I really don’t argue in bad faith for starters.

You as an individual human being maybe don't. But online, that's irrelevant. People don't see you as a human individual, for better or worse, people see you as part of a group/community. And by most people on lemmy, the community on this server is seen as rude and unpleasant.

And not only "the left" places individuals into groups, everyone does that.. You do it in this post when you say "They argue in bad faith, they are rude and generally unpleasant.".

the left and the right operate in two completely different paradigms. That is why communication is next to impossible.

It is possible when people actually try, but in order to reach a point where people want to try to understand the other side, you need a tiny portion of faith that the other side is willing to engage in good faith and make a step towards the other side to signal that they are actually interested in good faith.

One big reason (from the leftist perspective) why many online leftists have completely abandoned any hope to engage in good faith with right wingers is because online right wingers seem to go out of their way to be obnoxious, provocative, unapologetic, uncompromising and disrespectful in every possible way towards "the left" and seem to have the main objective to "trigger the left". And even when they themselves don't engage in this way, they tend to protect and defend those actions. At the same time, they also claim that "the left does not want a good faith argument" or "we just want rational debate" or "we just exercising our free speech".

As a leftie who has tried to engage in good faith with right wingers online in various forums, I have experienced a lot of hypocricy where people will say "this is a free speech zone, all views are welcome", but after a while, the admin would just have some bullshit excuse to ban me for simply voicing my opinion.

But as I mentioned, there are many reasons, it's not just all "the right's fault". Online people of all sides, instead of arguing and discussing with people they disagree with, tend to just kinda argue with themselves by essentially imagining the position of the opponents and then arguing against them.

The obvious problem with that is that due to the lack of interaction and the obvious bias, the view that one side has of the other does not represent reality or at least differs a lot from the view one side has of itself.

As a leftist, I appreciate the good faith effort, but as you probably expect, I don't agree with your interpretation.

So to me, the first issue is that "the left" does not have a universal worldview. You have people on the left who have a very materialist view and generally reject concepts like good and evil, you have idealists who focus on autonomy/personal freedom and you have moralists who have more religious and moralist roots and more connected to the idea of "protecting the weak". The last group is probably the group that comes closest to your interpretation. I personally fit more into the second and first group, but obviously at the end of the day, I can only speak for myself.

I would also make a distinction between liberals and the left. Liberals have adopted leftist talking points where they think it helps them, but they don't really believe in them.

Undeserved suffering is evil. Undeserved suffering is the only evil there is.

Here I already completely disagree. Suffering isn't evil, suffering isn't even bad, suffering is an fundamental part of the human condition, arguably a fundamental part of life itself, it's kinda beyond being strictly good and evil. A human who has never suffered is unimaginable, a world without suffering sounds like a distopia to me.

Deserved suffering is fine, so you can torture Nazis - they deserve it.

99% of leftists are against torturing anyone, not because it causes suffering, but because it violates people's autonomy. Many leftists tolerate violence against fascists/nazis, but they see it as self-defense.

Since undeserved suffering is the ultimate evil and the only evil there is, we must rearrange government and society to eliminate all unwanted suffering.

If you replace "suffering" with "oppression", you get closer to the real picture. So again, this does not apply to all leftists, but many leftists are focused on "oppression" (which is essentially restricting people's autonomy/personal freedom).

Abortion is seen as a heroic act

Abortion is not seen as a heroic act, it's seen as a morally grey/complicated act, which is why most leftists want this complicated choice to be made by the person most directly affected by the moral dilemma instead of having the state forcing it's morality onto people by force..

Even if it is murder they don't care.

Abortion is seen as different from murder because a fetus is not considered to be an independent person. A human fetus is indeed human, it is indeed alive, but a person only becomes a person once it is born and is able to exist as a seperate entity. That's why we celebrate birthday's as the start of a person's life, that's why we have a birth certificate to document a person's life and give them a name. It's impossible for a fetus to be removed from it's mother without dying, which means a fetus cannot posess any form of autonomy, so in function, it is part of the mother's body.

This doesn't mean that abortion is morally clear or unproblematic, but leftists do believe that the state should not make that decision for the mother.

They will deny this, but the rampant nihilism on the left all but proves my point.

Nihilists do exist and they do indeed tend to be lefists. But nihilism doesn't argue that "existance is evil", nihilism rejects labels such as "good, evil, rightous, ..." and in a radical form rejects a "higher purpose/higher meaning" in a religious and/or spirital sense. So no, the left or even leftist nihilists don't believe that existence is evil.

Need a carbon tax to save the planet but it will kill a billion people?

This argument does not seem to be written in good faith. People who support a carbon tax don't do so "to save the planet" and they certainly don't do so to "kill a billion people".. Also, carbon tax is not a leftist idea, it's is supported by a wide part of the population accross the political spectrum. 73 of all Americans support a carbon tax, this includes more than half of Republicans.

https://www.pewresearch.org/science/ps_20-06-11_climate_featured/

And the idea behind carbon tax is a pretty moderate one, it has nothing to do with "saving the planet", it's about who pays the cost that is generated by emissing carbon. Without a carbon tax, the cost is covered by everyone, irregardless who produced the carbon emissions. This means that even if you don't produce a lot of carbon, you have to cover the cost.

Most people think this is obviously unfair and believe that the cost generated by carbon emissions should be paid proportionally by those who created the carbon emissions and generated the cost in the first place.

Just imagine you are going out to eat with a couple of people. You just take a water and a salad, most just take an average meal and some just take the most expensive meal on the menu. Do you believe it's fair if the bill is split by everyone equally so that everyone pays the same? Most would say no because it means that those who ordered cheap food have to pay more than they ordered and the people who ordered expensive food have to pay less than they ordered.

