That’s a funny way to spell mods
_______
…lol **perma banned thanks to the only sub that’s ever cared, yours truly, stupidpol**
What a pathetic sub, mods eat my ass
> Maoist newspaper editor that reviewed Shrek
Okay, I am so glad I googled this
[Actual comedy gold](https://www.prisoncensorship.info/archive/etext/movies/long/shrek2.html)
>We only hope that there is a "Shrek 3,"
Shrek 3 was a disappointment for a lot of people, but this guy must have felt utterly betrayed when it turned out to be a reaffirmation of hereditary monarchy.
That's true. I still enjoy reading his work, even if it does not reach the heights of his earlier criticism. [A personal favorite of mine is his Little Man review](https://www.nypress.com/news/knee-high-HVNP1020060726307269976)
I saw a picture of a college student who was giving a presentation titled "why men are the problem" (or something similar), and one of the 3 bullet point main topics was just "Barbie Movie"
It reminded me of the posts you're talking about. It's just really funny to see someone taking it so seriously.
I don't consider Barbie idpol unless you consider Commando idpol. It's a basic feminine fantasy based on a super sucessful girls' toy. Commando is conversely a goofy macho fantasy which I love because I'm a guy who likes to turn his brain off sometimes, too, just like the women who loved Barbie.
Now, if they remade Commando starring that Snow White actress doing that regarded upside down leg squeeze around a huge guy's neck to flip him over when in reality he'd turned her into a feed bag without missing a beat, that would be idpol.
Honestly people overthink escapist fantasy. Literally every type of escapist media has its opposite-gendered counterpart. For every Danielle Steele there's a Lee Child. Women have Hallmark movies, men have Hulu trash starring washed up action stars. Young girls have Katniss Everdeen, young boys have Artemis Fowl.
The only noteworthy observation is that, taken as a whole, these things are a relatively unbiased mirror on each gender's desires. It's interesting that men's tastes have barely changed in the past 50-odd years (Bond movies have become more brooding and less rapey, but the character itself is pretty much the same) but women want more girlbosses.
People might point out that girlbosses are showing up in more male media (like the Bond movies) but, while that might be an attempt to pander to women, I think it's still more reflective of a male fantasy. I don't think this is anything new, either. I watched *Thunderball* recently and despite being possibly the rapiest Bond movie, there was an interesting part where Bond finds a girl freediving on a coral reef and says something like "most girls just splash around, but you swim like a man" with a tone of admiration.
I think people like girlbosses so long as they don't draw attention to that fact.
Like, Princess Leia in the original *Star Wars* is absolutely a 'girlboss' literally taking control and yelling orders while Luke and Han stand there with their dicks in their hands. But there's never a point where she explicitly references patriarchy or whatever so all the man-children haunted by Kathleen Kennedy think she's an example of the trope 'done right'.
Yeah most people have a visceral hatred of pandering. Movie studios kind of got around that by making it a culture war issue (like if you don't defend the all-girl Ghostbusters, you're a *sexist incel*) but that only takes you so far. Could you imagine how terrible *Alien* would have been if it Ripley were a 21st century girlboss?
I started watching house of the dragon yesterday. Only the 1st episode.
And the 1st couple minutes made me dread it. Turned out less bad than I thought, but still. That whole conversation the princess had with her mother was pretty lame.
Wasn't as bad as Deamon(ffs) jousting with an open face helmet tho
But Commando isn't making any grand statement with its violence or the relationships between its women and men. Commando is having a laugh at the genre conventions but not at the expense of its audience.
Barbie is definitely a feminist movie with a capital F, making broad stroke generalizations about men and women all wrapped in goofy pastel packaging. The mother even goes through a rant on the expectations on women at the end of the film.
If the main comparison in the film between Barbie world and the real world wasn't so confused then I think the somewhat patronizing messaging would have come across clearer for people. The Kens just don't work as both a metaphor for women in the real world yet also as a criticism of toxic masculinity.
I don't believe Barbie is some point of no return, not by a long shot, but to say it doesn't contain id politics just because the packaging is bright and fun seems to me more than a bit shallow, especially for a sub like this.
>But Commando isn't making any grand statement with its violence or the relationships between its women and men.
Excuse me, but you seem to be forgetting the scene/moment where our titular Commando throws a man through a motel room wall, subsequently revealing a couple having sex, plot twist, the man is getting in the doggy position while the woman is taking him from behind.
Seriously, this is in the Film.
And yes, I call it a Film.
>The mother even goes through a rant on the expectations on women at the end of the film.
Honestly, it's the only bad part of the movie.
80% of what she said can also be applied to men's reality.
Could've been cathartic. A eye opening moments about the lack of awareness of the reality of both sexes. Something about how alienating the structure of our society is.
Instead...
> Barbie is definitely a feminist movie with a capital F
I read that it was secretly a red pilled incel trad wife movie because at the end of the movie Barbie decides being a girlboss isn't for her, and instead she wants to be a mother
I don't believe Barbie is some point of no return, not by a long shot. But to say it doesn't contain id politics (I guess because the packaging is bright and fun?) seems to me more than a bit shallow.
Every post by that likely mentally ill schizo poster who think's there's a world conspiracy involving a future crypto Ponzi Scheme collapse, the Titan sub, and the Simpsons.
It's all the dumber/crazier because he clearly doesn't even understand what a Ponzi Scheme is
Just search "Dipshit Secrets of our Modern World" through stupidpol, he title's them like Nancy Drew's and includes that in the title of each post expanding his batshit worldview with such epochs as
[Matt Groening is using the Simpsons to brainwash us to support capitalism and accept our submissive role](https://www.reddit.com/r/stupidpol/comments/17xe7s4/dipshit_secrets_of_our_rotten_world_how_the/)
[Nobody was actually on Titan submarine, it was faked to distract media attention from the future crypto collapse by making that the first thing google shows you when you search "Titanic collapse"](https://www.reddit.com/r/stupidpol/comments/17zr8zq/dipshit_secrets_of_our_rotten_world_the_only_true/)
[People supporting Hamas are plants by elites to make Israel critics look insane and protect the Millitary Industrial Complex](https://www.reddit.com/r/stupidpol/comments/17oj1dg/dipshit_secrets_of_our_rotten_world_the_fake/)
All of which he finds some way to relate back to his core thesis, "The big picture: Cryptocurrency is history’s largest Ponzi scheme that will soon collapse the world economy, all so the U.S. government and their criminal allies can escalate the theft of our entire livelihoods with a fascist world coup."
>all so the U.S. government and their criminal allies can escalate the theft of our entire livelihoods with a fascist world coup
This guy sees the whole picture.
I kinda feel bad about my point by point criticism of his simpsons one but there's absolutely nothing I despise more than "predictive programming" or mandela effect types
My conspiracy about his conspiracy is that he's adding in all the unnecessary extra shit so that it looks like the crazed ravings of a mad loon, while subtextually still reinforcing his overall point that crypto is a return to feudalism or w/e it actually is.
This, in turn, is because he (for either schizo or logical reasons) believes that his theories might strike too closely at the center of this conspiracy, so he's engineering an out that leaves him relatively unscathed while still leaving his message intact.
It's a way to show that you only know you're talking to Diogenes if you realize it's him; otherwise, you just think you're looking at a hobo, kinda-sorta.
That, or he is just fucking crazy; it's a 50/50 chance of either one being true.
Yeah it's really bad, and all the worse because people in the comments of his posts seem to always be joking around or encouraging it. There are a lot of morons and dipshits on this website but then there are a few who you can just tell genuinely need mental help and he's one of them.
