site banner
Hour Week Month Year All
Hot Bump Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Advanced search parameters (with examples): "author:quadnarca", "domain:reddit.com", "over18:true"

Showing 25 of 336 results for

domain:retrofuturista.com

Culture War Roundup for the week of October 13, 2025
  1. The question is wrong -- I don't think these texts indicate any of those things. For example: "support of slavery." What is going on here is the left treats race and slavery as sacred topics, which means no joking. Rejecting this taboo does not mean someone supports slavery. It could just mean they think HR ladies are cringe. Also it could mean they are a young boy.
  2. Personally, I like Vance's response. I think these texts are a nothingburger. I would prefer if all our powerful politicians made racist jokes behind closed doors, which indicates loyalty to my tribe (Reminder to those who cannot read: the tribe in question does not support slavery). Although I didn't answer yes to (1), I'll talk about concerned Republicans: certain portions of the Republican party may still be concerned. Upon contact with young male voters, these politicians might consider switching the letter next to their name. These things happen from time to time.
  3. No. The "hiding ones power level" phenomenon is not related to extremism. As I explained earlier, telling racist jokes is a shibboleth and tribal signal. Another example of ingroup-jargon is "trans women are women." Whether that slogan is "extremism" probably depends on if it's post-2020, or closer to 2015. Hiding ones power level is just code-switching so you don't scare the hoes normies. Since what is normal changes over time, you find that some signals and slogans will enter the mainstream and it is no longer necessary to code-switch. What we are witnessing is Vance's attempt to shift the Overton window (or perhaps evidence that it has already shifted). Violence has nothing to do with this, at all.
  4. The answers to this could vary because everyone is a little different. But i would say it's safe to assume it goes like this: the Democratic party is hostile to white men and the GOP is not. A particular white man who is not married to the Democratic party (on account of: economic resentment, sexual deviancy, class anxiety etc.) inevitably can only feel at home in the GOP. A self-identified Nazi could believe he has support just because of typical-minding.
Culture War Roundup for the week of October 13, 2025

TBF, many very sincere progressives find joking about Hitler even worse than sincerely praising him, because what kind of moral monster jokes about the worst person ever? (Meanwhile, Free Palestine, and its 2 million unironic Hitler admirers.)

Wellness Wednesday for October 15, 2025

You identified the danger, and the things to (not) do to reduce the danger, and carried out the plan with discipline and got the results you wanted. You can be proud of this. Great work. :)

Culture War Roundup for the week of October 13, 2025

Is there really not a single right-wing hacker competent enough to find whatever horrifying racist nonsense Democrat-associated activists say in their group chats? I get the feeling it's a lot less irony-infected than this kind of thing.

You would think any Democrat group with a modicum of foresight immediately deleted their chat histories the moment this story broke.

Culture War Roundup for the week of October 13, 2025

Or you could just work to remove the stigma against making obscene jokes in private chats. Vance's comment works toward this goal. The left has already done this for their people, there's no reason for the right to keep punishing their own.

Culture War Roundup for the week of October 13, 2025

You're replying to a filtered comment.

Culture War Roundup for the week of October 13, 2025

I love you as well, my autistic friend. Thanks for being here.

Yes I understand the rules, but I’m saying with proper context, we are allowed to swear.

Small-Scale Question Sunday for October 12, 2025

Comedy value on point though.

Culture War Roundup for the week of October 13, 2025

I should have known better than to count my gift horses before they hatch!

Culture War Roundup for the week of October 13, 2025

I'm aware of why a lot of leftists object to the term. I'm just not sure why anyone to the right of Tim Walz should care. It's not like that n-word which indelibly stains the soul of any white person who dares to utter or type it (not sure if the hard-r is required, gotta be safe); they're only allowed one of those at most.

Culture War Roundup for the week of October 13, 2025

Not really. Most people are racist, but very few Americans publicly gloss their racism as racism. There's almost always an excuse or deflection or pretext. You might not find them very convincing in a given context, but they're there.

Culture War Roundup for the week of October 13, 2025

My guess at the most obvious explanation would be that the pro nazis are just pro nazi to begin with and any excuse they give is just that, an excuse.

You have people like Daryl Cooper and Tucker Carlson who may not be full-on sieg heiling but look an awful lot like they think the Nazis were directionally correct about maintaining national purity. For them, rehabilitating the Nazis is an important of legitimizing their own political program. As long as the Nazis are the Worst Thing Ever and not just one among many authoritarian movements, that's a major impediment to the respectability to reactionary authoritarian ethnonationalism.

Now maybe we could say that it's because "Nazism" as a term has become diluted, like how "Communism is when the government does stuff" happened among many youth.

A significant point is that there are lots and lots of socialist movements, including democratic socialist movements that have at least occasionally governed in western democracies to something less than absolute disaster. Liberals, socialists, and traditional conservatives alike can all point to something, say "that's what I want", and have the thing they're point to not be something totally atrocious. If you're a fascist or fascistically inclined, you've got Hitler and Mussolini.

