this post was submitted on 30 Dec 2025
26 points (76.0% liked)

No Stupid Questions

45186 readers
563 users here now

No such thing. Ask away!

!nostupidquestions is a community dedicated to being helpful and answering each others' questions on various topics.

The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:

Rules (interactive)


Rule 1- All posts must be legitimate questions. All post titles must include a question.

All posts must be legitimate questions, and all post titles must include a question. Questions that are joke or trolling questions, memes, song lyrics as title, etc. are not allowed here. See Rule 6 for all exceptions.



Rule 2- Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material.

Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material. You will be warned first, banned second.



Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.

Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.



Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.

That's it.



Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.

Questions which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.



Rule 6- Regarding META posts and joke questions.

Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-question posts using the [META] tag on your post title.

On fridays, you are allowed to post meme and troll questions, on the condition that it's in text format only, and conforms with our other rules. These posts MUST include the [NSQ Friday] tag in their title.

If you post a serious question on friday and are looking only for legitimate answers, then please include the [Serious] tag on your post. Irrelevant replies will then be removed by moderators.



Rule 7- You can't intentionally annoy, mock, or harass other members.

If you intentionally annoy, mock, harass, or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.

Likewise, if you are a member, sympathiser or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people, and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.



Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.



Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.

Let everyone have their own content.



Rule 10- Majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here. This includes using AI responses and summaries.



Credits

Our breathtaking icon was bestowed upon us by @Cevilia!

The greatest banner of all time: by @TheOneWithTheHair!

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Aequitas@feddit.org 26 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Left and right are misleading terms that originate from the seating arrangement in the French National Assembly. Roughly speaking, left and right can be distinguished by the fact that those on the right approve of social hierarchies and want to maintain them, while those on the left want to abolish them. A supposed middle position would be “only some hierarchies are good.” But that is also just a right-wing position.

That is why there is no “middle ground” in anarchism. Either you want a system in which everyone benefits equally, or one with a clear capitalist hierarchy. Either everyone has one vote, or the weight of the vote depends on wealth. Either we consider the freedom of all to be important, or only that of those who have enough capital. Either no one is dominated, or only those who have to sell their labor.

There is only either/or here. Those who do not consider all people to be of equal value consider some to be more valuable. This is not a spectrum; rather, the difference lies in very fundamental normative decisions.

[–] AfterNova@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (2 children)

Are human social groups inherantly hierarchical?

[–] Nemo@slrpnk.net 7 points 1 week ago (2 children)

There's a natural tendency towards heirarchies, but "natural" doesn't mean "necessary" and it definitely doesn't mean "desirable". To create and maintain a better world takes work, and part of that is dismantling "natural", but harmful, heirarchies (eg. the physically strong dominating the physically weak).

[–] AfterNova@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (2 children)

If humans are hardwired to create hierarchies and seek status would a complete lack of hierarchy be possible on a large scale?

[–] Aequitas@feddit.org 8 points 1 week ago (1 children)

This is surely how they argued in the Middle Ages when it came to justifying the different estates.

I don't believe that hierarchies are something inherently human. You don't seek out hierarchies in your normal environment. Very few people do. And those who do are usually not very popular. You don't want to subordinate yourself or dominate others. We are all only human, after all. It's just that we live in a society that is hierarchical, and therefore it seems normal to us. In fact, however, this order can and is only maintained through violence. That cannot be natural.

[–] AfterNova@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago (11 children)

So are you saying humans don't seek social status?

[–] TheMinister@sh.itjust.works 1 points 4 days ago

I wouldn’t argue that social status = hierarchy. What is social status? Respect, mainly. Dignity. Everyone wants those things, but they can be given to everyone. When someone wants more than that, hey are a problem, not the natural order taking over.

load more comments (10 replies)
[–] Nemo@slrpnk.net 7 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Some heirarchies (my personal opinion now) are both natural and desirable: parent and child, teacher and student.

Many are harmful, and should be removed, no matter how "natural".

I wouldn't say "hardwired to create heirarchies" so much as there's a tendency, in any case.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Aequitas@feddit.org 5 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (4 children)

Some groups are hierarchical and others are not. My group of friends, for example, is not hierarchical. My partnership is not hierarchical either. So human social groups cannot be described as inherently hierarchical. Perhaps it is necessary to entrust people with tasks. But temporary, democratic delegation of responsibility is something different from social hierarchy. For example in cooperatives there is usually an elected chairperson. Nevertheless, most cooperatives are not hierarchical.

This applies to economic hierarchies such as those between the working class and the owner class, but also to social hierarchies, for example through patriarchy, racism, and other forms of discrimination. If you believe that hierarchy between people is natural and therefore worth stabilizing, for example, that men should call the shots in relationships and in society, or that it is right for the majority of society to work, while a small minority does not work but becomes rich from the labor of the majority, you are advocating a right-wing view of society.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] A_norny_mousse@feddit.org 19 points 1 week ago (1 children)
[–] determinist@kbin.earth 9 points 1 week ago (2 children)

excuse me. the People's Front of Judea.