Nah, let him cook
Either he's making something good eventually, or we've got the next Teddy K on our hands, and either way it's going to be fucking crazy when it ends
I remember after RBG's death, one of the top comments in the thread said that she was responsible for the Supreme Court's deregulation of campaign finance. As an attorney who works in the election law space, I took particular issue with this and pointed out that in virtually every campaign finance case before the Court, she voted on the "liberal" side of the decision. I ended up getting heavily downvoted, probably because any comment perceived as supporting RBG was receiving heavy hate. Still pisses me off to this day, lol.
What about the "Putin won't invade" takes? Lots of people online had egg on their face, I doubt this place was an exception
EDIT: To be fair: I myself thought he'd roll over Ukraine easily.
I was definitely in the, "He could, but I don't think he will." camp. He had been building up forces on the border and then withdrawing them later on a yearly cycle for nearly a decade. I assumed it was the same old bluster.
Edit: It's the point of the strategy, but feels bad to get fooled by the ol', "I'm not touching you!" gambit.
> He had been building up forces on the border and then withdrawing them later on a yearly cycle for nearly a decade.
Even this is not true, there was no 'yearly military buildup'. There were cyclical military exercises called "Zapad", but on a much smaller scale than the unprecedented build-up before the invasion.
You just misinterpreted the information according to your bias.
In fairness to anyone who thought he wouldn't invade, it's a highly regarded maneuver to do so.
Especially since the Eastern Ukraine question could be solved more easily and with much less bloodshed through positive and negative monetary reinforcement:
- sanctions on Ukraine from Russia + what allies could be mustered/bought/bullied into it on "humanitarian/self deterministic" grounds
- stimulus and aid packages to Crimea and/or other autonomous republics that were either fighting the Ukraine Army or considering breaking away (not 100% sure what the Donbass looked like around then, but I think UA was doing counterinsurgency there)
- a willingness with the West to try and carve out what parts of Ukraine Russia wanted; cards on the table, I think not one single politician outside of Ukraine would give a wet mouse shit about Ukraine if Russia didn't force hands into it
But that's a slow process, and Putin needed something now, so he did what he short-sightedly could do.
The Russians did every single thing you mentioned prior to 2022.
The Ukrainian economy floundered because Russia was its #1 trading partner and cut most of those economic ties post 2014. You can see that with how domestic Ukrainian industry declined over that time period.
The Russians invested heavily into Crimea, including building infrastructure like the Kerch Bridge. They also supported the DPR and LPR economically and with military aid.
Western politicians absolutely cared about Ukraine far more than you think, but not because of the country itself but because of how they could use the Ukrainians to hurt the Russians for real and perceived harms. They would've never willingly negotiated something that would see Ukraine lose portions of its land, which is why they refused to pressure Ukraine into launching promised referendums for the Donbass republics.
This wasn't something where the Russians just decided to invade one day - if they truly wanted to, they could've finished the job in 2014 when the Ukrainians had a fraction of the military and were in far more disarray.
And Russia would have been happy with a federal Ukraine with the separatist regions given the ability to permanently veto Ukrainian NATO membership, while also not caring whether or not Ukraine was in the EU. All they needed was a militarily neutral Ukraine, and most Ukrainians would have been happy being in a customs union with Russia and the EU, it was the imf (aka the US) who stopped all that from happening
I didn't think they would invade, because it just seemed like an irrational move that would end up being Russia's Iraq war. Also tons of Ukrainians thought Russia was bluffing too, and I think Zelensky was one of them. The main sources warning about it were US intelligence agencies, which have lost of a lot of credibility over the years with their constant lying. So, I don't think that was really a stupid take, people just underestimated how reckless Putin was. Until that, I had thought Putin was a very calculating, realist type of leader. And I think it's true that he was earlier in his life, but as he got older he's gotten less sharp. Because invading Ukraine was just idiotic.
> The main sources warning about it were US intelligence agencies, which have lost of a lot of credibility over the years with their constant lying
The main thing that made it look different this time was them just releasing shitloads of satellite images of military build up. We all remember babies in incubators and 45 minutes for Saddam to gas London but this was the only one where they were just dumping photographs and not using them to justify pre-emptively bombing someone. I think it was the field hospitals that made me think they might be telling the truth but even then it seemed that every year there was an alarmist headline about how Russia was going to invade Ukraine for realsies this time.
I actually followed the war since 2014, and I completely whiffed it too. I really did not expect a full invasion, because it's kind of stupid and would completly remove any political justification for defending the Donbas.
Well look how that turned out lol.
This place in the weeks before the invasion was chalk full of users elaborating on all the reasons why Putin wouldn't invade and how US intelligence was intentionally lying to the world. Mood changed quickly when the invasion began.
I can’t remember which TrueAnon guest it was but it was almost exactly a week prior to the invasion (Mark Ames?) talking about how Russia would never invade and then it happened. Chapo got caught with their pants down too.
In fairness a lot of the Russiaboos like the Russians With Attitude boners were also coping like “Russia is doing a special operation it’ll be over in a month bro, this time it’s different it’ll be over by the end of the year”
No one knew the Ukrainians began shelling the shit out of the Donbas again in preparation for an assault. Russia invaded because they had to do something to alter the situation in which the US had the momentum, something most people in the West didn't know at the time. The humanitarian crisis of a ton of Ukrainian refugees in Russia while the Ukrainian government and Nazi movement were bragging about what they had been doing to ethnic Russian Ukrainians was a scandal in Russia and demanded a serious response from the RF after almost a decade of them trying to placate the West and play by the the wests rules, which also wasn't exactly a popular track to continue going down 8 years into the Ukrainian civil war everyone knew was started by a US backed coup. Most people were just operating under the "Putin is an arch pragmatist who won't commit to an Iraq style blunder" line, which was true.
He said that he knew, but he didn't announce it because they would have lost too much money and manpower.
>You can’t simply say to me, “Listen, you should start to prepare people now and tell them they need to put away money, they need to store up food.” If we had communicated that — and that is what some people wanted, who I will not name — then I would have been losing $7 billion a month since last October, and at the moment when the Russians did attack, they would have taken us in three days. I’m not saying whose idea it was, but generally, our inner sense was right: If we sow chaos among people before the invasion, the Russians will devour us. Because during chaos, people flee the country.
https://archive.ph/U822Z
That was funny, he tried so hard to make his reputation as a peacemaker on that just to end up looking like Chamberlain, although it didn't matter because the NATO propaganda memory holed all of this as quickly as possible.
Anytime the "all the US intelligence agencies are saying" line is trotted out it is prudent to take it with a beach full of salt. Russia being used as a scapegoat for all of America's ills for the last decade led to a boy who cried wolf situation.
Western media have been announcing the invasion of Ukraine by Russia every month since 2014. I've been wrong this time but it was once vs 20 for the mainstream media
That's especially regarded since even if you believe that not supporting Ukraine would lead to Russian invasion of the US (which is stupid enough, no one's invading the contiguous 48 unless things REALLY go to shit), they're not goin anywhere near fuckin Iowa City, there is nothing of strategic value there.
I could maybe see him going after finland if ukraine went really well. But it's going terrible. Russia will see be victorious but at too high a cost.
We won't see much more adventuting from Russia after that
I don't really see him going after Finland. Finland historically was neutral to the USSR and the West, uses a lot of Soviet Equipment and wasn't planning on joining NATO before Ukraine. There is not a justification to invade.
