ArjinFerman
Tinfoil Gigachad
No bio...
User ID: 626
ArjinFerman
Tinfoil Gigachad
4d ago
What backfired was pissing off Elon enough that he started talking about buying Twitter, and then having a judge force him to actually buy it, because they thought they'd be owning him this way somehow. Were it not, we'd be living under president Kamala Joy, you wouldn't be hearing about half of the news we're talking about now, and the ones you would be hearing about would be fully framed within the progressive narrative.
It's depressing how short people's memories are.
ArjinFerman
Tinfoil Gigachad
5d ago
There were a long series of religious right-motivated censoring movements in the 90s (and not to mention the Dixie Chicks and Freedom Fries stuff following 9/11)
The Dixie Chicks can barely even be called a boycott, let alone censorship, and "freedom fries" is just a way of saying "fuck France", again I fail to see how it prevented anyone from speaking their mind.
The only consistently free speech people have been the centrist democrats (Liberals who want higher taxes) and centrist republicans (Liberals who want lower taxes).
The moment you start criticizing the core ideas of liberalism, liberals start doing the same deplatforming campaigns that the far left does, using the exact same arguments.
ArjinFerman
Tinfoil Gigachad
5d ago
Ah yes, Stalin, the famous good-faith negotiator.
ArjinFerman
Tinfoil Gigachad
6d ago
If it was disavowed, why did people who stabbed, tasered, threw bombs at, or otherwise attacked cops get pardoned?
Because what they were subjected was a kangaroo court that was an affront to justice.
ArjinFerman
Tinfoil Gigachad
6d ago
But I notice that the right seems to be trying to bring back the worst parts of 2021 era cancel culture
These aren't the worst parts, it's some of the mildest ones, and it's not bringing them back, they never left. I have sympathy for principled free speech advocates, but the way they act these things are perfectly symmetrical detracts from their point.
We can always just counter by pointing out how many of the same people opposing trans kids have also defended circumcision.
You won't finish the sentence without your own side shouting you down, and it will look like a pathetic attempt at deflection if you do. It's like trying to fend off the opiod addiction scandal by saying "but what about all the people abusing marijuana and alcohol!!!".
Think for 3 seconds why this argument has never left obscure internet fora.
Personally I think chopping off a baby's genitals with a meat cleaver is a little worse than letting them dress in opposite-sex clothes.
Ah yes, transgender care is fameously done without it he applications of meatcleavers to genitals, and other body parts.
Anyway, I think circumcission is pretty bad, but it's medical consequences aren't even in the same galaxy as the stuff being performed on children in the namw of transgenderism.
An unwoke democratic party would
...have to come into existence, before you can start dreaming about what it can do.
ArjinFerman
Tinfoil Gigachad
6d ago
P.S. Last thread appears to be the most comments in site history
We've had people dooming and glooming over our decline, and while there were bigger thrads back on reddit, the primary reaaon for reduced activity is that nothing was happening. But when things happen, they happen here as well.
ArjinFerman
Tinfoil Gigachad
6d ago
But like he said, lots of people want to live there. And who wants laissez-faire anyway?
ArjinFerman
Tinfoil Gigachad
7d ago
I'm not in America so this isn't about me - I'm mostly worried about the damage to the system from another round of purges. McCarthyism was on track to break the system if it hadn't been stopped by the Army-McCarthy hearings.
I'm trying to find a way to move the conversation forward and not dredge up the past, but when I hear stuff like this it's really hard. Like, how come you never mentioned all your worries about the system when every other anti-woke here was doing so? How come the spectre of McCarthyism didn't worry you enough to bring it up, when it was progressives doing it?
And is "I'm not in America" a good argument for you? Your country is literally arresting people for tweets, and you're worried about people getting fired an ocean away from you?
ArjinFerman
Tinfoil Gigachad
7d ago
You might be right, but at the moment you're freaking out over getting hit with a fraction of the force you were dishing out over a decade, so I don't know if you're qualified to gauge demand exceeding supply, or who is likely to spiral out of control.
ArjinFerman
Tinfoil Gigachad
7d ago
It's a safe-edgy position
It's only a testament to how far we've come that liberals are describing it as "safe-edgy".
The constant drumbeat of trans bad will just sound like bullying the longer it goes on
We don't need to rely on "trans bad" and bullying. We can go after the doctor Mengeles that pushed the practice on unsuspecting parents of vulnerable children, we can go after corrupt academics, we can go after healthcare providers that cynically used this fad to extract money. We can keep hammering this issue longer than you can imagine, outflanking you from the left as we're doing so.
