domain:aporiamagazine.com
07mk
14hr ago
Heck, the very term "Jew" was declared offensive in some blue tribe circles 5+ years ago! There was even a This American Life episode featuring the Jewish host Ira Glass asking one of his younger interns or recent hires to describe what person he is in terms of his religion, and she insisted on calling him a "Jewish person" or something of the sort, while explicitly refusing to call him a "Jew," despite the fact that he self-identified as a "Jew."
I don't think it caught on, but then again, the blue tribe environments in which I reside don't have that many Jews and don't talk about Jews much, so it could be one of those things that just quietly passed under my radar and is actually dominant in the blue tribe.
magicalkittycat
14hr ago
Was there any actual support for Hitler? The single quote appears to be, as per the context The_Nybbler provided, a reducto ad absurdum joke.
I don't understand what the humor here is in
A: "Let's elect the most hardcore of our beliefs"
B: "That would be Hitler"
Seems like an admission that the beliefs are Hitler Lite, not a great sign.
But ok, sure let's take that as just a joke and not read into anything. What about the other comments like the one about the Kansas delegation possibly liking someone more if they painted them as Nazis? It seems over and over again the joke here is "boy we sure are a lot like literal Nazis".
Republicans like Gov Scott, Stefanik, Roger Stone, etc all seem to be appalled by it, so it's not some just Bad Faith Left Wing thing either unless anyone who breaks tribal loyalty is inherently considered an outsider enemy.
2D3D
14hr ago
It doesn't even have real life traction, thats the thing.Firing some young republican nobodies is costless for republicans, and now everyone sotto voce thinks the liberals are the crazy moralizing karens they spent the ladt year pretending they werent. There is an extremely aggressive attempt to memoryhole the shaming and screeching of the late 2010s but this just shows the libs can't help themselves from beating the racism gong when some supply actually instantiates to feed their unlimited demand for wrongthink.
MadMonzer
Epstein Files must have done something really awful for so many libs to want him released.
14hr ago
My understanding of 4chan culture is that none of these are remotely homophobic in practice, and the term "fag" has become sufficiently debased that someone needed to coin the term "gayfag" to describe male homosexuals.
2D3D
14hr ago
I've happily made many a macro of Bill Hicks screaming "HITLER DIDNT GO FAR ENOUGH" paired with Dave Chappelle just eyebrow waggling. It is AMAZING what people read into that.
magicalkittycat
14hr ago
After the lefty reaction to the Kirk assassination I absolutely don't care about this, and will never care about anything like this from my own side ever again. OP wildly overestimates the number of fucks the right has left to give.
Do you believe that all of politics can only be summed up as "left" and "right" and that it is impossible to be both against killing people like Kirk and against racism/neonazism/etc?
If you do believe this, then why do Republicans like Gov Scott, Elise Stefanik, Roger Stone, etc seem to be able to denounce the chat without saying positive things about killing Kirk? Are they fake right wingers or something?
2D3D
14hr ago
You don't need to be infiltrate a groupchat to find obvious examples of democrats wanting to do things they know their opponents find terrible. They openly talk about why Democrats should pretend to support economic populism so that they can sneak in trans rights and unlimited immigration, at the direct and explicit expense of white people. Its the entire existence of Lib Of Tik Tok and the progs out this out openly because they think cons are too stupid to ever pierce the barrier to entry of looking at a phone screen.
crushedoranges
Can Marx explain the used panties market?
14hr ago
You're not beating the logs-in-eyes allegations. None of anything you said would reflect on how Arabs would treat Jews in a hypothetical one-state solution. The evidence we do have is from the expulsion of Mizrahim from all Arab countries to Israel - a pogrom you blame on Zionism. But they didn't do anything for Israel. They were completely innocent in the matter, but they were expelled and had their property confiscated anyway.
That was, undeniably, ethnic cleansing at the least. Genocide, if you stretch it. And you deny it so pithily, with a single sentence. As if the actions of Jews in Judea and Samaria reflected upon them as a whole.
Why should I trust you accusing Israel of genocide when you downplay the Arab one?
ChickenOverlord
14hr ago
In 1944, before the actual, everyone-can-agree-they're-fascist fascist states of Italy and Germany had been defeated, George Orwell wrote an article highlighting how the term had devolved into an insult and lost any useful, shared, descriptive meaning of any actual political system: https://www.orwell.ru/library/articles/As_I_Please/english/efasc
It will be seen that, as used, the word ‘Fascism’ is almost entirely meaningless. In conversation, of course, it is used even more wildly than in print. I have heard it applied to farmers, shopkeepers, Social Credit, corporal punishment, fox-hunting, bull-fighting, the 1922 Committee, the 1941 Committee, Kipling, Gandhi, Chiang Kai-Shek, homosexuality, Priestley's broadcasts, Youth Hostels, astrology, women, dogs and I do not know what else.