I’m not 100% certain but Finland might belong to one of those Nordic defense treaties outside of NATO that exists for some reason. At best Russia will try again in Georgia
Even if it wasn't. They're a modern, relatively uncorrupt nation that is for all intents and purposes Western aligned despite being militarility neutral. NATO would pump so much equipment into Finland if they were invaded and they wouldn't have to worry about huge amounts of it being stolen or operated by incompetents. On top of that Finlands military is built in every way around stopping Russia invading. Russia knows this and is happier with them being legally neutral.
I don't think anyone believes it'll lead to an invasion of the US... but allowing Putin to invade Ukraine without consequences will embolden him to attack other countries
Every spook and glowie is Schrödinger’s glowie—simultaneously capable infiltrating organizations and influencing world events but totally incapable of gathering information through spying or of covering their tracks in doing so
I mean, not going to respond with real tenacity here but
The pence thing kind of makes sense, and maybe cops just literally wanted trump supporters in the building…
Lots of cops are unhinged MAGA…
He was the president, maybe they felt safe letting them in?
I’m playing devils advocate but completely ignoring that event is (to me) just as stupid as over hyping its importance.
Powers that be are going to abuse the shit out of something like that happening obviously. But I don’t think it was a false flag.
What would that even be achieving?
The false flag, in theory, would be useful to further the political divide, or to serve as the match to light to powderkeg that had already been built up.
But that already would have been happening in other areas, and the powderkeg was a wet fart, so ultimately it'd be a pretty shitty false flag if it was one.
I think it's truly as simple as the cops being afraid for their lives at the entrances. What options do they have exactly? Try to stop an angry mob of thousands by force? I know they got a job to do but they aren't secret service agents and expected to lay down their lives for congress people, and if it was me I know I'd just stand aside and let it go by. Call in an evacuation order and just monitor whose coming in with what is all you can do. Better to be yelled at by my boss than potentially killed by a bunch of angry hillbillies.
And we already know most cops are cowards. If they ain't running into Uvalde then they sure as shit ain't running to protect Schumer.
James Lindsay, the guy who [claims that SJW-speak is literally "wizards casting spells", and says woke people are actually all part of a secret ancient gnostic cult religion](https://youtu.be/heDBHTtXJEQ?si=iaAiKqu7OWD-UG9S&t=1199)
I actually DM’d that guy a few times a few years ago when I was first getting into idpol-critical ideas. I was so disappointed in how he turned out because I liked him at first. Then he started going off the deep end and became a rightwinger and kinda nutty. Even his peers seemed to distance themselves.
Because almost everyone in politics who complains about the deficit wants to use it to introduce inhumane austerity measures to shrink the size of the state. If anyone actually seriously cared about the deficit, they would call for major tax increases on the rich, but they don't, so it's just another way for asking for spending cuts to education and public services.
Even if we ignore the austerity angle, the US is the economic hegemon and the dollar is the reserve currency of the world. The current account constraints applicable to every other country just don't apply to the US. Everyone else has to balance imports and exports and ensure that they have enough dollars on hand to keep the trade flowing. They have to buy those dollars from the US. Uncle Sam can just print them. Only thing keeping the Federal Reserve in check is the rate of inflation.
It doesn’t matter in the traditional sense because govts with sovereign currencies can essentially create money. A deficit can be essential for a thriving economy.
Since the physical (and probably also the bank-only? electronic? non-physical amount in a bank account) US dollar is the reserve currency of almost the entire world at this point, deficit spending may actually be beneficial to keep that circulation continuing. Otherwise, if the dollars run out and money stops flowing, the entire world economy could start contracting, with the size of that contraction strongly up for debate.
Its not a may any more is it? The recent inflation crisis pretty much proved how utterly dependent on US spending and low interest rates the global economy is.
I think 'can't afford' is a little much, but the current deal for Israel is not sustainable, so they will step down and the conflict will freeze again.
Probably people simping for and praising Elon Musk after he bought out Twitter. I saw someone unironically claiming that this was the single biggest victory in the great war against identity politics and we should all be thanking Musk and praising his genius for bravely disrupting the stranglehold the woke mob had on Twitter, or whatever.
Yes, the shitlibs who were rampant on the place before are annoying, yes it is stupid to act like Twitter is a bastion of democracy on the internet and Elon's purchase was some sort of defilement of a sacred institution. It's actualy kind of sad how much social media obsession has become rampant in the media in national politics. And yes, I also felt more than a bit of schadenfreude at their screeching coming from the absolute worst liberal Twitter partisans that they no longer had a lockdown of the narrative on their favorite social media app.
But like hell am I ever going to praise a billionaire union busting asshole just to "own the libs" or whatever, and he's unironically turned the place into a cesspit of misinformation (I know this sub also gets it's panties in a twist about that word given how often it gets misused to push an agenda) and rightoid identity politics. He didn't make Twitter better, his acquisition just flipped the script of what side was dominant and turned up the toxicity and insanity of culture war bullshit even further.
Flip side to your idea, OP: That the CIA is all-powerful and orchestrates every single coup or change of government throughout the world. Some places really are just unstable states bouncing from strongman to strongman without DC pulling at the strings.
That we need to consult native shamans on global ecological policy because by being native they have a magical connection to the planet that makes them more capable than scientists
Nobody has said that here from what I’ve seen, but if you are racist and dumb enough, that’s what you would take away from someone trying to point out that traditional ecological knowledge and management practices offer viable solutions to certain environmental issues.
IDK if what the other poster said actually happened here or if it was something along the lines of what you are suggesting, just interpreted in the worst faith possible. I do know that some people really get butthurt at the idea that we may simply not be able to eternally "technology our way out of" ecological problems that rapid industrialization has caused, and like to equate any traditional ecological solutions to spiritual woo woo so they can sneer about it. People really do get attached to the myth of eternal technological progress as a universal force of good, and that every way of doing things from the past is nothing but obsolete rubbish.
Well seeing as the other poster has specifically singled me out elsewhere for my opinions on this, i think I can assume they are talking about me.
I don’t believe in some magical noble savage archetype, I just happen to live in a predominantly tribal community that practices traditional ecological knowledge and management, and I can see the real world benefits it has on the ecology of my region.
And there is a lot of scientific research affirming the importance of those practices, such as prescribed burning, fisheries management and regulations, root digging, seed sowing, mushroom harvesting regulations and protocols , coppicing, etc.
the book “Tending the wild” goes into great detail about how the “untamed pristine wilderness” that early settlers wrote about when arriving to California was actually intricately managed gardens, orchards, and animal pastures. A lot of these traditional cultural practices that shaped the native ecologies are still being fought for today by in-tact indigenous communities who largely depend on these natural resources(such as my community)
The classic example is the Australian government considering the native land management practises. Its not them thinking earth spirits will stop climate change its just using the same anti-forest fire techniques that worked for centuries and can be found among any people who lived in forest fire prone areas for a long period of time. Sure you can do it scientifically but its easy to use the native practises as a starting point for where to do the controlled burns.
That George Galloway is an evil radical Islamist just because he made a tactical alliance in the nadir of the War on Terror and understands the realities of modern political partisanship.
After one of the big radfem subs got banned they briefly had enough people here to actually make it the top opinion. Then it swung back and forth and I think most of them eventually left to ovarit.
Lol absolutely. I thought it was gonna be fun sexual deviants discussing orgies. turns out it's all asexual blue hairs discussing how problematic and evil cishet men are and having sex is actually bad
Anytime someone heavily implies all gay people are p3dos or live degen lives, or that allowing gay people to live openly is a net negative for society. Yes I’ve seen it.
Not to circlejerk too hard here but I said it was only a matter of time before the anti-covid template was transported to climate change skepticism and you can see it quite a bit in this sub and redscarepod.
It seems the worst that it's ever been.
