of those. Possibly because users without access to Twitter aren't worth informing.
IOW, Twitter still is a social data infrastructure, like road or tap water. Something that the society depends on, that also ain't nobody paying for it, something that only makes sense at-cost max or at a loss.
I think that was always a fundamental problem with Twitter as a for-profit company. Surely it handles a large amounts of important communications, that are also not so exploitable or monetizable, ethically or not, just fundamentally.
I question your definition of 'need', mainly because my only interactions are interest-related, not work/life related, and whenever I capitulate and follow the link, it's not as interesting/useful as it was purported to be.
As such, I find it easier and easier to just not visit. This is, however, entirely my own anecdotal.
It's not the fault of the users when there's no viable alternative
Bluesky is founded by the same founders of Twitter and is not open and has ridiculous policies, Mastodon is the same, even less popular and even more tyrannical
So the choice for most users, including myself, is tightly moderated spaces run by awful people, or a website run by a literal Nazi, but that at least doesn't ban me on sight
The Musk twitter acquisition (and the sieg heil at the inauguration) were pivotal moments where a good alternative could've surfaced but instead we got twitter 2.0 (and moving from Twitter to Twitter 2 seems entirely pointless even if it wasn't badly moderated on top of that)
Bluesky has the same moderation issues as Twitter. There are people complaining their recommendation feeds are full of macho men nudity and/or furry images, or flooded by far left infights(not like relative to self-proclaimed centrism but FAR left), or straight up getting banned after they've specifically chosen the most appropriate contents, things like that.
Weird thing is that my feed is largely fine other than those gotten banned went back to Twitter. Only politics topics I get are neutral, concerns in global economy, some US and more often Ukraine. No dick pics or furries or antisemetism, just cats, more cats, food pics, infosec stuffs, all as I were back on Twitter in 2009 or so.
But there are enough reports of negative experience, so moderatuon is likely still a bit problematic. Or that compounding with lack of passionate users.
Sound logic doesn't matter to App Store review policies. The browser argument was made, and ignored. They were told to do what they were told or have the entire Mastodon compatible apps internally blacklisted.
Gab/Truth was easy and not that controversial, but content moderation was a lot more problematic, so they introduced a published instance blocklist system and had operators join the condemnation while also throwing wrenches at instance chooser interfaces online and/or hardcoded, because otherwise the "main" part will become a permanent minority.
I think any modern LLMs would see/know what I mean. Ask your agent if you need more information along this lore.
This is the first time I've ever read a commentator tell me to just ask an LLM to write their comment for them. But for "just send me the prompt" to work, I still have to know the prompt you planned to use?
There's several apps for the fediverse though? I always use Voyager for Lemmy (I don't really like the short-form Twitter style socials so I use Lemmy not Mastodon).
Mastodon devs have said many times that the mainstream fediverse, the original community that federates among itself, has a distinct culture and values that they wish to maintain in perpetuity. That is "policies". Yes, the tech allows parallel ecosystems of servers that don't federate with that original community, but when people talk about "Mastodon" like the OP did, they aren't talking about offshoot ecosystems.
They can say whatever they want but they have no control over it.
It's like Microsoft saying they want a distinct culture among the users of their software. They can want it but it's not gonna happen. Within the mastodon community there's also a lot of servers that won't federate, for example the Germans always have very strict rules that they try to impose on everyone else. So most of the world does not federate with them anymore. *)
I mean there's even stuff like gab and truth social that run on fediverse tech. Not sure if it's mastodon itself or another implementation but that doesn't really matter. They certainly don't meet those culture and values.
And there is no 'mainstream fediverse'. Nothing about fediverse is mainstream to begin with. Unfortunately.
*) Don't get me wrong, I'm very progessive myself but the way the German fediverse community goes about it is wrong. "Follow exactly our rules otherwise you are defederated". That doesn't fly even if I agree with most of those rules.
When I tried to get into it, all the biggest instances had policies you had to sign off to to make an account where you basically had to agree with them ideologically on everything, I made a serious effort to find a populated instance that didn't have those and didn't find anything
That is emphatically the weakness as well. I too loved the idea of "they all have their own policies," until it came to be that those policies ended up being utterly childish "I'm taking my ball and going home the second anyone says any little thing I don't like."