[–] Limerance@piefed.social 2 points 3 days ago

The popular front of course!

[–] BlameThePeacock@lemmy.ca 15 points 1 week ago (2 children)

There's no such thing as the middle. It's not a spectrum.

Sometimes things are actually just distinct beliefs.

You can't be in between Christianity and Hindu for example. They aren't attached to each other, they are distinct.

[–] AfterNova@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (8 children)
[–] dusty_raven@discuss.online 8 points 1 week ago (1 children)
[–] AfterNova@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Different ngos would compete for a govenment funding contract.

[–] dusty_raven@discuss.online 1 points 1 week ago

If sugar is on the left, and salt is on the right, what would be in the center?

[–] Fedizen@lemmy.world 3 points 1 week ago (4 children)

What would it be a spectrum of? Either you think society needs to be ruled by elites (right wing) or you think society should run itself based on universal rights (left wing).

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] dreadbeef@lemmy.dbzer0.com 9 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (13 children)

"genuine" anarcho capitalists (who arent grifting or trying or are otherwise not just interested in new political concepts like anarchism) dont know what they believe in and no one really helps them out because its easier to make fun of them (valid, but making fun of something isnt how you fix things). They are in a transitionary phase between liberalism, fascism, and socialism. They started from one of those places, are becoming dissillusioned to it, and are opening up to ideas of the other two.

Now you know how to talk to an anarcho capitalist and sway them to your side. Find out where they are coming from, and appeal to whichever side you want them to go to (or back if you want them to see the err in their ways). This also works in favor of fascism btw so if you dont help the anarcho capitalists, they will, and they are.

load more comments (13 replies)
[–] AmidFuror@fedia.io 9 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I've read enough political posts on Lemmy to know that the correct term for the people in the middle is "Nazi sympathizers."

Does that tell you where the strongest voices on Lemmy fall?

The other answer is "the left / right spectrum is false." The actual spectrum is "right / wrong," and the writer's beliefs are always on the former side.

[–] TubularTittyFrog@lemmy.world 4 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

Amen. Any political post I make, even like citing basic facts of government and law... often results in multiple screams of nazi and maybe one reply that is legit.

Extremists don't like facts. Just the other gay some guy was arguing me and he defaulted to 'everything is propaganda, therefore anything you say is propaganda'. And well, he got me. Because apparently in his world me taking a dump is a form of political pro-capitalist propaganda.

[–] AmidFuror@fedia.io 3 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Oh, definitely. The far left never did anything wrong. They only want unicorns and rainbows. All the states that turned authoritarian to preserve their revolution of the workers are actually just far right fascists. If you want to make a dollar or increase your home's appeal and attraction, you're a stooge of Big Somebody.

[–] TubularTittyFrog@lemmy.world 4 points 1 week ago (2 children)

had someone yesterday comment multiple times at me how financing my car was endorsing fascism.

[–] AmidFuror@fedia.io 3 points 1 week ago (1 children)

You don't walk or ride a bike everywhere? Literal Nazi.

[–] TubularTittyFrog@lemmy.world 3 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Then if you point out the implicist ableism in that... well you're a woke nazi...

[–] Spaniard@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

It's difficult for some to understand the world is not black and white. I am an anarchist I always have to start saying: "I am an anarchist but I understand the world I am in and the things I have to do to survive they doesn't mean I can't spread the word" and the last word goes hard because I am a anarchocristian.

You can't talk with "black and white world people". All you can do is reply in hopes those who read don't fall into the "black and white world hole".

I would like to not own a car, to not have to spend half my life working for a company that pollutes the world and to no need money. I don't live in that world but I can try to put a small stone in building that world even though I won't see it because we are not ready for it.

That being said I hate this world where the State is God and its getting worse but as the saying goes: "the night is darker before dawn"

[–] Nemo@slrpnk.net 9 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Of those two? Christian Democrats, I guess. But there are ideologies far to the right of anarchocapitalists (eg. neomonarchists) and far to the left of libertarian socialists (eg. communists), and anyway political ideologies don't map well to a single- or even dual-axis graph. You need axes for economic model, rights vs. authority, and stability vs. innovation at a minimum.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] matte@feddit.nu 6 points 1 week ago

Ideologies such as social liberalism and democratic socialism are often regarded as in between extreme left and extreme right positions. There are many other positions of course such as centre-right and various "green" and religiously motivated positions. They could also often fit somewhere in between on a conventional right-left spectrum. This of course varies a lot between countries and political systems.

[–] CannedYeet@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago
load more comments
view more: next ›