"Nazi" might be diluted as an insult, but it's not diluted as an ideology. There's no moderate, democratic fascism.

Culture War Roundup for the week of October 13, 2025

This post is definitely a nu-Scott post: It's unclear, short, and boring. His bottom line is that violence (so far it seems) would not help make anything better. It is so short he didn't exactly argue why (not that I disagree with him). Whatever part of his audience he is trying to persuade, I am not sure how this is supposed to do it.

If I squint, I can kinda extract a Scott-like interpretation, but it's not particularly insightful: he argues that Fascist is just a boo-word, and so premise #1 isn't even factual in the first place (this also explains why he doesn't even attempt to argue that its true). Having defused the word that provides moral cover, the one is left to "show their work" that things are so bad that violent revolution is necessary. Unfortunately, Scott didn't stoop into the object-level of ICE taking people off the streets or whatever so it won't be changing any minds. Probably, he doesn't know how to construct a verbal argument to pacify the militant anti-fascists that the wants to reach.

Culture War Roundup for the week of October 13, 2025

Now I have to disagree with our vice president here, I don't think it is pearl clutching to oppose support of Hitler.

Would you agree with your vice president on the nature of pearl clutching opposition by people who claim they are opposing support of Hitler, when they are opposing things that are not actually support of Hitler?

Some beginner questions for discussion.

is neonazism, support of slavery, and unabashed bigotry such as this actually common among young conservatives as Hanania and the group chat themselves seem to believe?

Is there a reason to believe the young conservatives in the group chat demonstrate / support neonazism, support of slavoery, and unabashed bigotry?

Others have noted the locker room banter nature of the discussion, both on the structural language dynamics and personal experience. You have confessed not understanding such forms of humor, which is a fair admission of a substantial limitation that could be a result of a lack of personal experience and/or ability to model others. However, the nature of such admissions of self-limitation is that the self-limited do not get to set the framing over those more familiar with the topic.

In that same vein which response is better, someone like Ortt and Stefanik or Vance? And should the Republican party be concerned about the rise of neonazis and support of slavery if question 1 is yes?

Since inserting a pejorative assumption is a timeless form of political attack, why should anyone be concerned enough to address such a framing? Should the Republicans be concerned about the rise of wifebeaters after being asked if they've stopped beating their wives yet?

Often what we see now is people "hiding their power level" with extremism, and it's often not revealed till they get to the point no one seems denouce them much. This is happening with Jay Jones now, and has happened before in cases like Mark Robinson "black Nazi". Even now Vance can't bring himself to denouce this. Is this tribalist loyalty helping to empower extremism and violence?

Is there any evidence that denouncing these not-Hitler-supporters would have any correlation, let alone causation, with extremism and violence?

If so, what is this evidence? If there is no evidence, why does the question link the non-dunciations of not-nazis to empowering extremism and violence?

A common complaint among the right is "they called us Nazis". But often, we see some right wingers calling themselves Nazis. The aforementioned "black Nazi" Mark Robinson, candidate for LT Gov John Reid in Virginia, etc. As Hanania himself pointed out, the only major national politicians to refer to Trump as Hitler was JD Vance (and RFK per community note, but that might not have counted under his usage of "national politician"). Even the leaked group chat expressed this belief about the Kansas delegation. Now I've been a strong believer in individual responsibilities and have fought for it consistently, so I do the same here and believe that the only people who should be called Nazis are the individuals who praise Hitler/want gas chambers/call themselves nazi/etc. But question 4 is, why do so many of these self identifying Nazis seem to feel at home in the GOP, and why do they seem to believe they might have decent levels of support? How many others are "hiding their power level" too as suggested?

Why do you believe there are any self-identifying actual Nazis feeling at home in the GOP?

Your own article only points to satirical-Nazis, for whom self-association is a matter of in-group humor that you have treated as dark matter Whether you understand dark-matter-humor or not is actually irrelevant, though. Whether you get out-group humor or not, Satire-Nazis are not Actual-Nazis.

We know this not least because Actual-Nazis had a historical record of being murderously serious about their agendas as identified in formal Nazi literature, and openly self-identified as Nazis in very serious contexts. By contrast these very leaks show the satire-Nazis being not murderous or serious or openly self-identifying as Nazis, and only privately doing so in unserious contexts. Actual-Nazis did not need to resort to clandestine humor groups for safety or security. Doing so is, itself, evidence against feeling 'at home,' as Actual-Nazis at home did not need to cloak their intent with banter. Their open racial animus was one of the historically defining things about them, which this leak- by its nature as a leak- demonstrates a lack of in these young republicans.

Small-Scale Question Sunday for October 12, 2025

Finished Merchanter’s Luck. Excellent, vintage sci-fi. I’d rate it quite highly for elegantly sketched characters, understated but effective worldbuilding, and economy of prose. These are enough to turn a borderline cliche premise into an immersive one. Unabashedly genre fiction without straying into pulp.