It's fucking annoying however to stay in touch with people. It used to be that everyone was on Twitter and that's it. Now it's AT LEAST Twitter, Threads, Bluesky, Instagram, Mastodon and a ton of other stuff and everyone is somewhere else and no one interoperates with each other.
Twitter was the best website by far, very high quality posts, per day I would only scroll through 3 or 4 tweets because each would be a rabbit hole (as an example, and he's long left the platform, crypto cuttlefish)
Well in many cases this is justified. You can't expect them to federate with something like gab (for obvious reasons), or with threads from meta. That would just aid their obvious Embrace, Extend Extinguish play here.
And there are some groups like the German fediverse that stipulate a really long and very specific list of rules and block any instance that doesn't take these over 100% verbatim, no discussion allowed. Also a good reason most of them are blocked. We've had this issue before at the progressive instance I was on.
But besides that most of them get along well. Mastodon is strong on bubble forming anyway but I personally like that. I hate seeing a post from a trans friend on e.g. instagram and then see hundreds of Americans falling over themselves to spew trans hate. Even though the post had nothing to do with that. I think bubbles are necessary in today's online world because many people are just not worth talking to anymore.
> And there are some groups like the German fediverse that stipulate a really long and very specific list of rules and block any instance that doesn't take these over 100% verbatim, no discussion allowed.
Yeah guess what, I'm German LOL that's why I wrote this post
> Also a good reason most of them are blocked.
Well the problem is, it's still annoying from a user perspective - I don't care about the problems other instance admins have with the admins of my instance. And no, I don't want to maintain a dozen accounts just to make sure I can interact with everyone I want to.
> I hate seeing a post from a trans friend on e.g. instagram and then see hundreds of Americans falling over themselves to spew trans hate.
yeah the commercial social networks are just another level of shittiness, and frankly I wouldn't be surprised if a bunch of these "Americans" are just Russians in disguise.
IMO the reason why BS just ended up being Twitter 2.0, or 1.2 even, or why Twitter went down its path in the first place, is that the US and EU are no longer producing enough content to justify ownership or continuous iterations of such a system.
Otherwise it wouldn't have been forced upon who begrudgingly got funding secured. Any of then-GAFA could have bought it and none wanted to touch it.
The bad moderation on those platforms, I think, is a desperate attempt to align platform cultures to the moderating entities' standards that are no longer comprehensible to users, if known at all, like a kid on a push car moving away from the park trying to steer it back.
It seemed fine until 2015 or so, streaming hundreds of novel tweets per second per user, many with novel images. Then things went downhill. Musk can't be the sole villain in it.
The nazis in this case being the people that allow a wider range of political opinions on their platform than the people you're defending as "just a little mean"
There's a very narrow political line you have to maintain to stay on bluesky or mastodon and if you stray too far right or left on any single issue you get deplatformed
Seriously, we have a problem labeling anything not left “far right”. It is of course by design and has always been (who is not with us is against us). Not that right is any better, but at list they don’t label everyone across “antifa” or whatever.
That said, i do not endorse Musk, especially his infamous gesture.
You don't need to go anywhere to see that Musk is far right. If you're going to claim otherwise, you're gonna need to bring some solid evidence.
The "left" spans such a huge range right now that to be "not left" is basically far right. A Republican opposing Trump is _extremely_ rare (and usually excommunicates them from the party) while on the left, you have AOC, Omar, etc actively sharing a party with Fetterman and Manchin. Right/far-right was a thing in the 2010's but not any more.
The right spans such a huge range right now that not to be right is to be "far-left". A "democrat" opposing the OmniCause ("climate, migration and 'palestine'") is _extremely_ rare and usually gets excommunicated from the Party, e.g. Fetterman and Manchin (whom you for some reason listed as 'democrats' even though the Party does its best to label and shun them) while on the right you have people ranging from Massey to Trump, Vance to Rubio, Wiles to Collins.
So maybe it is in the eye of the beholder? I certainly see far more labelling coming from the "left" side of the spectrum than from the "right" side although they're certainly catching up lately now that the communist zombie has risen from its grave again. On the "right" the general idea of the "left" seems to be that they're 'stupid', 'naive' and 'uninformed' while on the "left" the general idea of the "right" seems to be that they're 'evil', 'narrow-minded', 'racist' and '*-phobe'. Neither of these general ideas are true but that doesn't seem to bother anyone.