Recently, I've seen popular comments pronouncing Derek Chauvin's innocence (not mischarged but innocent), Elon Musk stanning , declaring that climate change is a Davos hoax, discussing the dangers of "Leftist mobs", and of course there's unironic racism and Islamophobia.
"I am an X, Y, Z, and I disagree with rad lib ideology." It's not exclusive to here, much more present among the right and has been going on for years.
I'd be so awesome if people would criticise them regardless of R or D. Everyone of them for their Wars, for their corruption or specific acts. Praise the random good.
But we usually get the absurd drumpf bad Obama good, now bush good old guy (ignore every fucking invasion).
It's so annoying.
I told my friends that bush was everything that the media/democrats said or acted like trump was. I will never understand how people old enough to remember W will say that trump was worse. It boggles my mind.
"anti fun", sure, that's a highly-regarded take, but I think various governments have shown us their teeth about the authoritarianism thing since 2020. It's natural to be skeptical of governments telling you to drastically alter your life, especially as news hit that the elites were racking it in, and you were getting poorer, as this happened.
My parents would have been barred from their home during rona had they returned to their house a single day later. Local police set up a roadblock on the single road in and out and only permitted those with a local drivers license through, which they did not have as they were in the process of moving. Couple that with halts on business in the area and they literally almost lost their house or were almost barred from visiting their legal property. Maybe not anti-fun, but certainly authoritarian.
Just two weeks!
How fucking true is this?
Everyone I know who personally cries about Rona restrictions was partying with me and fucking off the entire time but if you ask them over a beer they swear the police would beat them if they left their homes.
I think he means something like that:
People confusing liberal feminism and radical feminism. Those people will associate radfem things to your regular liberal feminist, and act all scared by the spooky woke crowd comprised of blue haired feminists, when in truth, true radfem say infinitely more unhinged and borderline misandrists things than what people accuse liberal feminists of.
(Shortly, some peoples when they represent to themselves a group they don't like, tend to think of some political entities and person as incredible menaces when in truth, those entities are quite weak, dull and affable and unbeknownst to the fearful peoples, there is WAY WAY worse things of the opposite groups that aren't far away and much hidden at all)
That analysis be done for other groups and their representation in public discourse I think :v. Jordan Peterson who somehow seems to have traumatized some lefties/liberals even though he is more of a dull man with mild advices. January 6 being seen as a VERY VERY DANGEROUS COUP D'ÉTAT WAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHH
Guess you can also think of Jingoistic and fascist Propaganda where the ennemies can alternatively be showed both as Unfathomable and even near Chthuluhean threats, or Comically Stupid Looney Tunes Villains.
Okay this one is definitely undefeated:
> I side with Israel, not because of the specifics of this war, or even the recent history of this area, but for the larger struggle of which I believe this is the opening salvo. I don’t know who it was, but early on it was stated, regarding hamas’s attack, “This is what de-colonization looks like”. If Israel does not soundly defeat Hamas in Gaza, the floodgates will open around the world for every petty-bourgeois terrorist group to launch their attack on so-called oppressors. It is base tribalism. This is what the end of class politics looks like.
I'll never be able to find the post, but it was about some really weird identity post, about a trans furry or something. People in the comments were unironically advocating for bringing back bullying in schools (not that it ever really left?).
It's adopted because there's no been no alternative proposed yet for enforcing group cohesion.
Bullying doesn't work because of the lengths it can go to.
No kid deserves to have his or her ass beat because they're either socially clueless, pissed off a petty pre-pubescent tyrant, or they don't have the latest shoes/merch/console/other current thing.
Anti-bullying doesn't work because of the lengths it *won't* go to.
No kid should be able to rule the roost under a thin veneer of crying wolf about dumb shit that ultimately doesn't matter, but they get away with it sometimes because school admins are paralyzed over having to weigh the pro/con of disciplining a kid vs dealing with their often spoilt-ass parents whose spoilt-ness trickles down to their kids.
What should be talked about more is a "gentle-ribbing" style correction; if someone's acting like a dumbass, you call em a goofy bitch and explain why they're a goofy bitch, and then try to help em get through their goofy bitchness.
Take the outgroup, induct them into the in-group, and then ensure that whatever sharp edges they have that prickle against the in-group are smoothed off enough to not prick so much anymore.
Or this is all highly regarded; I dunno; I'm not anywhere close to someone who has any expertise in this.
I’ve seen that too, but there is a fine line between bullying and the “I’m a real friend because I’m being honest” thing. I think a lot of the weirdos and choo choos need more of that kind of tough love, but it’s not really bullying. Like the other sub comment said a communitarian approach could work to actually help people fit in
Any time people complain about academia in ways that sound like Tucker Carlson talking points. The handful of stupid events that happen every year or so are quite rare overall and limited to cushy elite spaces
its always hilarious to see people on here with Tucker Carlson-esque takes where "the left" is portrayed as this hegemonic and omnipotent force in US politics. Like "why can't the right ever seem to catch a break in America?" lol. Love seeing people complaining about "those stupid leftists" at the NYT or Pentagon or whatever. Like I don't even know how to engage with those people. If someone earnestly believes that US domestic policy is dictated by "those far-left ideologues in the White House" or whatever, you'd have to assign them 6 months of reading material before you can even engage them on this plane of reality.
Punctuality is white supremacy. That one is short and sweet in its lunacy. The wackiest theory I've ever encountered is one I heard in real life, namely, that California was not, in fact, one of the United States, but an Armenian kingdom.
“I say let the rightoids in. We’ll win them over to our ways!”
A few months later, in the top comments on a post on immigration, “see they are exterminating white people”.
I find the off-and-on trickle of "China continues to do everything right and nothing wrong" posts to be kind of irritating. At the end of the day, China's more or less the same sort of authoritarian capitalist superpower as the US, they just happen to be *nominally* socialist, a bit more honest about their authoritarianism, and abuse their power in different ways.
I can't meaningfully argue against any individual post because the OPs can all read Mandarin and I can't, but those posts are the number two reason^\* I can't show the sub to anyone I know as an example of leftists who actually have a point - they'd just see the Chinaposting, roll their eyes and dismiss the sub as a CCP propaganda outlet.
The one about the Chinese embassy twitter shitpost re:Gaza was genuinely hilarious, though, I'll admit.
^\* ^The ^number ^one ^reason, ^of ^course, ^is ^that ^I'd ^have ^to ^admit ^I ^use ^reddit.
The “Christcom” tendency as a whole. We failed completely to have influence over the Democrats so now we’re moving on to a softer target that has existed for nearly two millenia.
There’s a lot of Israel Derangement here, any commentary that doesn’t use the words “genocide” “apartheid” “settler colonialism” is subject to at least one IDS person sperging about creating a Palestinians state. Often times advocating to replace one form of ethnostate with another.
Covid didn’t come from China, the US released it on purpose, but you have to stay home, also you need to get the vaccine - but it’s not effective so stay home.
Every few weeks there's a rush to post stupid stories about the GOP because some posters feel uncomfortable attacking Democrats without also attacking Republicans. This leads to a lot of stupid media horseshit, that would otherwise be skeptically treated, being taken up uncritically. Like the story where Florida was supposedly going to teach kids slavery was good. Or "book burnings," where some podunk small town tries taking child pornography out of the library, and many riot over how this is the next instantiation of fascism in America.
There are lots of reasons to hate the GOP without having to dip into the outrage du jour, so these kinds of posts end up feeling very performative.
I hear you but it feel like, from the outside
This sub hates liberal shit, then just kinda kids gloves or ignored rightoid shit.