Next up is Sarah Waters’ Fingersmith, a period Victorian gay heist novel and/or comedy of manners. While I don’t normally enjoy such a hateful protagonist, I’m quite liking the book so far. Unfortunately, the previous owner of my copy underlined random bits and occasionally added margin notes.

Culture War Roundup for the week of October 13, 2025

swears are freely allowed

The moderators are aware of the use–mention distinction, but the rules still include "be kind", "be no more antagonistic than is absolutely necessary for your argument", and "write as if everyone were reading and you wanted him to be included in the discussion".

Culture War Roundup for the week of October 13, 2025

why do so many of these self identifying Nazis seem to feel at home in the GOP, and why do they seem to believe they might have decent levels of support?

This was a private group chat, no? Saying this sort of stuff in private but not in public seems like the opposite of "believing that they have decent levels of support".

People say wild things in chat sometimes, at least in the spicier chats. If you've never been invited to any of the spicier chats, this may be surprising to you.

Culture War Roundup for the week of October 13, 2025

Isn't it great that we can talk in a place where swears are freely allowed? Gah, I love freedom. Thanks mods.

Culture War Roundup for the week of October 13, 2025

As hydro said, the Amerindians were originally kept as separate as possible from the white American population. Amerindians weren't given unconditional birthright citizenship until 1924, and the reservations are still considered sovereign territory for their respective Indian nations. Later developments would take Indian policy in a more assimilationist direction, but that was mainly from a Christianizing perspective and not broadly miscegenatory.

The Australians went around massacring Aboriginals in an ad-hoc bottom-up way because it was easy but there was never any actual policy to get rid of them, the closest they got is 'the arc of history bends towards us, no big deal if they wither away but we won't actually make it happen, we'll do weird things like them away from their parents and raise them as our own'.

While there was no official policy of extermination, there was a considerable amount of more active efforts to expedite the withering process.

From Mark Twain's "Following The Equator":

Here is an instance. A squatter, whose station was surrounded by Blacks, whom he suspected to be hostile and from whom he feared an attack, parleyed with them from his house-door. He told them it was Christmas-time-a time at which all men, black or white, feasted; that there were flour, sugar-plums, good things in plenty in the store, and that he would make for them such a pudding as they never dreamed of-a great pudding of which all might eat and be filled. The Blacks listened and were lost. The pudding was made and distributed. Next morning there was howling in the camp, for it had been sweetened with sugar and arsenic!

The white man's spirit was right, but his method was wrong. His spirit was the spirit which the civilized white has always exhibited toward the savage, but the use of poison was a departure from custom. True, it was merely a technical departure, not a real one; still, it was a departure, and therefore a mistake, in my opinion. It was better, kinder, swifter, and much more humane than a number of the methods which have been sanctified by custom, but that does not justify its employment. That is, it does not wholly justify it.

Culture War Roundup for the week of October 6, 2025

Good points, thanks for coming back around to this.

I agree that early Christianity was apocalyptic! Obviously not as apocalyptic as the insane cults we've seen throughout history, since they survived and spread incredibly well, but there was a strong bent towards it for sure.

Culture War Roundup for the week of October 13, 2025

"Let's elect the most leftwing candidate we can."

"Great, so Stalin then?"

Does rephrasing it that way help you understand the joke, or are you going to go down with the USS Waging The Culture War?

Culture War Roundup for the week of October 13, 2025

Literally "Yes [practically] all men!" That's correct. "Locker room talk" is real.

There's a Chappell Show sketch about a woman who develops psychic powers and hear men's thoughts. She is comedically horrified at every man she meets including a middle school boy. You are resembling that character a bit.

Culture War Roundup for the week of October 13, 2025

Sure, but that still means credit goes to Stalin, no?

Culture War Roundup for the week of October 13, 2025

The rightmost and "our beliefs" may be different things. Extrapolating your views to the most extreme failure state possible is not endorsing hyperbolic extremism.

If a Young Democrat said we need more government control over the economy and another one sarcastically replied "okay, Chairman Mao", I would not interpret that as literal support for Maoist economic policies.

Culture War Roundup for the week of October 13, 2025

Granted, they did do the Nazi thing of rounding up co-ethnics and shipping them off to concentration camps in Siberia

By contrast, there's a country in the Near East- the ethnicity of its founders even had 'nazi' as part of their name- that despite its small size actively sends armed 'settlers' into a combat zone to displace the natives there, spends a great deal of treasure doing this, and the people that do those things have a TFR above 2. That just ain't a thing the average communist does.

Because they don't have to. Russia / the USSR is a different creature, but the Soviet satellite states were so ethnically homogeneous, they'd give the average Californian a stroke. And come to think of it this might even apply to the USSR, give or take minor Soviet Republics being flooded with ethnic Russians to maintain control, it's not like you were free to travel around that country. As for TFR, I think my generation is the last above-replacement one.