Is there a list of things or beliefs that make someone "Far right"? Is there a list or reason why being labeled "far right" (by others, not oneself) should be disqualifying, or worthy of having your services abused? Nitter and its forks are in violation of the X.com terms of service, which is why they are facing legal challenges. Those challenges may be easily routed around with other technology, but Nitter and its forks are still violating the services brazenly. Are "far right" people beneath the law? Is it okay to steal from someone on the "far right"? Is it okay to commit violence against someone on the "far right"?
> Is there a list of things or beliefs that make someone "Far right"?
Yes. I mean not literally but this is a poli sci question and it has a fairly objective answer.
Both right-wing and left-wing thinkers tend to agree that core division is: belief in natural hierarchy. Though it's sometimes phrased slightly differently.
Do you believe that there are higher and lower grades of people? Do you believe that some people deserve more than others? You're right-wing. Do you take that to an extreme conclusion compared to even other people who believe such things? You're far-right.
Do you believe that all humans beings are equal? Do you believe that the grades of social differentiation that exist today are unjustified or do not reflect real differentiation in mankind? You're left-wing. Do you take that to the extreme conclusion compared to other people who believe such things? You're far-left.
That's the most neutral way I know to phrase it. It should be agreeable to most on both the left and right.
That is what these words mean. I know such a definition of left and right is not perfect but it's also the closest thing we have to a workable semantics.
Ah, AfD, the party with female lesbians leader, right? typical far right, point taken.
Otherwise, yes, I think labeling any party which works within the legal bounds as “far” is dangerous. Because there are legit far groups which should not be permitted on both sides of the spectrum. And we better know what is legitimate and what not.
The leader can be a lesbian and still far right. They are against gay marriage, against talking about homosexuality in schools. There were gay Nazis, even high up. Röhm for example.
Iirc Weidel herself has made statements regarding how the society should always promote heteronormativity.
AfD wants to do mass deportations (because nothing bad ever happened when a party in Germany had the idea to mass deport people based on ethnicity). Their leader can be a lesbian and still have a platform that is pretty extremely to the right
> Keep in mind that the NSDAP also operated within the legal boundaries.
I am no expert but you might be correct - quick search shows they exploited legal loopholes, essentially hacked the system. I am afraid we haven’t learned much feom it as recent history shows.
That said, legal framework has thankfully changed since and in Europe there is the Europen Convention of Human Rights, plus the constitutional rights. That said, they are not failable, and are equally explotable by left and right, especially if the conditions are right, such as fear.
So ok, point taken, even those who operate within legal bounds today need to be watched closely - on all sides.
And yes I think being homosexual and far anything is pretty weird, as neither far left nor right would tolerate homosexuality IMO. Socialism proved that.
And btw, despite what historians tell, the NSDAP sold itself to the voters on the _left_ ideas. Fascism likewise. In fact, when blinded, some left thinkers have enforsed fascist ideas. Again, hilarious. But true.
Here are some points from fascist manifesto if you don’t believe me:
- Universal suffrage by regional list voting, with proportional representation, voting and eligibility for women.
- Minimum age for voters lowered to 18; minimum age for deputies lowered to 25.
- The prompt enactment of a state law enshrining the legal eight-hour workday for all jobs.
- Minimum wages.
- The participation of workers' representatives in the technical operation of industry.
- The entrusting to the proletarian organizations themselves (who are morally and technically worthy) of the management of public industries or services.
- The speedy and complete settlement of the railroad workers and all transportation industries.
- A necessary amendment of the Disability and Old Age Insurance Bill by lowering the age limit, currently proposed at 65, to 55.
It’s comical that an organisation endorsing and expanding these same ideas is called “antifa”. In fact, people today have no clue what fascism was, they just use it as label for whatever they disagree with, same as “far right”.
Those who don’t know history are indeed condemned to repeat it.
It's just a gorgeous free lunch tavern if you didn't even understand English through LLM and American right wing politics was just the cash pile for patrons to shovel into the fireplace.
There's some likely made up charts online[1] for country stats of Twitter right now, and Twitter is allegedly 2.5x more popular than it is in the US in the top two countries, which are incidentally known for strong-ish purchasing power and near-nonexistent English literacy.