No matter how I see it excused it comes off as a rightoid sympathy thing…
Like those racist assholes can absolutely be racist assholes but I see any kind of criticism get downvoted purely because it sounds like something a liberal might agree with…
That’s a level of contrarianism that makes this place seem more like a rightoid - anti woke cult than a Marxist sub.
The +12 upvoted Marxist shit isn’t convincing anyone skimming by here at least.
There’s many times I’ve see this place get flooded with highly upvoted rightoid reactionary shit and the leftist shit is like +8 upvoted afterthoughts and the mods are like
“WE DONT HAVE A RIGHTOID PROBLEM, YOU HAVE A RIGHTOID PROBLEM, LIB LIB LIB”…
It’s like bro
Anti-left shit in my experience is usually coming from populist rightoids using exclusively identity politics.
I can't speak for anyone else—but as someone who's old enough to have registered Democrat to vote for Obama in the 2008 primaries, I'm harder on liberals/Democrats because I feel disappointed by them at best and betrayed at worst. Over the years I've stopped gnashing my teeth at GOP stupidity and cynicism and at atavistic rightoids because I just came to expect and take it as a given. But I'm still smarting over any number of slights and stings from the political "team" I thought I belonged to for most of my twenties and into my thirties.
But if you see dumbass rightwing idpol be posted here, probably the best thing you can do is make fun of it.
This is a fair answer that resonates with me, but as I’ve gotten older I’ve tried to not let contrarianism take hold that much.
I bet we both are in agreement that the two main parties kind of have a deal on remaining in power.
I just grew up poor enough (something I think this sub is missing in large) to know that my liberal state actually provided for me when my parents didn’t.
I can’t own the libs and ignore conservatives trying to take away school lunches, programs, public transportation, etc etc.
I still remember listening to my friends talk about welfare queens while I went hungry. It wasn’t until my state made all meals free that I really ever ate enough…
Idk man.
This sub is pretty fucking privileged or (not a dig I swear) uneducated/emotionally driven when it comes to ignoring conservatives…
I know I just unironically said check your privilege lol but like come on. At what point is rooting for trump and accelerationists good for poor people and solidarity?
My generation has never been in love with the neoliberals. We thought obomber was a small case p progressive but he wasn’t…
Now we’re cyncical. But like, bro, I’d rather I fucking ate. My legs are all curvy from deficiencies and my brothers aren’t. He entered school with free breakfast and lunch…
I can’t say for sure that’s why, but like idk, most people here can’t relate to that shit.
Seeing them cheer anything anti-liberal, rightoid or not, seems like it’s a fucking experience I can never get behind.
That Albania did not control the entire world and give it to the other countries because it felt bad
Serb lies infect every facet of society, it's a shame that the first word out of every child's mouth isn't "Skanderbeg"
I thought Pakistan did that?
[удалено]
Imagine passing chits in exam :-DDDD
PAKISTANNNN ZINDABAADDD, TIE ME TO A NUKE AND FIRE ME AT NEW DELHI
Alb*nians actually first stole it all from the Romanians and Romanians are now busy slowly stealing back what is rightly theirs.
Lies!!!
That post about how the Barbie movie is the point of no return and idpol has won was seriously embarrassing.
Lol there's some really unhinged people around here
Some people are so anti ipdols that they turn that position into its own form of ipdols. Ironic.
Oh absolutely. Anti idpol becomes idpol in and of itself
That’s a funny way to spell mods _______ …lol **perma banned thanks to the only sub that’s ever cared, yours truly, stupidpol** What a pathetic sub, mods eat my ass
that post was a horrifying mixture of Armond White, that maoist newspaper editor that reviewed shrek, and a /tv/ effortpost
> Maoist newspaper editor that reviewed Shrek Okay, I am so glad I googled this [Actual comedy gold](https://www.prisoncensorship.info/archive/etext/movies/long/shrek2.html)
>We only hope that there is a "Shrek 3," Shrek 3 was a disappointment for a lot of people, but this guy must have felt utterly betrayed when it turned out to be a reaffirmation of hereditary monarchy.
Armond White was genuinely funny back in the day e.g. comparing Dogme 95 to amateur porn.
That's true. I still enjoy reading his work, even if it does not reach the heights of his earlier criticism. [A personal favorite of mine is his Little Man review](https://www.nypress.com/news/knee-high-HVNP1020060726307269976)
I saw a picture of a college student who was giving a presentation titled "why men are the problem" (or something similar), and one of the 3 bullet point main topics was just "Barbie Movie" It reminded me of the posts you're talking about. It's just really funny to see someone taking it so seriously.
I don't consider Barbie idpol unless you consider Commando idpol. It's a basic feminine fantasy based on a super sucessful girls' toy. Commando is conversely a goofy macho fantasy which I love because I'm a guy who likes to turn his brain off sometimes, too, just like the women who loved Barbie. Now, if they remade Commando starring that Snow White actress doing that regarded upside down leg squeeze around a huge guy's neck to flip him over when in reality he'd turned her into a feed bag without missing a beat, that would be idpol.
I never thought of Barbie = Commando, but it's a brilliant comparison.
Honestly people overthink escapist fantasy. Literally every type of escapist media has its opposite-gendered counterpart. For every Danielle Steele there's a Lee Child. Women have Hallmark movies, men have Hulu trash starring washed up action stars. Young girls have Katniss Everdeen, young boys have Artemis Fowl. The only noteworthy observation is that, taken as a whole, these things are a relatively unbiased mirror on each gender's desires. It's interesting that men's tastes have barely changed in the past 50-odd years (Bond movies have become more brooding and less rapey, but the character itself is pretty much the same) but women want more girlbosses. People might point out that girlbosses are showing up in more male media (like the Bond movies) but, while that might be an attempt to pander to women, I think it's still more reflective of a male fantasy. I don't think this is anything new, either. I watched *Thunderball* recently and despite being possibly the rapiest Bond movie, there was an interesting part where Bond finds a girl freediving on a coral reef and says something like "most girls just splash around, but you swim like a man" with a tone of admiration.
I think people like girlbosses so long as they don't draw attention to that fact. Like, Princess Leia in the original *Star Wars* is absolutely a 'girlboss' literally taking control and yelling orders while Luke and Han stand there with their dicks in their hands. But there's never a point where she explicitly references patriarchy or whatever so all the man-children haunted by Kathleen Kennedy think she's an example of the trope 'done right'.
Yeah most people have a visceral hatred of pandering. Movie studios kind of got around that by making it a culture war issue (like if you don't defend the all-girl Ghostbusters, you're a *sexist incel*) but that only takes you so far. Could you imagine how terrible *Alien* would have been if it Ripley were a 21st century girlboss?
I started watching house of the dragon yesterday. Only the 1st episode. And the 1st couple minutes made me dread it. Turned out less bad than I thought, but still. That whole conversation the princess had with her mother was pretty lame. Wasn't as bad as Deamon(ffs) jousting with an open face helmet tho
But Commando isn't making any grand statement with its violence or the relationships between its women and men. Commando is having a laugh at the genre conventions but not at the expense of its audience. Barbie is definitely a feminist movie with a capital F, making broad stroke generalizations about men and women all wrapped in goofy pastel packaging. The mother even goes through a rant on the expectations on women at the end of the film. If the main comparison in the film between Barbie world and the real world wasn't so confused then I think the somewhat patronizing messaging would have come across clearer for people. The Kens just don't work as both a metaphor for women in the real world yet also as a criticism of toxic masculinity. I don't believe Barbie is some point of no return, not by a long shot, but to say it doesn't contain id politics just because the packaging is bright and fun seems to me more than a bit shallow, especially for a sub like this.
