domain:weirditaly.com
faceh
1d ago
Very manly, yes, but not very helpful unless you're sure A is an abject coward.
I am DEAD CERTAIN that A is a coward in this case.
If they don't want to kill or die over words then they can simply recant. Most people do not want to kill or die over words.
Of course, we can make the duel less than lethal if needed.
plural
1d ago
I'd be hard pressed to think that any people who regularly post in dedicated political spaces aren't engaged in pure conflict theory especially when its a place like Reddit which is naturally and unnaturally designed to hide all pushback (mods controlling topics, downvotes hiding the wrong opinions). This is a culture war, and they believe their way of life is at stake at the very least. Of course they lie, that would be my default assumption given the low-quality and high incentives of most places that discuss politics. To me this is just a day that ends in y comment.
I mean Reddit is going to be more politically slanted than anything on /pol/ just because what they want the narrative to be is controlled by upvotes, downvotes, bots, and mods. And on 4chan mods or janitors might fuck with things or try to but pretty much half the posts in /pol/ at any given time are people trolling because its designed to be unpreventable and when they do try to prevent discussion of a topic it goes poorly (gamergate). Reddit just chugs along, lets get every single subreddit to ban twitter - done. No problem even if the majority of users didn't care or want that, just chugs along.
At this point continuing to concern yourself with that is just outrage masturbation. You linked to politics, politics, unfiltered news, and bluesky skeets. Politics I know is the most left leaning place I can possibly imagine and the others are probably worse. Pointing out moments when /r/politics lies for their own narrative is like shooting fish in a barrel overfilled with fish. Even the most reddit-pilled reddit user will shrug off the denizens of /r/politics with being arguments-as-soldiers liars as par for the course. And I'm sure those other subreddits hold about as much political water for being balanced as the_donald or kotakuinaction does.
I do think there's something to be said about Reddit only holding stigma with enemies of it. A "normie" will not really care if you said you read something on Reddit, but if you said the same thing and gave the same information and said you got it from 4chan or Twitter you'd be a racist, even if only slightly, and if you said it was from Facebook you'd be doling out misinformation or at the least boomer-tier out-of-touchness. Reddit might be, at a glance, easily seen as dominated and controlled by the left but it doesn't carry a stigma which I imagine is exceedingly useful in wagging the dog which I expect is the intention with conflict theory throwing-shit-at-the-wall-and-hoping-it-sticks way tallying of evil to preemptively win or bury an argument.
I do think this is why Elon is more hated than Trump in my opinion because he stole Twitter from the left which was used in the exact same way that Reddit is used. Stigma-free narrative control. Bluesky doesn't have that, even if Twitter/X is now racist, Bluesky is not just what normal people think about a subject in the way that twitter was presented before the buyout or Reddit is bundled and sold as now. (Reddit does have to be bundled but the bundling does work).
Anyways. Ever since I stopped going to Reddit because I was tired with the political discussions filling every single subreddit, regardless of what the content was supposed to be, I've been much better off and I think you should probably try to ignore it, too.
ABigGuy4U
1d ago
All it takes is for a populist upstart to sweep the 2028 Dem primary by steamrolling the wokescolds and pro-Israel donors.
That’s the whole problem though, Democrat Party bylaws and primary structure make it much more resistant to any kind of populist takeover. The leadership can jam the throttle and point the plane right at a mountain and there’s not much the rank and file can do to stop them.
I happen to know better - that even if he could be taken to trial, which already might not be possible, Joe would not be convicted under current jurisprudence and laws of the land. But on the other hand, I do believe that Joe earnestly tried to subvert and destroy the country. An act that under the colloquial definition of treason, as well as the historical definition of treason accepted by many societies, would clearly qualify. Undoubtedly countless fair and just executions have been carried out throughout history for offenses far less than what Joe has done.
I'm assuming the average boomer has no idea how the legal system works, or how treason is defined under United States law, or how current jurisprudence interprets that law. I'm sure the average boomer sees Joe's actions as treasonous and assumes that the law would agree.
Interestingly, trying to overthrow or destroy the United States doesn't actually count as treason under the law.
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
1d ago
What about their opinion on the Israel situation do you find baffling in particular?
JarJarJedi
1d ago
They are not direct ancestors maybe, but close relatives. Cousins or something like that. The totalitarian mindset is the same, the world model is the same - there's a group of people which is the reason of every evil and must be suppressed by all means necessary. It's true that for the modern Left the inclusion of the Jews into this group is consequential to them being so close to foundations of the Western civilization (which is the real target) that it's impossible to not include them, while for Nazis the Jews were pretty much the sole focus. But looking beyond those surface differences, the ideological skeleton behind it is surprisingly similar. And I don't think this is a coincidence.
phailyoor
1d ago
Sure, most "normie" democrats don't directly want you dead. They don't really think about it that way. But somehow they always vote for people who want you dead and say so on national television. And they wouldn't be caught dead voting for anyone who doesn't want you dead.
phailyoor
1d ago
You act as though there are tens of thousands of people out there who the police know committed crimes but who aren't being arrested for political reasons.