Yet underneath all this mess there does lie a kind of buried meaning. To begin with, it is clear that there are very great differences, some of them easy to point out and not easy to explain away, between the régimes called Fascist and those called democratic. Secondly, if ‘Fascist’ means ‘in sympathy with Hitler’, some of the accusations I have listed above are obviously very much more justified than others. Thirdly, even the people who recklessly fling the word ‘Fascist’ in every direction attach at any rate an emotional significance to it. By ‘Fascism’ they mean, roughly speaking, something cruel, unscrupulous, arrogant, obscurantist, anti-liberal and anti-working-class. Except for the relatively small number of Fascist sympathizers, almost any English person would accept ‘bully’ as a synonym for ‘Fascist’. That is about as near to a definition as this much-abused word has come.
But Fascism is also a political and economic system. Why, then, cannot we have a clear and generally accepted definition of it? Alas! we shall not get one — not yet, anyway. To say why would take too long, but basically it is because it is impossible to define Fascism satisfactorily without making admissions which neither the Fascists themselves, nor the Conservatives, nor Socialists of any colour, are willing to make. All one can do for the moment is to use the word with a certain amount of circumspection and not, as is usually done, degrade it to the level of a swearword.
ChickenOverlord
14hr ago
Back when SBF was in the news for massive fraud etc. I made some random comment about him having a Jew-fro. My sister was quite offended by this and said it was a rude thing to say, even though I first learned the term from a Jewish friend in high school who rocked a pretty awesome Jew-fro (unlike SBF's nasty greasy rat's nest).
Eupraxia
Of all words spoken, all things read / most true was that which went unsaid
14hr ago
· Edited 9hr ago
To the best of my knowledge, nobody was fired because of things they said about Charlie Kirk in leaked private messages. They were fired because they were in positions of trust (teacher, doctor, etc), and they posted horrific things endorsing his assassination publicly and proudly under their full name. These are not the same thing, don't pretend they are, I'm not playing along.
They are the same thing. Both of these situations reflect the same interior motivations, and insofar as feeling joy at Charlie Kirk's death is horrific, all of these people ought to have been punished. It makes sense from a practical perspective to punish only the highest profile cases as a warning to the rest, but the point was not to punish people for "saying things".
haroldbkny
14hr ago
Ah yeah, I left that one off my list, but that makes sense. Leftists do say that sort of thing all the time in private, and it would be kinda damning if that were seen more, but not as much as the gerrymandered racism.
DiscourseMagnus
14hr ago
This failure to detect irony goes both ways in multiple senses, both in the sense that Republicans are also prone to it (if less so) and in the sense that it also takes the form of defending your own side's genuine expressions of malice as Just Fooling Around (the Jay Jones thing is still heavy on my mind).
Lizzardspawn
14hr ago
Now I have to disagree with our vice president here, I don't think it is pearl clutching to oppose support of Hitler.
The guy has been dead for 80 years. Let it go. There are no Aryans enough left for Aaryan supremacy.
This is just a normal milquetoast man space group chat. The ones I participate in are way worse.
They should be fired for being so lame in being edgy and for terrible opsec. But morons will moron I guess.
netstack
Texas is freedom land
14hr ago
- Only because you included “like this.”
- Both are basically devoid of value. The lower-level politicians are covering their asses against attacks like the one you’re making. Vance is putting his on display to score a couple political points.
- No. There is a vast gulf between speaking and doing, and our violent extremists continue to be uninterested in hiding much of anything.
- Because the (young?) GOP is more receptive to this kind of humor.
Underpinning all of these answers is the obvious point that these people aren’t Nazis by any reasonable definition. Like Key and Peele, they’re putting on a little caricature. You have to be very motivated to find it damning.
professorgerm
clutching my imitation pearls
14hr ago
Paxton is kind of a standout but yeah, my understanding would be the AG is the second-most important politician in most states, or at least not lower than third.
professorgerm
clutching my imitation pearls
14hr ago
No, saw that name in this thread but didn't check the context. How disgusting!
professorgerm
clutching my imitation pearls
14hr ago
Democrats are doing their soft racism thing of belittling minority groups?
Doesn't count as racist for these purposes, but really should be more damning for Dems.
Democrats in private are just as racist as Republicans are in private
Democrats in public have spent several years being way more racist than Republicans in private or public, they just don't call stuff like "white people are goblins" and "whiteness is a contract with the devil" racism, because they gerrymandered racism to primarily be about black people. Belittling white men is a favored pastime. Et cetera and so forth.
So I would imagine whatever they say in private is even worse than what they've been publishing in public for my entire adult life.
I mostly don't care; it's layers and layers of irony, and there's not enough information to determine what they believe in their hearts of hearts. Most likely, their error is not in being Nazis, but simply in treating a professional(?) forum like a personal 4chan. Organizations don't have to go total longhouse to have some standards of conduct, and heads should roll (NOTE: I am not calling for a Robespierre-style solution to this problem; it's a turn of phrase indicating someone should be fired).