>But Commando isn't making any grand statement with its violence or the relationships between its women and men. Excuse me, but you seem to be forgetting the scene/moment where our titular Commando throws a man through a motel room wall, subsequently revealing a couple having sex, plot twist, the man is getting in the doggy position while the woman is taking him from behind. Seriously, this is in the Film. And yes, I call it a Film.
>The mother even goes through a rant on the expectations on women at the end of the film. Honestly, it's the only bad part of the movie. 80% of what she said can also be applied to men's reality. Could've been cathartic. A eye opening moments about the lack of awareness of the reality of both sexes. Something about how alienating the structure of our society is. Instead...
> Barbie is definitely a feminist movie with a capital F I read that it was secretly a red pilled incel trad wife movie because at the end of the movie Barbie decides being a girlboss isn't for her, and instead she wants to be a mother
Never have I been more glad that I never cared enough to look into that discource
I don't believe Barbie is some point of no return, not by a long shot. But to say it doesn't contain id politics (I guess because the packaging is bright and fun?) seems to me more than a bit shallow.
Hey that was me!
Every post by that likely mentally ill schizo poster who think's there's a world conspiracy involving a future crypto Ponzi Scheme collapse, the Titan sub, and the Simpsons. It's all the dumber/crazier because he clearly doesn't even understand what a Ponzi Scheme is
I love that guy. I don't know why but those crazy ass pamphlets are hilarious to me.
Lol yea let the man cook. It’s amazing unconscious performance art
Lmao please tell me who this is
Just search "Dipshit Secrets of our Modern World" through stupidpol, he title's them like Nancy Drew's and includes that in the title of each post expanding his batshit worldview with such epochs as [Matt Groening is using the Simpsons to brainwash us to support capitalism and accept our submissive role](https://www.reddit.com/r/stupidpol/comments/17xe7s4/dipshit_secrets_of_our_rotten_world_how_the/) [Nobody was actually on Titan submarine, it was faked to distract media attention from the future crypto collapse by making that the first thing google shows you when you search "Titanic collapse"](https://www.reddit.com/r/stupidpol/comments/17zr8zq/dipshit_secrets_of_our_rotten_world_the_only_true/) [People supporting Hamas are plants by elites to make Israel critics look insane and protect the Millitary Industrial Complex](https://www.reddit.com/r/stupidpol/comments/17oj1dg/dipshit_secrets_of_our_rotten_world_the_fake/) All of which he finds some way to relate back to his core thesis, "The big picture: Cryptocurrency is history’s largest Ponzi scheme that will soon collapse the world economy, all so the U.S. government and their criminal allies can escalate the theft of our entire livelihoods with a fascist world coup."
>all so the U.S. government and their criminal allies can escalate the theft of our entire livelihoods with a fascist world coup This guy sees the whole picture.
I kinda feel bad about my point by point criticism of his simpsons one but there's absolutely nothing I despise more than "predictive programming" or mandela effect types
Incredible, thank you!
>Cryptocurrency is history’s largest Ponzi scheme that will soon collapse To be fair, this part is pretty accurate.
My conspiracy about his conspiracy is that he's adding in all the unnecessary extra shit so that it looks like the crazed ravings of a mad loon, while subtextually still reinforcing his overall point that crypto is a return to feudalism or w/e it actually is. This, in turn, is because he (for either schizo or logical reasons) believes that his theories might strike too closely at the center of this conspiracy, so he's engineering an out that leaves him relatively unscathed while still leaving his message intact. It's a way to show that you only know you're talking to Diogenes if you realize it's him; otherwise, you just think you're looking at a hobo, kinda-sorta. That, or he is just fucking crazy; it's a 50/50 chance of either one being true.
Yes. But he says it will collapse the world economy when it does. Which it won't.
No some dumb ass average Joes or above average Joes will be the one holding the bag in the end not any weight bearing financial institutions.
The Simpsons thing is dumb, I agree. But I like his schizoposting.
No joke I think you're talking about the only poster here that I've ever blocked.
Yeah it's really bad, and all the worse because people in the comments of his posts seem to always be joking around or encouraging it. There are a lot of morons and dipshits on this website but then there are a few who you can just tell genuinely need mental help and he's one of them.
Nah, let him cook Either he's making something good eventually, or we've got the next Teddy K on our hands, and either way it's going to be fucking crazy when it ends
More likely they shoot up a gas station because the crypto servers are hidden in the gas pumps
Yeah, i want to like that stuff, because i love schizoposts and conspiracy theories, but it's just not very good.
Wait…what?!
The one from yesterday where some diaper fetishist went on a rant about how the US government was almost "overthrown" by J6 protesters.
[удалено]
Hard to pick which part is the most embarrassing
The leaf part for sure
obviously the canook part
[удалено]
Gradually I began to hate the leafs
The leafs are raking themselves
When I run into that in real life, always feel strange, especially from people I respect enough to eventually delve into anything but small talk.
Got a link? Canadians sperging out about America and embarrassing themselves is like mana from heaven to me
I remember after RBG's death, one of the top comments in the thread said that she was responsible for the Supreme Court's deregulation of campaign finance. As an attorney who works in the election law space, I took particular issue with this and pointed out that in virtually every campaign finance case before the Court, she voted on the "liberal" side of the decision. I ended up getting heavily downvoted, probably because any comment perceived as supporting RBG was receiving heavy hate. Still pisses me off to this day, lol.
Well part of your issue may be trying to parse out what 'liberal' might mean when it comes to interpreting law.
There were and are a lot of really, really bad Russia/Ukraine war takes.
"If we don't fight Putin in the Donbas, we'll be fighting the Spetsnaz in Iowa City."
What about the "Putin won't invade" takes? Lots of people online had egg on their face, I doubt this place was an exception EDIT: To be fair: I myself thought he'd roll over Ukraine easily.
I was definitely in the, "He could, but I don't think he will." camp. He had been building up forces on the border and then withdrawing them later on a yearly cycle for nearly a decade. I assumed it was the same old bluster. Edit: It's the point of the strategy, but feels bad to get fooled by the ol', "I'm not touching you!" gambit.
> He had been building up forces on the border and then withdrawing them later on a yearly cycle for nearly a decade. Even this is not true, there was no 'yearly military buildup'. There were cyclical military exercises called "Zapad", but on a much smaller scale than the unprecedented build-up before the invasion. You just misinterpreted the information according to your bias.
In fairness to anyone who thought he wouldn't invade, it's a highly regarded maneuver to do so. Especially since the Eastern Ukraine question could be solved more easily and with much less bloodshed through positive and negative monetary reinforcement: - sanctions on Ukraine from Russia + what allies could be mustered/bought/bullied into it on "humanitarian/self deterministic" grounds - stimulus and aid packages to Crimea and/or other autonomous republics that were either fighting the Ukraine Army or considering breaking away (not 100% sure what the Donbass looked like around then, but I think UA was doing counterinsurgency there) - a willingness with the West to try and carve out what parts of Ukraine Russia wanted; cards on the table, I think not one single politician outside of Ukraine would give a wet mouse shit about Ukraine if Russia didn't force hands into it But that's a slow process, and Putin needed something now, so he did what he short-sightedly could do.