Absolutely there are
I will grant that a lot of people who were arrested for more minor crimes like failure to disperse had the charges dropped without incident.
re-arrest every single one of them on new charges and throw the book at them. Get a warrant and crawl through every device and account they they have, and search all their belongings for any antifa-related items.
J6ers got felonies simply for walking through an open door.
But the people who caused damage and were caught generally were prosecuted.
Who?
Iconochasm
2. Bootstrap the rest of the fucking omnipotence.
1d ago
Nah, Trump has his true believers, but he catches shit from the right all the time. If he talked about killing Kamala's husband's kids, there would be a large blowback, and it would be a national media firestorm for a week.
The Michael Scott line he actually probably could get away with, because he would tell it as an actual joke, not the "haha only serious I fucking hatehatehate that fucker" "joke" which is the actual genesis of that line that was old long before Michael Scott said it.
Also, I hate The Office and I'm very glad that it seems to be mostly fading as a cultural touchstone. It was the worst of the NBC big sitcoms by a huge margin.
DirtyWaterHotDog
1d ago
I'm speaking of young men aged 18-35. My opinions are colored by personal anecdotes from deep-blue cities.
I haven't met a non-communist straight man who has 'volunteered for the democrats' or 'worked on the campaign'. On the other hand, I know multiple women and LGBT men who have done so. I am the eldest of a family of male cousins. The college aged (18-25) cousins only express positive emotions about democrats when around women their age (reasons obvious).
I could be in an echo chamber. But, it sure feels like the truth.
You are also aware that local Democratic committees are composed of 1 man and 1 woman per precinct by rule?
I was not aware of this. Good rule. I went back and looked at the numbers. Now seems as good as time as any to be a young man in democratic party. A healthy number (~50%) of the young democratic leaders (major mayors, house reps, senators) are under 45 men. Try as I may, the real numbers don't match my intuitions.
I still have my suspicions. But, I stand corrected.
vorpa-glavo
1d ago
I'm perfectly happy to accept the official narrative, if investigators say that it wasn't arson.
However, we live in an era where the internet has created so many different epistemic bubbles that question whatever the experts and authorities say, on both the right and left. On one hand, I think this can be a healthy thing. If you're a woman in the 1940's, and the medical authorities are telling your husband that he should get you a lobotomy to deal with your various issues, is it better to be married to a sheep who follows everything the authorities say, or a contrarian who maybe rubs some people the wrong way but whose questioning of authority leads him to rejecting lobotomies (maybe without any good evidence or reason for his actual rejection)?
I agree that objective facts matter. It is my hope that all people will embrace the idea that even if deferring to experts and authorities is often a necessary shortcut for getting by in the world for most people in most circumstances, you should be prepared to do your own research and have the independent conscience to depart from the crowd if that is what your reason or character tells you to do. On the other hand, sometimes you're going to lose to reality, and it will turn out the experts were right all along.
But it's all about humanity not putting all of its eggs into one basket. It is positively good for humanity as a whole if a small portion of us become Amish, or reject modernity for religious or ideological reasons, or join cults, or have their children die of diseases we have reliable vaccines for, because the diversity of practices maximizes the odds that there will be at least one group of humans available to inherit the ashes after the sheep do something so stupid and destructive that it kills billions of humans, or leaves most of humanity infertile, or does anything that almost wipes out the whole species.
There should be room for normie rule-followers, of course. They're the salt of the Earth, and society would be intolerable and impossible without them, no matter what shape society takes. But I think we should feel grateful for the insurance policy that groups that are often easily mocked or not taken seriously because they depart so far from consensus reality provide.
All this to say, I think it is completely fair to mock lefties that are so caught in their epistemic bubble that they can't conceive of the idea that fires just happen, and there's no need to invent an arson conspiracy with corresponding government conspiracy. Probably, they are just wrong, and they're just departing from objective, consensus reality for no good reason. But that's also not the worst trait a group can exhibit.
zoink
1d ago
I don't think the imbalance for leftists in the justice system should be all the surprising. It's been decades of leftist having literal terrorists with tenure. Marxist and Communists with tenure outnumber Nazis and Fascists by about... what? 100x? 1,000x? 100,000x? All while calling the most milk toast Republicans like Romney fascists.
SubstantialFrivolity
I'm not even supposed to be here today
1d ago
I'm sympathetic to your argument, but even if porn is disgusting that doesn't mean one should show disgust for the young men who watch it. You need to show them compassion to get them to change, not go "ewww" as so many tend to do.
crushedoranges
Can Marx explain the used panties market?