Musk's ongoing massive self humiliation is largely contained to the US/English speaking space. Other parts of the world with no strong cultural understandings and pathways from the US and its politics, which is quite substantial still, are fine, ish. Things like LLM auto translation haven't made a change to that situation; it only strengthened the reverse of that pathway.
In the same vein there is no reason to bother with social networks owned by literal far left supporters, i.e. nearly all the others. Combined these two statements lead to the conclusion that hardly any social networks are worth bothering which is something I can get behind.
If you think Musk is far right you will have a really bad time in coming years.
Musk holds very few far right views in comparison to parties very close to power in many EU countries for example.
He is against mass immigration, especially from Islamic countries. That is a very mainstream view though. There is nothing 'far' about it.
He aligns with AfD on issues where AfD is with majority of the population (stopping mass migration, some remigration) but not on all policies which make them far right.
Also more than 30% of Germans support AfD these days. Hard to call that "far" anything.
The very fact 'they' refer to immigration as "mass immigration" means they're already pretty right heavy.
That kind of attempt to redefine what migration is, is classic manipulation of the narrative to try and appear more centrist.
Looks like it works pretty well too.
Migration levels are controlled by government and are generally based on the needs of the society being governed. I thought the rules had always been pretty strict on getting into most western countries.
>>Migration levels are controlled by government and are generally based on the needs of the society being governed. I thought the rules had always been pretty strict on getting into most western countries.
In theory, not in practice.
If they are "controlled by the government" then illegal immigrants should be deported.
What is happening is that a lot of people come illegally, often against wishes of local population. That's why it's "mass".
Speaking of EU (as Musk is often criticized for expressing his views on EU countries): majority of people support some level of remigration. Vast majority supports stopping illegal migration. Big majority is against migration from Islamic countries. Instead we get all of it at mass scale against wishes of the people. Musk is with the majority here but against ruling elite. His view is well in the middle of what people in EU support.
Yeah, well, it's illegal, so even the establishment is against it. From the, admittedly minimal, sources I hear from it's way overblown by politicians and their supportive media outlets as an easy vote capturing exercise playing on basic human tribalism and fear.
There is a VERY GOOD reason to do this, and this is because they are still very powerful and prevalent.
Closing your eyes and ears and going NAAH NAAH NAAH I'M GOING TO PRETEND IT DOESNT EXIST is a wildly stupid way to approach things like twitter when they are still so influential.
I appreciate experimenting with "boycotting," but when the dust settles and the thing is still very much there, you have to engage with that fact.
This is exactly as intelligent as "if you don't like America, leave."
I neither love nor hate the place; in fact -- yes -- today I dislike it more than I like it.
But again, my like or dislike doesn't matter. It exists and has influence. And for that reason, there are very moral reasons to engage with it even if you think it is evil.
Depends if you thought Twitter ever had any value at all ever. I once made an account, hung around for 2 weeks,then never opened it again. So since musk owns it, it has no more or less than relevance than before.
It doesn't matter "what I think of its value" at this stage. It has observable effects that go beyond just me. Choosing to just ignore it and pretend it doesn't exist -- or perhaps worse -- pretending that your non-participation is meaningful, is irresponsible.
I'd say you couldn't be more wrong. Maybe you're doing fine. But both of those places have likely had extreme effects on the world that perhaps could have been mitigated with MORE, not fewer, eyeballs paying attention to what was and is happening there.
The big picture is that the vast majority of people are not on Twitter. It is a social network for extremists and the signal to noise ratio is extremely low.
So no, you "have to" do nothing of the sort. If something happens there that's worth reporting on, reputable journalists will write about it.
There's a huge cohort of people who are convinced they're somehow immune to right wing propaganda and continue posting information exclusively to sites owned by reactionary oligarchs. Sometimes that information is useful or important, which is why nitter and its ilk are sorely needed.
Words have lost all their meaning. The views of these people whom you label far-right (Elon, DHH) are common in the real world outside the SF overpaid webshit bubble.
The fact that there is not even a sentence explaining why it's a fork, i.e., how it differs from the original, suggests this was only on the front page because of the name. Kinda dumb!
Rarely am I so envious of another’s idea. This makes me jealous. I wish I’d thought of it, even though I’ve never used the original and I’d never use it after it became what it has become.