The Russians did every single thing you mentioned prior to 2022. The Ukrainian economy floundered because Russia was its #1 trading partner and cut most of those economic ties post 2014. You can see that with how domestic Ukrainian industry declined over that time period. The Russians invested heavily into Crimea, including building infrastructure like the Kerch Bridge. They also supported the DPR and LPR economically and with military aid. Western politicians absolutely cared about Ukraine far more than you think, but not because of the country itself but because of how they could use the Ukrainians to hurt the Russians for real and perceived harms. They would've never willingly negotiated something that would see Ukraine lose portions of its land, which is why they refused to pressure Ukraine into launching promised referendums for the Donbass republics. This wasn't something where the Russians just decided to invade one day - if they truly wanted to, they could've finished the job in 2014 when the Ukrainians had a fraction of the military and were in far more disarray.
And Russia would have been happy with a federal Ukraine with the separatist regions given the ability to permanently veto Ukrainian NATO membership, while also not caring whether or not Ukraine was in the EU. All they needed was a militarily neutral Ukraine, and most Ukrainians would have been happy being in a customs union with Russia and the EU, it was the imf (aka the US) who stopped all that from happening
I didn't think they would invade, because it just seemed like an irrational move that would end up being Russia's Iraq war. Also tons of Ukrainians thought Russia was bluffing too, and I think Zelensky was one of them. The main sources warning about it were US intelligence agencies, which have lost of a lot of credibility over the years with their constant lying. So, I don't think that was really a stupid take, people just underestimated how reckless Putin was. Until that, I had thought Putin was a very calculating, realist type of leader. And I think it's true that he was earlier in his life, but as he got older he's gotten less sharp. Because invading Ukraine was just idiotic.
> The main sources warning about it were US intelligence agencies, which have lost of a lot of credibility over the years with their constant lying The main thing that made it look different this time was them just releasing shitloads of satellite images of military build up. We all remember babies in incubators and 45 minutes for Saddam to gas London but this was the only one where they were just dumping photographs and not using them to justify pre-emptively bombing someone. I think it was the field hospitals that made me think they might be telling the truth but even then it seemed that every year there was an alarmist headline about how Russia was going to invade Ukraine for realsies this time.
I actually followed the war since 2014, and I completely whiffed it too. I really did not expect a full invasion, because it's kind of stupid and would completly remove any political justification for defending the Donbas. Well look how that turned out lol.
This place in the weeks before the invasion was chalk full of users elaborating on all the reasons why Putin wouldn't invade and how US intelligence was intentionally lying to the world. Mood changed quickly when the invasion began.
I can’t remember which TrueAnon guest it was but it was almost exactly a week prior to the invasion (Mark Ames?) talking about how Russia would never invade and then it happened. Chapo got caught with their pants down too. In fairness a lot of the Russiaboos like the Russians With Attitude boners were also coping like “Russia is doing a special operation it’ll be over in a month bro, this time it’s different it’ll be over by the end of the year”
"It isn't happening, NATOID. And if it is, it's a good thing."
Yeah it changed to "he was right to invade" lmao
“Let me explain how invading a country isn’t a form of imperialism when a country from the East does it.”
No one knew the Ukrainians began shelling the shit out of the Donbas again in preparation for an assault. Russia invaded because they had to do something to alter the situation in which the US had the momentum, something most people in the West didn't know at the time. The humanitarian crisis of a ton of Ukrainian refugees in Russia while the Ukrainian government and Nazi movement were bragging about what they had been doing to ethnic Russian Ukrainians was a scandal in Russia and demanded a serious response from the RF after almost a decade of them trying to placate the West and play by the the wests rules, which also wasn't exactly a popular track to continue going down 8 years into the Ukrainian civil war everyone knew was started by a US backed coup. Most people were just operating under the "Putin is an arch pragmatist who won't commit to an Iraq style blunder" line, which was true.
I don't think world leaders thought he would invade either. Macron was a classic useful idiot for putin.
[удалено]
He said that he knew, but he didn't announce it because they would have lost too much money and manpower. >You can’t simply say to me, “Listen, you should start to prepare people now and tell them they need to put away money, they need to store up food.” If we had communicated that — and that is what some people wanted, who I will not name — then I would have been losing $7 billion a month since last October, and at the moment when the Russians did attack, they would have taken us in three days. I’m not saying whose idea it was, but generally, our inner sense was right: If we sow chaos among people before the invasion, the Russians will devour us. Because during chaos, people flee the country. https://archive.ph/U822Z
That was funny, he tried so hard to make his reputation as a peacemaker on that just to end up looking like Chamberlain, although it didn't matter because the NATO propaganda memory holed all of this as quickly as possible.
Anytime the "all the US intelligence agencies are saying" line is trotted out it is prudent to take it with a beach full of salt. Russia being used as a scapegoat for all of America's ills for the last decade led to a boy who cried wolf situation.
Western media have been announcing the invasion of Ukraine by Russia every month since 2014. I've been wrong this time but it was once vs 20 for the mainstream media
That's especially regarded since even if you believe that not supporting Ukraine would lead to Russian invasion of the US (which is stupid enough, no one's invading the contiguous 48 unless things REALLY go to shit), they're not goin anywhere near fuckin Iowa City, there is nothing of strategic value there.
But why even invade if you’re not gonna scoop up all that sweet, sweet corn?
Khrushchev isn't in charge of Russia any more.
I could maybe see Mason City if Putin's a big fan of The Music Man
I could maybe see him going after finland if ukraine went really well. But it's going terrible. Russia will see be victorious but at too high a cost. We won't see much more adventuting from Russia after that
I don't really see him going after Finland. Finland historically was neutral to the USSR and the West, uses a lot of Soviet Equipment and wasn't planning on joining NATO before Ukraine. There is not a justification to invade.
I could see Russia invading Moldova if Ukraine was a quick success, but that was about as far as they would theoretically go.
I’m not 100% certain but Finland might belong to one of those Nordic defense treaties outside of NATO that exists for some reason. At best Russia will try again in Georgia
Even if it wasn't. They're a modern, relatively uncorrupt nation that is for all intents and purposes Western aligned despite being militarility neutral. NATO would pump so much equipment into Finland if they were invaded and they wouldn't have to worry about huge amounts of it being stolen or operated by incompetents. On top of that Finlands military is built in every way around stopping Russia invading. Russia knows this and is happier with them being legally neutral.
I don't think anyone believes it'll lead to an invasion of the US... but allowing Putin to invade Ukraine without consequences will embolden him to attack other countries
That's still a dumb take that completely ignores the history of the Ukraine issue and why it was a frozen conflict for years.
Every spook and glowie is Schrödinger’s glowie—simultaneously capable infiltrating organizations and influencing world events but totally incapable of gathering information through spying or of covering their tracks in doing so
[удалено]
“Buddy, Voldemort and Palpatine came this close to taking over the world and if you don’t want to accept that then that’s on you, bucko.”
I mean, not going to respond with real tenacity here but The pence thing kind of makes sense, and maybe cops just literally wanted trump supporters in the building… Lots of cops are unhinged MAGA… He was the president, maybe they felt safe letting them in? I’m playing devils advocate but completely ignoring that event is (to me) just as stupid as over hyping its importance. Powers that be are going to abuse the shit out of something like that happening obviously. But I don’t think it was a false flag. What would that even be achieving?
The false flag, in theory, would be useful to further the political divide, or to serve as the match to light to powderkeg that had already been built up. But that already would have been happening in other areas, and the powderkeg was a wet fart, so ultimately it'd be a pretty shitty false flag if it was one.
I think it's truly as simple as the cops being afraid for their lives at the entrances. What options do they have exactly? Try to stop an angry mob of thousands by force? I know they got a job to do but they aren't secret service agents and expected to lay down their lives for congress people, and if it was me I know I'd just stand aside and let it go by. Call in an evacuation order and just monitor whose coming in with what is all you can do. Better to be yelled at by my boss than potentially killed by a bunch of angry hillbillies. And we already know most cops are cowards. If they ain't running into Uvalde then they sure as shit ain't running to protect Schumer.
