I ll start : I have been following a pretty known tech/Linux journalist, and always found he is a fun dude to listen to, with interesting tech takes

The fact that he is also very openly “american conservative” (aka, religious & weapon nut, anti abortion, etc) annoys me, but i keep those things separate. And he does keep it separate too (politics channel vs tech channel), which is a great decision.

  • bionicjoey@lemmy.ca
    254·
    11 months ago

    I’ve been called a tanky, neolib, fascist, radfem, misogynist, racist, “woke”, republican, Democrat, religious nutjob, and militant athiest over my time on Reddit and I wouldn’t really agree with any of those descriptors lol. People just assume that if you have an even remotely nuanced opinion on a topic then you must belong to the “other side”. I don’t really care most of the time. I know what I believe and I don’t let it be defined by tribalism.

    • HubertManne@kbin.social
      61·
      11 months ago

      I feel for you here. I think of myself as left of center but it is funny how much one side or the other treats the center like the hardest core of the other end. Its funny because I way back when I had started at a catholic college where I seemed waaayyy left but then transfered to the state school where I seemed centerist or at best kinda left and if you compared me to the school population then right of center. I did find the liberal state school seemed to have more of self awareness that the environment was skewed left whereas the catholic institution viewed itself as more center.

    • weeeeum@lemmy.worldEnglish
      83·
      11 months ago

      Haha as well. I’ve been called chauvinist, fascist and other words associated with the super far right, even though I’m center left on the compass. It’s impressive how utterly extinct nuance is in social media and traditional news.

    • phillaholic@lemm.ee
      74·
      11 months ago

      That’s a wide spectrum of associations. Have you ever considered you may be bad at articulating your views?

      • bionicjoey@lemmy.ca
        3·
        11 months ago

        More like interactions would play out thusly:

        Them: All X is Y

        Me: hmm, it may not be helpful to paint with such a broad brush. Sometimes X isn’t Y. (Gives example)

        Them: wow, sounds like something a (insert opposing tribe here) would say.

        Basically, this

        • phillaholic@lemm.ee
          42·
          11 months ago

          Using that as an example, if you spend a lot of most of your time let’s say defending little details about bad people it can come off as someone muddying the waters on purpose to downplay the awful things they do.

          Or maybe your just on some shitty subs full of dumb people 🤷‍♂️

          • bionicjoey@lemmy.ca
            2·
            11 months ago

            You’re assuming I spend my time defending bad people, which I don’t do. I just use critical thinking and point out logical fallacies. I believe fallacies are always bad, even if they support a position I agree with.

            • phillaholic@lemm.ee
              11·
              11 months ago

              That’s exactly what I’m talking about. If a lot of your comments are pointing out logical fallacies against bad people then it looks like you’re muddying the waters. For example pointing out logic fallacies in arguments against conservatives but not doing the same against liberals wouldn’t make you wrong outright, but you’d be wrong by omission.