129 comments
[ 4.9 ms ] story [ 82.9 ms ] threadmany working instances right now: https://codeberg.org/shitter/shitter/wiki/Instances
> "A web extension that redirects YouTube, Instagram, Reddit, TikTok and other websites to alternative privacy-friendly frontends."
Example: https://shitter.thepixora.com/search?f=tweets&q=elon+musk
Wont show any pictures in Firefox for me. Works in Chrome. Can this be fixed? Thank you!
If only someone would "just" fucking build a viable replacement for Twitter. It's a weekend's work with the tools now available. C'mon. (pokes stick)
Those services are available, however, people would not stop using Twitter and will continue to do so until we stop consuming their content, then maybe they will finally get off Twitter...
Some of them would move to Instagram if it makes sense to do so, but Twitter apparently makes the best ad ROI figures among Twitter-like services.
Keep all the bullshit in one far corner, over there, in the distance, behind the big wall, topped with razor wire.
IOW, Twitter still is a social data infrastructure, like road or tap water. Something that the society depends on, that also ain't nobody paying for it, something that only makes sense at-cost max or at a loss.
I think that was always a fundamental problem with Twitter as a for-profit company. Surely it handles a large amounts of important communications, that are also not so exploitable or monetizable, ethically or not, just fundamentally.
As such, I find it easier and easier to just not visit. This is, however, entirely my own anecdotal.
Bluesky is founded by the same founders of Twitter and is not open and has ridiculous policies, Mastodon is the same, even less popular and even more tyrannical
So the choice for most users, including myself, is tightly moderated spaces run by awful people, or a website run by a literal Nazi, but that at least doesn't ban me on sight
The Musk twitter acquisition (and the sieg heil at the inauguration) were pivotal moments where a good alternative could've surfaced but instead we got twitter 2.0 (and moving from Twitter to Twitter 2 seems entirely pointless even if it wasn't badly moderated on top of that)
Huh? It is remarkably open and the policies are not really an issue.
Weird thing is that my feed is largely fine other than those gotten banned went back to Twitter. Only politics topics I get are neutral, concerns in global economy, some US and more often Ukraine. No dick pics or furries or antisemetism, just cats, more cats, food pics, infosec stuffs, all as I were back on Twitter in 2009 or so.
But there are enough reports of negative experience, so moderatuon is likely still a bit problematic. Or that compounding with lack of passionate users.
Gab/Truth was easy and not that controversial, but content moderation was a lot more problematic, so they introduced a published instance blocklist system and had operators join the condemnation while also throwing wrenches at instance chooser interfaces online and/or hardcoded, because otherwise the "main" part will become a permanent minority.
I think any modern LLMs would see/know what I mean. Ask your agent if you need more information along this lore.
This is in the google play store too: https://github.com/aeharding/voyager Though I get it from F-Droid obviously.
I don't know about Apple, its ecosystem is way too closed for me. But Google offers fediverse apps.
It's like Microsoft saying they want a distinct culture among the users of their software. They can want it but it's not gonna happen. Within the mastodon community there's also a lot of servers that won't federate, for example the Germans always have very strict rules that they try to impose on everyone else. So most of the world does not federate with them anymore. *)
I mean there's even stuff like gab and truth social that run on fediverse tech. Not sure if it's mastodon itself or another implementation but that doesn't really matter. They certainly don't meet those culture and values.
And there is no 'mainstream fediverse'. Nothing about fediverse is mainstream to begin with. Unfortunately.
*) Don't get me wrong, I'm very progessive myself but the way the German fediverse community goes about it is wrong. "Follow exactly our rules otherwise you are defederated". That doesn't fly even if I agree with most of those rules.
And it's biggest weakness because instance admins keep bitchfighting with each other, holding their users hostage.
Times used to be better, before the stonerhead took over...
And there are some groups like the German fediverse that stipulate a really long and very specific list of rules and block any instance that doesn't take these over 100% verbatim, no discussion allowed. Also a good reason most of them are blocked. We've had this issue before at the progressive instance I was on.
But besides that most of them get along well. Mastodon is strong on bubble forming anyway but I personally like that. I hate seeing a post from a trans friend on e.g. instagram and then see hundreds of Americans falling over themselves to spew trans hate. Even though the post had nothing to do with that. I think bubbles are necessary in today's online world because many people are just not worth talking to anymore.
Yeah guess what, I'm German LOL that's why I wrote this post
> Also a good reason most of them are blocked.