I'm not saying carbon taxes are the solution for everything or that they could not have negative impacts, especially depending on how it is put into practice, but implying that "people who support carbon taxes" do so because they think people existing is bad and they want to murder everyone does not seem at all like an attempt to make a good faith argument..

Nope, I'm still here.

They argue in bad faith, they are rude and generally unpleasant.

I'm sure they say the exact same thing about you. After all, about 80% of the posts on this server are about how "stupid and dumb everyone on the left is" and seem to have the only purpose of "triggering lefties", so most of the "pleasant" lefties don't think it's worthwhile to engage in good faith, which means it's mostly trolls who visit..

Fucking young people today, they just don't want to work, that's why we can't find any employees /s

Fuck Suckerberg, his motivations are clear.

I do not think there are real murder fantasies going on here at all

You have upvoted posts where the top comment is "trannyfags should be lined up and shot.".. This is public content, so I'm not sure why you want to deny that stuff like that is going on here and is obviously tolerated..

but the goal has never been nor will it ever be to impose anything on anyone.

I don't know what your opinion is, but there are definitely people here who apparently want death for trans people, or drag queens, or homosexuals, or leftists..

there have actually been isntances where comments have been removed solely because the N-word was used.

I don't think the usage of the N-word is what concerns people most..

Not a troll, but I am a lefty.

Breast feeding is biologically possible for trans women, there is medication that allows women to produce milk without having been pregnant (not just for trans women, but also biological women who adopted a child, for example). So this is not necessarily a "performative" or "kink" thing, there could be a practical reason for this in the same way that there is a practical reason for biological women to breastfeed their child.

Having said that, it is in my opinion questionable and controversial. The main focus should imo be on the health and safety of the child, not the parent. As far as I know, there are some potential risk involved with the medicine which makes the whole thing questionable to me, but this applies both when it's used by biological women and trans women.

The main issue that leftists have with posts like this is that they seem to imply that trans women are not able to produce milk and are thus not able to breastfeed, which is misleading. And even if it turned out that this trans-person did it for sexual reasons (which would obviously be bad), it does not mean that all trans people are pedophiles or child molesters or even that all trans people breastfeed children.. They are people at the end of the day and like all people, they are not a hivemind, not all of them are evil and not all of them are angels..

I mostly lurk to stay up to date on what the right leaning people are up to. Occasionally I will provide my personal views on things.

And yes, when I see opinions such as "trannyfags should be lined up and shot, no matter the context.." I will shit on their opinions because their opinion is, as far as I'm concerned, shit..

And if you have a problem with that opinion of mine then go ahead and and shit on my opinion, after all, is that not your right? Surely you don't want to tell me how I'm allowed to voice my opinions.

Do people even know what "brigading" means anymore? People downvoting and commenting in disagreement are not necessarily brigading. Trolls going to a community they disagree with to troll are not necessarily brigaders.

Brigading is the organised, planned and coordinated effort of a group of people mass downvoting and spamming a community at the same time. 4Chan used to do it to reddit all the time. Subs used to do it to other subs where they made posts linking to other posts with the instruction of downvoting them or spamming them.

I don't think that's happening here.. Most people on lemmy want nothing to do with you guys, that's why you got defederated. It's just what happens when you leave your little save spaces and go to a medium where most don't share your views, ideas and actions..

Well again, most in the current userbase would argue otherwise..

Also, don't you think it's a little bit ironic? You are upset that this server is getting defederated, but at the same time you call the current userbase "retarded"? Why do you want to federate with people you call retarded in the first place? And why are you surprised that people don't want to federate with people who casually call them retarded?

Maybe you are 14 years old (either physically or mentally) and calling people retarded is normal to you, but most adults are kinda over that phase.

As another user has pointed out right now lemmy is full of reddit refugees. Reddit already purged all right wing people.

Most right wingers were purged, that's true. My point still stands. Most people on Lemmy right now support heavy moderation. Maybe this changes in the future, idk, but you shouldn't delude yourselfs into thinking that half the user base supports you.

A huge portion of the world

Yes, a huge portion of the world.. Social media overall, and lemmy especially, do not represent "the world". They represent a specific subsection in the western world who tend to lean left overall.

A huge portion of the world is still Christian or muslim whether you like it or not and have conservative values.

Right but they are not on lemmy..

It’s insane to think lemmy’s views are mainstream at all.

It would indeed be insane to think lemmy's views are mainstream.

But once again, my point still stands. Your views on homosexuality and other social issues are not mainstream anymore IN THE WESTERN WORLD. Even in the US, 75% of people think the LGBT community should be accepted. 15 years ago, it was a different picture, but those days are gone and the trend we are heading towards is pretty clear.

And just to be clear, I support you guys expressing your views on here. That's why I made an account a couple of months ago in the hopes of being able to be confronted with right wing views from time to time.

If Lemmy is alienating half the population from the get-go

You're not half the population, not even close.. The vast majority on lemmy supports heavy moderation.

The decision to block or defederate should be done at the user level and not at the site level.

It's pretty funny to me, when it comes to social media, conservatives seem to turn into communists. There actually are instances that are community funded and run collectively.

But when it comes to most servers, they are rented by individuals, set up in their spare time and on financed by their own money. Those individuals pay for that server, they are running their server and they can do with it whatever they want. How can you demand to choose what somebody does with their own server when you are not the one paying for it?

Things I’m interested in like Godot or Retrogaming have WAY MORE users on Reddit still

Every community has way more users on reddit than on lemmy.. Lemmy is so much smaller and younger than reddit.

Oh and by the way, lemmy was literally developed by radical commies.. Why do you expect it to have a significant right wing userbase?