I do think this lack of ability (real or affected) to detect irony is part of the puzzle of why Democrats are losing young men. Conversations like this happen all the time, among both Democrats and Republicans, and treating obvious jokes as literally as possible gives a strong out-of-the-loop school principal or humorless HR lady vibe.
Drinniol
14hr ago
Are you familiar with the concept of sarcasm? Personally, I've never believed in it.
I love Stalin and Hitler and Pol Pot btw.
Ah but it wouldn't advance your argument soldier to obtusely pretend to not understand jokes like an inhuman robot in this circumstance, so I'm sure you understand the non-literal subtext perfectly.
sun_the_second
could survive a COD lobby and a gay furry discord server
14hr ago
Don't care, and
You waste time typing anything after "and" if you've already admitted you don't care. Anyway, pivoting from pearl-clutching over the other side being publicly edgy towards you to calling out pearl-clutching when it is directed at you, for any reason, is a whiplash hazard.
Shrike
14hr ago
Anything with significant quantities of rare earths - which describes a lot of modern military technology.
This is a problem for all countries that aren't China right now - but I think most of those countries will survive.
China's not going to help - China wants to make sure the Israeli security situation is as miserable as possible, because that means US resources and attention will be diverted there and away from Taiwan.
This isn't really a consideration at play if the US is no longer Israel's patron, is it?
France? I wouldn't pin my hopes on France coming to the rescue given their own large internal problems. They can't even supply the Ukrainians with enough materiel to fight off Russia.
I'm not suggesting France will "come to their rescue," I'm suggesting France will sell them military hardware. France's support of Ukraine hasn't halted French arms sales elsewhere (e.g. they are still attempting to sell the Rafale to various parties, I believe). You can make of that what you will but "France can't/won't sell people military hardware" doesn't seem correct.
As for Russia itself? Russia supplies the air-defence systems used by Iran and has been accepting a lot of help from them with regards to drone technology and drone warfare. Russia is the largest military partner of Israel's biggest regional threat - I don't think they're going to be much help.
Russia has relatively good relations with Israel (and notably Israel has declined to assist Ukraine) and a history of cooperating with Israel on military technology. Russia also doesn't have much qualms about selling to both sides of a conflict, I don't think, and have (allegedly) agreed not to sell arms to Iran due to agreements with Israel in the past, so I'm skeptical that the Russian relationship with Iran would actually prevent them from selling arms to Israel.
In the same future where the US has abandoned them, there's no doubt going to be a cessation of remittances and other support from American jews to Israel
Why? I don't think American Jews are sending support to Israel because the US government suggests it.
paying Egypt to stay friendly to Israel
Why do you think this is necessary? Israel and Egypt are trade partners, Egypt is the first Middle Eastern nation to recognize Israel (getting close to 50 years ago) and both the Arabism and the Islamism that precipitated past Israeli-Egyptian conflict have waned somewhat. I don't see it as impossible, but I don't see why it's inevitable, either.
The nations surrounding them, and by simply closing their borders to land/air traffic.
My understanding is that the majority of Israel's imports are via sea.
Iran is more than capable of shutting down their shipping infrastructure, even if they have to send the weaponry to the Houthis to do it.
Why hasn't Iran done this, then? It sounds to me like Iran could have destroyed Israel already without needing to develop nuclear weapons. This would probably have been a better idea than letting Israel bomb them nonstop for days. What's stopping them?
I would note that the Houthis are in Yemen. Yemen and Iran are both too far away from the Mediterranean to close shipping lanes there with the ease that they can close shipping lanes through Suez. What mechanism do you propose for shutting down shipping? Missile strikes on port facilities, maybe?
I don't think they'll necessarily attack them, but charging obscene fees to render those imports uneconomical when they don't just sabotage or block them is well within the bounds of what they could do.
How are the neighboring nations going to charge fees on goods imported via the Mediterranean traveling through international waters? Cutting them off in Suez would be annoying, but it would not be the end of the world - the Houthis already accomplished a partial closure of the Red Sea, rerouting many ships around the Horn of Africa, and Israel didn't collapse.
It sounds to me in your telling like losing the United States as a patron would be irritating and expensive - does it really follow that Israel will cease to exist as a state?
So two adults coordinating a child porn ring is acceptable as long as it's done in private? Might need to walk back your literally nothing claim here.
I'm sorry, but if you're in such a world where you genuinely believe that every man jokes this way and anyone who doesn't is just a liar, it says a lot more about you and the people you hang out with in your dark matter world than about men in general.
This type of defense is truly incredible just as a concept though. Like it's literally "Yes all men!" but as an endorsement, it comes off as a lack of imagination and theory of mind.
More options
Context Copy link