Well the problem is, it's still annoying from a user perspective - I don't care about the problems other instance admins have with the admins of my instance. And no, I don't want to maintain a dozen accounts just to make sure I can interact with everyone I want to.
> I hate seeing a post from a trans friend on e.g. instagram and then see hundreds of Americans falling over themselves to spew trans hate.
yeah the commercial social networks are just another level of shittiness, and frankly I wouldn't be surprised if a bunch of these "Americans" are just Russians in disguise.
Otherwise it wouldn't have been forced upon who begrudgingly got funding secured. Any of then-GAFA could have bought it and none wanted to touch it.
The bad moderation on those platforms, I think, is a desperate attempt to align platform cultures to the moderating entities' standards that are no longer comprehensible to users, if known at all, like a kid on a push car moving away from the park trying to steer it back.
It seemed fine until 2015 or so, streaming hundreds of novel tweets per second per user, many with novel images. Then things went downhill. Musk can't be the sole villain in it.
I wish we wouldn't mince words about this because that's really the long and short of it.
(The third option, of course, is to not use social networks run by Nazis as a basic matter of principle.)
There's a very narrow political line you have to maintain to stay on bluesky or mastodon and if you stray too far right or left on any single issue you get deplatformed
... so? Being linked to it is not an obligation to bother with it.
Seriously, we have a problem labeling anything not left “far right”. It is of course by design and has always been (who is not with us is against us). Not that right is any better, but at list they don’t label everyone across “antifa” or whatever.
That said, i do not endorse Musk, especially his infamous gesture.
The "left" spans such a huge range right now that to be "not left" is basically far right. A Republican opposing Trump is _extremely_ rare (and usually excommunicates them from the party) while on the left, you have AOC, Omar, etc actively sharing a party with Fetterman and Manchin. Right/far-right was a thing in the 2010's but not any more.
What is “far right”, btw? What are objective measurable criteria?
> The "left" spans such a huge range right now that to be "not left" is basically far right
Jesus Christ, you can’t be serious. But then again, I am not surprised that you are.
So maybe it is in the eye of the beholder? I certainly see far more labelling coming from the "left" side of the spectrum than from the "right" side although they're certainly catching up lately now that the communist zombie has risen from its grave again. On the "right" the general idea of the "left" seems to be that they're 'stupid', 'naive' and 'uninformed' while on the "left" the general idea of the "right" seems to be that they're 'evil', 'narrow-minded', 'racist' and '*-phobe'. Neither of these general ideas are true but that doesn't seem to bother anyone.
Yes. I mean not literally but this is a poli sci question and it has a fairly objective answer.
Both right-wing and left-wing thinkers tend to agree that core division is: belief in natural hierarchy. Though it's sometimes phrased slightly differently.
Do you believe that there are higher and lower grades of people? Do you believe that some people deserve more than others? You're right-wing. Do you take that to an extreme conclusion compared to even other people who believe such things? You're far-right.
Do you believe that all humans beings are equal? Do you believe that the grades of social differentiation that exist today are unjustified or do not reflect real differentiation in mankind? You're left-wing. Do you take that to the extreme conclusion compared to other people who believe such things? You're far-left.
That's the most neutral way I know to phrase it. It should be agreeable to most on both the left and right.
That is what these words mean. I know such a definition of left and right is not perfect but it's also the closest thing we have to a workable semantics.
What else do you need to agree that he is far right? Wear an SS outfit? Put some people in ovens?
Otherwise, yes, I think labeling any party which works within the legal bounds as “far” is dangerous. Because there are legit far groups which should not be permitted on both sides of the spectrum. And we better know what is legitimate and what not.
Iirc Weidel herself has made statements regarding how the society should always promote heteronormativity.
Pure comedy at this point, seriously, this is hilarious.
AfD wants to do mass deportations (because nothing bad ever happened when a party in Germany had the idea to mass deport people based on ethnicity). Their leader can be a lesbian and still have a platform that is pretty extremely to the right
https://edition.cnn.com/2026/09/07/europe/afd-first-place-sa...
> Otherwise, yes, I think labeling any party which works within the legal bounds as “far” is dangerous
Keep in mind that the NSDAP also operated within the legal boundaries.
Based on your asinine rationality, labeling the fucking nazis in early 1930s as far right would be "dangerous".