1d ago
That's already happened. If you go to his subreddit, it's full of people who do nothing but hate him, like Joe Rogan. I think Reddit is a pretty good barometer as to one's current bona fides in the Democrat party.
This is the problem, right?
Maybe? Democrat messaging is really, really, really, abysamally, unfathomably bad. It is so bad that getting back at the people responsible for terrible Democrat messaging is a substantive policy position of the Republicans.
I mean, just look at this shit. Marginal improvements won't fix this, but a complete paragidm shift might.
crushedoranges
Can Marx explain the used panties market?
1d ago
You would think that gay men would have a better grasp of straight men, of the internal theory of mind of their fellows. But that doesn't happen. Why?
daguerrean
1d ago
The slightest glimpse into real violence leaves a lasting negative taste in one's mouth (unless you're a psychopath). That's why well adjusted men don't make violent threats easily.
I think it is most likely those that have engaged in violence are most likely to make threats and follow through to engage in more violence, I’m basically talking about the low IQ criminal underclass. I don’t think experiencing violence turns them into prudent philosophers on the subject. And of course I’m as effete and faggy as they come, but am horrified by the prospect of political violence in any direction.
Cirrus
1d ago
Looking at the DNC leadership page, Jason Rae is gay. Stuart Appelbaum and Chuck Schumer are Jews. Only Ken Martin and Chris Korge appear to be straight, white men.
netstack
Texas is freedom land
1d ago
You, personally, have an assuredly principled line in the sand -- or a consideration of factors -- that allows you to move abacus beads on the appropriate exchange-pogrom language scale. I agree that this is not pogrom language. I don't think the gap is as wide on this reportedly accidental, unprompted exchanged, but my point was the accurate placement on the pogrom scale is not so important to the politics.
We The People transcended opprobrium. The Motte is not supposed to partake in the enlightenment, so in that regard you deserve kudos for working on the details. There is a lot of grievance bleeding in. Voters, not party, will get the chance to decide how much such things matter anyway. That's probably for the best or worst.
Throwaway05
1d ago
They were hunting down and putting J6 people in jail YEARS later.
Meanwhile seems to have been no particular effort at all to hunt down BLM rioters except for some of the worst in a few states.
Absolutely crazy gap in effort.
Throwaway05
1d ago
I have some family and friends who work in DC as part of national Democrat political strategy.
They are comically far left, woke, and every extreme stereotype.
Outright caricatures who literally run out of the room if you push back against their political positions in the most mild way.
faul_sname
Fuck around once, find out once. Do it again, now it's science.
1d ago
Truth social is over thataway if you would like somewhere you can post without worrying about discourse norms.
In particular, I would argue that outside your odd lizardman, none of the smarter MAGA people believe the narrative. I think it highly unlikely that Charlie Kirk thought, in his heart of hearts, that Biden was committing treason for which his countrymen would sent him to the gallows if they knew about it. But the narrative played really well with the idiots, so he spread it.
...How closely have you been following the revelations about Russiagate/Crossfire Hurricane/Hillary's email server/Biden's Corruption/Hunter's Laptop over the last year? My working understanding of that mess (and it seems to me there's a fair amount of evidence that it is a coherent, single mess) is that we now have solid evidence that Obama, Hillary and Biden worked together to suborn the national security apparatus and turn it into both a partisan weapon against their political enemies, as well as a shield to their own serious malfeasance. As with, say, Watergate, but amusingly never ever with any Democrat scandal, the initial crimes seem vastly overshadowed by the institutional corruption used to cover them, which at this point appear to have run so deep and for so long that they put the viability of our political system itself into question.
More generally, there's this amusing pattern I see, where people are very willing to discuss things under a frame where Trump and MAGA are fascistic white supremacists who must be stopped by any means necessary, as we did here for years, and are also willing to discuss things under a frame where actually there's no difference between the parties, everyone's corrupt so none of the details really matter, but certainly are not willing to discuss under the frame where, no, actually it's the democrats who are uniquely, intolerably bad. Maybe it's just bias speaking, but it seems to me that this excluded third option is going to get harder and harder to exclude the more evidence accumulates. And while within the context of debate and one's own mind denial might be an invincible shield, it's less effective in the real world if sufficient numbers of the public simply stop being willing to cooperate with your tribe in any way ever again.
The backlash being faced by Klien, Derek, Yglesias and Buttigieg is baffling. Everything they've said has been polite, non-accusatory and measured. Yet, they're being treated like Nazis by left social-media.
I don't have a read on how radicalized the younger democrats are. But, looking at reddit, bluesky or the youtube ...... they're being dogpiled.
More options
Context Copy link