Why do we say, "when I look in the mirror" instead of "when I look in a mirror?"
Kabe @ kabe @lemmy.world Posts 2Comments 143Joined 2 yr. ago
Kabe @ kabe @lemmy.world
Posts
2
Comments
143
Joined
2 yr. ago
A fair guess, but this isn't one of those times when a grammatical error becomes normalized through common usage.
There is no grammar rule that separates speaking literally versus metaphorically in this case.
"You have something on your face; go take a look in the mirror" is just as grammatically correct in English as "You need to take a good look in the mirror and change your ways."
I've explained why this is standard usage in English in my comment here.
English teacher here. Articles in English can be really confusing but essentially we use the definite article in this situation because:
- Uniqueness: In most situations, there's only one mirror in a room or a home that's readily available for someone to look into.
- Generality: Similar to "going to the bathroom," "look in the mirror" refers to the general act of using a mirror to see oneself, not interacting with any specific mirror.
Interesting. Do you know if it works with an existing LUKS-encrypted installation?
I understand very well what liberalism and socialism are, thanks. Where we disagree is the definition of the "left" versus the "right". Even in Europe, the old socialist left is becoming a thing of a bygone age, so of course the Overton window shifts to reflect the current political landscape.
Hang on, so you're telling me you guys lump social liberals in with classical liberals and neoliberals? That's definitely not common, but then I suppose if you're a communist then it kinda makes sense.
Also, while I wouldn't call Sanders a socialist either, he is not a centrist by any standard measure. I presume you don't consider anyone a leftist if they don't advocate for collective ownership and a centrally planned economy?
Dolce et Decorum est - Wilfred Owen. A grim, anti-war masterpiece written by a soldier fighting in the trenches in WW1
Ozymandias - Percy Shelley. A reminder of human transience and hubris
Do Not Go Gentle into That Good Night - Dylan Thomas. Helps me to endure when things seem bleak or hopeless.
ML people often tend not to apply 'liberal' correctly either, so it goes both ways.
If you ask in earnest, you’ll get good responses. A good number of people ask questions not to learn a different point of view, but to reinforce their own existing biases, which naturally becomes exhausting.
That is understandable, however I was more talking about good-faith attempts to express views that are contrary to ML orthodoxy being dogpiled, removed, and banned. I have personal direct experience with this, as do many others who have attempted to engage in political discussions in ML communities. Perhaps users of the ML persuasion are used to being attacked and this why contrarian views are so heavily moderated on ML instances, but quite often this defensive response only leads to alienating other leftists who could be sympathetic to your point of view.
Also, I already understand quite well the differences between classical, social, and neo-liberalism, and how the term is used in the US; I have a degree in political science. My point was that users on ML instances weaponize the term in the same way that other users utilize the term "tankie" in order to dismiss people who disagree with them, ad hominem.
Oh, I agree - calling people Tankies/Liberals/Dronies, especially ad hominem, is reductive and generally unhelpful.
Not so. There are many progressives who stand with Marxists on issues like social justice, LGBTQ issues, and Palestine but who do not feel welcome on instances like Hexbear because they also criticize the CCP.
now it just means, "any leftist I don't like".
With respect, there's a bit more to it than that.
The way political discussions are often policed on ML instances (This one, Lemmygrad, and Hexbear) is not conducive to helping new people see your point of view. If a, let's say, social democrat says something critical of the CCP and then is immediately censured or banned, they are going to be left with a very negative impression that feeds into the stereotypes that already exist about these instances.
Creating a useful enemy promotes group bonding, unity, a sense of strengthened identity, and self worth.
Aren't people on ML instances also doing the exact same thing when they shout down and decry the wretched "liberals" (which seems to refer to anyone left-of-centre who doesn't support communist party rule)? Whether it's "tankie" or "liberal", it only further entrenches the us vs them mindset.
It's a shame that leftist infighting exists to such a degree when we often share about 95% of the same views, compared to the general public.
First impressions to new users is an important factor, I agree, but is Lemmy really "full of extremist political content"?
Scrolling through the first 4 pages of Lemmy World today, I see no extremist content at all. All of the political posts are standard liberal/left-of-centre talking points and the only things related to .ml content are three posts complaining about tankies, off the back of the original post that made a splash yesterday.
I can't see anything that would be putting potential newcomers off in droves.
True, but I would argue that American Chinese food is a distinct cuisine in its own right, just as Anglo-Indian is.
If the argument is that the British Empire didn't incorporate seasonings and spices into its own traditional cuisine, then I'd argue that none of the European powers did. French cuisine is still undeniably French and spice-less, despite their colonialist history in Africa and the Caribbean.
Absolutely agree, which is why I would advocate against defederation. It's better to let users organically migrate away from problematic moderation than for the LW admins to preemptively make the decision on everyone's behalf.
Lemmy is still a relatively small community, and too much defederation is only going to be detrimental to its overall health.
I appreciate the effort you've put in here, but still I do not see grounds for defederation. You've just given me three examples from a single community that is obviously political.
Look, the question isn't "are there communities on lemmy.ml that are ideologically censored", because of course there are; the question I am putting to you is "is the average user going about their business and not actively engaging in politically-oriented communities affected enough to warrant the largest Lemmy instance completely defederating?" I would still say no, personally.
I've seen it in the obvious communities like worldnews@lemmy.ml, sure. But in non-political ones? Not once.
See, now that's a much more positive approach. Users making informed decisions and organically migrating is much more in keeping with the Fediverse spirit than admins wielding the defederation hammer, IMO.
Yes I have, which is why I'm asking. While I agree that the admin response was totally out of all proportion, this is not evidence of either of the things you previously claimed.
If you're going to justify defederation based on non-political communities being policed and injected with propaganda, you need to provide some concrete examples of that happening.
To what extent is this actually an issue? What examples do you have so far?
Nope, as I explained in my other comment, it's standard usage.
In English, we often use the definite article when speaking in general about a specific activity or action that involves a non-specific object. E.g. "go to the bathroom" or "catch the bus", or "read the newspaper". It's not poor form at all.