this post was submitted on 19 Feb 2026
228 points (91.6% liked)
Fediverse
40354 readers
1286 users here now
A community to talk about the Fediverse and all it's related services using ActivityPub (Mastodon, Lemmy, Mbin, etc).
If you wanted to get help with moderating your own community then head over to !moderators@lemmy.world!
Rules
- Posts must be on topic.
- Be respectful of others.
- Cite the sources used for graphs and other statistics.
- Follow the general Lemmy.world rules.
Learn more at these websites: Join The Fediverse Wiki, Fediverse.info, Wikipedia Page, The Federation Info (Stats), FediDB (Stats), Sub Rehab (Reddit Migration)
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Before Lemmy, I didn't know it was possible to go so left that you hated liberals.
Corporate media didn’t want you to be exposed to any ideas outside of the Overton window.
Sometimes the further left extremes I've heard hear are indistinguishable from conservative Q-Anon. I legitimately need to check users post histories to understand which extreme they are on
Examples?
The comment I replied to vs. this from QAnon page on Wikipedia.
Only difference is that your side is "right"
You are reducing both sides to an extreme and extracting a single quote from both of them - "corporate media is lying to you to protect politicians preying on children" . You understand that one side is right and the other isn't - where do you think the difference appears? Certainly not at the extreme surface level of a single quote you are picking.
All sides in WW2 were killing people, I literally can't tell the difference!
The statement is that far left makes similarly culty statements like "X entity is hiding evidence that supports our views from the general public". It's the "everyone except us lies" part of the culty belief. My statement is that both far left and far right have fringe beliefs that are culty or close to it.
Again, only because you are picking a very reductive surface level quote.
"People are lying to you, believe us" isn't culty. You are also twisting words, because "we alone tell you the truth" is not part of the discourse you are comparing to QAnon.
Sure. But I'm not going to write an essay to back my position right now with numerous examples.
I respect many of the far lefts beliefs like economic policy, pressure against the right wing, social policies supporting poor. I don't respect the extreme distrust of media, violent retoric (when I see it), ideological purism, because it comes off as culty
Should note that I see less violent retoric from the far left than the far right, hence "when I see it"
Billionaires/ruling classes owning the media for manufacturing consent is not a new idea, and even then, leftists/QAnon people have very different views on it anyway. Leftists don't believe there is some secret cabal, the ruling class is very blatant. Right wingers believe in some deep state or the rothschilds, who are a jewish family, "control the narrative", they don't care about class struggle. This comparison makes very little sense.
Also-
I'm not seeing the relations to "left extremes" here at all. The horseshoe theory is a ridiculous, centrist concept. @davel@lemmy.ml 's comment has some good links.
I don't believe the horseshoe theory. Far left and far right have a number of stark differences such as religion, economic policy, etc. I just believe that both sides are fringe cult-like environments, particularly when it comes to isolating yourselves and ideology control. Occasionally, I see other similarities.
Imo, far left isn't clearly closer to the far right in most beliefs, except cult-like behavior
Can you explain "cult-like behavior?"
"cult like behaviour"
This doesn't make sense beyond the most cursory vibes based consideration.
lmao, you're the perfect centrist. By your standard, "the Holocaust happened" and "white genocide in South Africa happened" are both equally valid statements. Do you see how ridiculous it is to just group statements by superficial similarity and treat them as equivalent regardless of the substance of the claims or the evidence?
I never said those were equal statements
I said "equivalent" and "equally valid", if you're going to make an argument based on the exact word used you should at least get it right.
I literally quoted this sentence where you stated that they were equivalent in my previous reply.