The true depth of this scandal is yet to hit the mainatream, and if it does, you will be looking at the innocent days of the year of Our Lord 2025 with wistful nostalgia.
ArjinFerman
Tinfoil Gigachad
7d ago
Sorry, I meant "either of [the Trump ones]". The Kirk shooter shack-up is now reported all over the place, so I think it's true.
ArjinFerman
Tinfoil Gigachad
7d ago
Sure, he happened to be signed up with the other party.
Is he? The only specifics on this that I heard of was that he supposedly donated to the Trump campaign... except he didn't. Someone just found a guy in the donation record, with the same first and last name.
Last I heard the shooter was not signed up with any party.
Edit: although from the context it sounds like they're talking about the Trump shooter(s), not the Charlie Kirk one, I don't think either of them shacked up with a transsexual.
ArjinFerman
Tinfoil Gigachad
7d ago
And the comment above yours is filtered ;)
It's not about the numbers, it's about the other side coming to the table and negotiating the terms of a truce. This thing isn't going to end if all we have is radicals who explicitly say the tools are good, if they're only used by them, and centrists who want to limit the conversation to hypocrisy, rather than what should be the rules going forward.
Finally, even once the terms of truce are found, anyone who cares about hypocrisy will be in a bit of a bind, because how do you enforce them if not by cancelling the cancellers?
ArjinFerman
Tinfoil Gigachad
7d ago
That wasn't just because of the left's cancel culture, it was also because of, but not limited to, it's dogmaticism, aversion to debate with the outgroup, radicalism, and the application of it's rules in a one-sided manner, according to an oppressor-oppressed framework.
I doubt we would have been where we are, if the left satisfied itself with cancelling racists, and otherwise acted normal.
Hopefully we'll all be able to take a step back, and have a conversation about the rules of warfare. A vicious cycle of escalation, ultimately ending in the defeat of the red tribe, is certainly possible, but I don't see how unilateral disarmament ends any better.
ArjinFerman
Tinfoil Gigachad
7d ago
Just pure MAGA hypocrisy. I can't believe I once saw the modern right as an ally in the fight for free speech.
Only if you they're looking tor excuses to not call it cancel culture, otherwise it's about as hypocritic as Ukrainians bombing Russian territory. Centrists that never spoke up against progressive cancel culture, but act outraged now, are much worse than this.
Some have argued that it is not the same thing, due to the disparaging comments being immediate, vs old comments dredged up in an attempt to cancel someone.
Yeah, no, this is cope. If you're going to do it, own it. It's perfectly defensible as retaliation and deterrence, but it's lame as hell to put shit under a microscope to come up with whatever difference you can find, and claim it's salient in a totally not ad-hoc fashion, so you're justified in whatever you're doing.
ArjinFerman
Tinfoil Gigachad
8d ago
if my priest made a Charlie Kirk assassination joke on the pulpit tomorrow morning I'd be offended.
Then the lord said to Moses, "triggered much, snowflake?"
But seriously, I agree. Some time has passed and tempers have cool down, and in the meantime make your jokes in private, with people who you know aren't going to be bothered.
Why the need to "believe"?
Because I do not exist outside time and space, and need to wait for events to unfold, before I know their shape and sequence. Until then I am stuck believing what they will look like, based on what happened in the past.
As a general point: all of this means nothing, if you can't make a prediction. It just shows you feel more comfortable squeezing established facts into your preferred theory, something that is pretty trivial to do, no matter what you believe, for the very reasons you, yourself outline.
And on the specifics:
And of course no mention of the one that’s coded right-wing, If you read this, you’re gay!”, because that one doesn’t fit the narrative
You have backwards. Left wingers are the ones glossing over the bullet that clinches it ("catch that, fascist"), and the "you're gay" one is not even very right-coded. I've seen gay people throw glitter bombs and exclaiming "you're gay now!".
Also the point of my prediction is that upon further investigation we won't need to rely on one-liners scrawled on bullet casings, the wider context will become available.
ArjinFerman
Tinfoil Gigachad
8d ago
It's trivial to come up with justifications for why your theory is correct no matter what, that's why predictions are so important. You should be able to make some that prove your theory correct, and some that prove your theory false.
If you think it's a great way of analysis, the best way to argue for it, is to demonstrate it. If you demand that we do it, and rest your case on a fanfic, the impression you're giving is that you don't think it's of much value either.
Yes. You will get nothing like the sadistic glee that came from the left. The most you'll get in terms of similarity will be "wait, seriously, we're doing it for this guy?" if the left chooses to go full national mourning over it, the way the right did for Kirk (and even then I'm not sure, because Hassan Piker is a way better choice for a saint than George Floyd was).
More options
Context Copy link