domain:aerosociety.com
Yeah, there was a time when people would discuss it so often, the more left-leaning mods decided to ban the entire topic for a month. Partly a result of 1-2 posters having a hobby horse, and partly of the more left-wing posters not being satisfied with making moral arguments it, insisting that it must be false, and stepping on rake after rake in the process.
Most people are happy to leave well enough alone, if you don't press the subject.
I am team: "This is different, and is still kinda bad."
My opinion is all these folks should exit public service, if they are in it, for 5 years or so, to mature. There are plenty of jobs at advertising agencies for Coca Cola, and THOSE companies should vigorously recruit these fellows because that is what they would do in a free market based on their comedic stylings and ability to understand the dark comedy of the modern youth.
Then in 5 years these bad jokes should be forgiven and they can do whatever.
This is, of course, a very high standard in comparison to the left, but it is what I prefer. Unfortunately, it also requires leftish cooperation because most ad places are run by the exact sort of people fake-outraged by this. So they kinda have to give up something to be reasonable.
I do, at the end of the day the individual actors are responsible for themselves. The average non Nazi conservative is not a Nazi because some other conservatives who are not them are Nazis. Many conservatives have actively condemned the growing nazi problem even, I linked some in the post!
Have any of these people even been credibly accused of being Nazis as opposed to making jokes that offend people who are always on the lookout for Nazis? Its not a joke for me to assert that I have been hearing warning about the "growing influence of Nazism on the right" since I was in 4th grade, and likely the only reason I dont remember hearing about it before then is because I was not listening. To quote the personality who helped found this forum in his better days, "You are still crying wolf"
This also isn't, by contrast, people openly calling for Nazism, nor is it high level politicians calling for political violence, or materially supporting it. It is basically an assortment of group chats by low level people. So we are trying to match like for like, when in reality we are matching pawns with queens.
The arguments I've seen are "he says they're good with money, which is stereotyping", and "he's encouraging people to hate them, both by generic bigotry and by doing things like recognizing Jerusalem as the capital of Israel, which made a lot of people angry and therefore more likely to attack Jews."
The first one seems more than plausible (Trump, a bog-standard bigot who agrees with stereotypes? Say it ain't so!), even if it's a bit milquetoast; the second is... IMO one hell of a reach.
That said, one person's "ragebait" is another person's outside-the-local-overton-window argument.
I expect that a post consisting of four twitter links and a "doesn't this prove all my outgroup are just the worst?" would invite a warning for being obviously boo outgroup antagonism. Like, I can imagine a post talking about Hasan Piker's scandal over torturing his dog and how doesn't this prove Democrats have a psychopath problem? But I can't imagine the community norm thinking that was a good faith contribution.
Failing to engage in good faith is another matter
More concerned about this as a consistent pattern. If it's on the radar, I'm happy enough.
If can israel deny a genocide with 4k video proof
That looks like the lead-in to a statement you'd see from someone pro-Palestinian on Reddit, which does not usually line up directly with the far right (who I believe want everyone in the Levant to lose).
Is there any particular reason you're posting about this, and then ignoring anyone who raises points that make your entire thesis look it relies on manipulating information, if not outright lying?
More options
Context Copy link