I am no expert but you might be correct - quick search shows they exploited legal loopholes, essentially hacked the system. I am afraid we haven’t learned much feom it as recent history shows.
That said, legal framework has thankfully changed since and in Europe there is the Europen Convention of Human Rights, plus the constitutional rights. That said, they are not failable, and are equally explotable by left and right, especially if the conditions are right, such as fear.
So ok, point taken, even those who operate within legal bounds today need to be watched closely - on all sides.
And yes I think being homosexual and far anything is pretty weird, as neither far left nor right would tolerate homosexuality IMO. Socialism proved that.
And btw, despite what historians tell, the NSDAP sold itself to the voters on the _left_ ideas. Fascism likewise. In fact, when blinded, some left thinkers have enforsed fascist ideas. Again, hilarious. But true.
Here are some points from fascist manifesto if you don’t believe me:
- Universal suffrage by regional list voting, with proportional representation, voting and eligibility for women.
- Minimum age for voters lowered to 18; minimum age for deputies lowered to 25.
- The prompt enactment of a state law enshrining the legal eight-hour workday for all jobs.
- Minimum wages.
- The participation of workers' representatives in the technical operation of industry.
- The entrusting to the proletarian organizations themselves (who are morally and technically worthy) of the management of public industries or services.
- The speedy and complete settlement of the railroad workers and all transportation industries.
- A necessary amendment of the Disability and Old Age Insurance Bill by lowering the age limit, currently proposed at 65, to 55.
It’s comical that an organisation endorsing and expanding these same ideas is called “antifa”. In fact, people today have no clue what fascism was, they just use it as label for whatever they disagree with, same as “far right”.
Those who don’t know history are indeed condemned to repeat it.
There's some likely made up charts online[1] for country stats of Twitter right now, and Twitter is allegedly 2.5x more popular than it is in the US in the top two countries, which are incidentally known for strong-ish purchasing power and near-nonexistent English literacy.
Musk's ongoing massive self humiliation is largely contained to the US/English speaking space. Other parts of the world with no strong cultural understandings and pathways from the US and its politics, which is quite substantial still, are fine, ish. Things like LLM auto translation haven't made a change to that situation; it only strengthened the reverse of that pathway.
1: https://soax.com/research/twitter-active-users
Name one
He is against mass immigration, especially from Islamic countries. That is a very mainstream view though. There is nothing 'far' about it.
Or as we say: It it sieg heils like a duck...
That kind of attempt to redefine what migration is, is classic manipulation of the narrative to try and appear more centrist.
Looks like it works pretty well too.
Migration levels are controlled by government and are generally based on the needs of the society being governed. I thought the rules had always been pretty strict on getting into most western countries.
In theory, not in practice. If they are "controlled by the government" then illegal immigrants should be deported. What is happening is that a lot of people come illegally, often against wishes of local population. That's why it's "mass".
Speaking of EU (as Musk is often criticized for expressing his views on EU countries): majority of people support some level of remigration. Vast majority supports stopping illegal migration. Big majority is against migration from Islamic countries. Instead we get all of it at mass scale against wishes of the people. Musk is with the majority here but against ruling elite. His view is well in the middle of what people in EU support.
I believe that this is a false narrative that's being pushed as vote attractant.
> Vast majority supports stopping illegal migration
Yeah, well, it's illegal, so even the establishment is against it. From the, admittedly minimal, sources I hear from it's way overblown by politicians and their supportive media outlets as an easy vote capturing exercise playing on basic human tribalism and fear.
Closing your eyes and ears and going NAAH NAAH NAAH I'M GOING TO PRETEND IT DOESNT EXIST is a wildly stupid way to approach things like twitter when they are still so influential.
I appreciate experimenting with "boycotting," but when the dust settles and the thing is still very much there, you have to engage with that fact.
I neither love nor hate the place; in fact -- yes -- today I dislike it more than I like it.
But again, my like or dislike doesn't matter. It exists and has influence. And for that reason, there are very moral reasons to engage with it even if you think it is evil.
What's the difference, considering X is riddled with silencing dark patterns?
So no, you "have to" do nothing of the sort. If something happens there that's worth reporting on, reputable journalists will write about it.
oh how I wish that were a thing that carried the weight it once did
You pretend to be for including women but repel 95% of normal women because you actually only want the weird ones.