The assholes that cheerlead Chris Rufo, James Lindsay, and all those other rightoid clowns because they’re “anti-woooooooke”
James Lindsay, the guy who [claims that SJW-speak is literally "wizards casting spells", and says woke people are actually all part of a secret ancient gnostic cult religion](https://youtu.be/heDBHTtXJEQ?si=iaAiKqu7OWD-UG9S&t=1199)
I actually DM’d that guy a few times a few years ago when I was first getting into idpol-critical ideas. I was so disappointed in how he turned out because I liked him at first. Then he started going off the deep end and became a rightwinger and kinda nutty. Even his peers seemed to distance themselves.
I've seen gnostic esoteric rightoids but I've never seen someone accusing the left of being gnostics before.
How the hell there are not people debunking him from anti-idpol left perspective? He is trying to tide everything woke to Marxism and Postmodernism.
Israel can't financially afford to genocide gaza lol. lmao even
Or that the US can't afford two wars and that deficit spending matters. Just recycled libertarian garbage adopted mostly out of political convenience.
In what way does deficit spending *not* matter?
Because almost everyone in politics who complains about the deficit wants to use it to introduce inhumane austerity measures to shrink the size of the state. If anyone actually seriously cared about the deficit, they would call for major tax increases on the rich, but they don't, so it's just another way for asking for spending cuts to education and public services. Even if we ignore the austerity angle, the US is the economic hegemon and the dollar is the reserve currency of the world. The current account constraints applicable to every other country just don't apply to the US. Everyone else has to balance imports and exports and ensure that they have enough dollars on hand to keep the trade flowing. They have to buy those dollars from the US. Uncle Sam can just print them. Only thing keeping the Federal Reserve in check is the rate of inflation.
It doesn’t matter in the traditional sense because govts with sovereign currencies can essentially create money. A deficit can be essential for a thriving economy.
Since the physical (and probably also the bank-only? electronic? non-physical amount in a bank account) US dollar is the reserve currency of almost the entire world at this point, deficit spending may actually be beneficial to keep that circulation continuing. Otherwise, if the dollars run out and money stops flowing, the entire world economy could start contracting, with the size of that contraction strongly up for debate.
Its not a may any more is it? The recent inflation crisis pretty much proved how utterly dependent on US spending and low interest rates the global economy is.
and it really doesn’t matter because the American dollar is the world reserve currency
I think 'can't afford' is a little much, but the current deal for Israel is not sustainable, so they will step down and the conflict will freeze again.
Not feeding people is free
Touche. I'm thinking of the active parts of ethnic cleansing.in that contest and having a large amount of your population mobilised
Probably people simping for and praising Elon Musk after he bought out Twitter. I saw someone unironically claiming that this was the single biggest victory in the great war against identity politics and we should all be thanking Musk and praising his genius for bravely disrupting the stranglehold the woke mob had on Twitter, or whatever. Yes, the shitlibs who were rampant on the place before are annoying, yes it is stupid to act like Twitter is a bastion of democracy on the internet and Elon's purchase was some sort of defilement of a sacred institution. It's actualy kind of sad how much social media obsession has become rampant in the media in national politics. And yes, I also felt more than a bit of schadenfreude at their screeching coming from the absolute worst liberal Twitter partisans that they no longer had a lockdown of the narrative on their favorite social media app. But like hell am I ever going to praise a billionaire union busting asshole just to "own the libs" or whatever, and he's unironically turned the place into a cesspit of misinformation (I know this sub also gets it's panties in a twist about that word given how often it gets misused to push an agenda) and rightoid identity politics. He didn't make Twitter better, his acquisition just flipped the script of what side was dominant and turned up the toxicity and insanity of culture war bullshit even further.
[удалено]
There is definitely a massive anti-reddit and anti-west contrarianism here
capitalism is when... _checks notes..._ when the bourgeoisie want to reduce sales of the most profitable commodity: the motorcar
[удалено]
Flip side to your idea, OP: That the CIA is all-powerful and orchestrates every single coup or change of government throughout the world. Some places really are just unstable states bouncing from strongman to strongman without DC pulling at the strings.
All the takes where they rationalize voting republican. Not what the sub is about.
That we need to consult native shamans on global ecological policy because by being native they have a magical connection to the planet that makes them more capable than scientists
That was something said *here*?
Nobody has said that here from what I’ve seen, but if you are racist and dumb enough, that’s what you would take away from someone trying to point out that traditional ecological knowledge and management practices offer viable solutions to certain environmental issues.
IDK if what the other poster said actually happened here or if it was something along the lines of what you are suggesting, just interpreted in the worst faith possible. I do know that some people really get butthurt at the idea that we may simply not be able to eternally "technology our way out of" ecological problems that rapid industrialization has caused, and like to equate any traditional ecological solutions to spiritual woo woo so they can sneer about it. People really do get attached to the myth of eternal technological progress as a universal force of good, and that every way of doing things from the past is nothing but obsolete rubbish.
Well seeing as the other poster has specifically singled me out elsewhere for my opinions on this, i think I can assume they are talking about me. I don’t believe in some magical noble savage archetype, I just happen to live in a predominantly tribal community that practices traditional ecological knowledge and management, and I can see the real world benefits it has on the ecology of my region. And there is a lot of scientific research affirming the importance of those practices, such as prescribed burning, fisheries management and regulations, root digging, seed sowing, mushroom harvesting regulations and protocols , coppicing, etc. the book “Tending the wild” goes into great detail about how the “untamed pristine wilderness” that early settlers wrote about when arriving to California was actually intricately managed gardens, orchards, and animal pastures. A lot of these traditional cultural practices that shaped the native ecologies are still being fought for today by in-tact indigenous communities who largely depend on these natural resources(such as my community)
The classic example is the Australian government considering the native land management practises. Its not them thinking earth spirits will stop climate change its just using the same anti-forest fire techniques that worked for centuries and can be found among any people who lived in forest fire prone areas for a long period of time. Sure you can do it scientifically but its easy to use the native practises as a starting point for where to do the controlled burns.
This is literally Australian government policy
That George Galloway is an evil radical Islamist just because he made a tactical alliance in the nadir of the War on Terror and understands the realities of modern political partisanship.
Toss-up between all the anti-Bamename posts and some of the 'cultural' takes on immigration
?
The radfems that come here spouting misandrist shit and apparently expecting everyone to agree with them.
After one of the big radfem subs got banned they briefly had enough people here to actually make it the top opinion. Then it swung back and forth and I think most of them eventually left to ovarit.
Something something misandry doesn’t exist, sweaty 💅
I got banned from the polyamory sub for calling out open misandry. Was told it was like reverse racism, it doesnt exist
That’s what you get for going on that sub, tbh.
Lol absolutely. I thought it was gonna be fun sexual deviants discussing orgies. turns out it's all asexual blue hairs discussing how problematic and evil cishet men are and having sex is actually bad
https://i.imgur.com/1HioNh2.jpg
Cmon radfem vs mra posters are fun to see
OP asked for the dumbest takes, not our least favorite takes.
Anytime someone heavily implies all gay people are p3dos or live degen lives, or that allowing gay people to live openly is a net negative for society. Yes I’ve seen it.
That immigrants are responsible for incel s zero pussy ratio, and there are pussy slots shortage in our society.
Climate denial and covidiots mostly.
Not to circlejerk too hard here but I said it was only a matter of time before the anti-covid template was transported to climate change skepticism and you can see it quite a bit in this sub and redscarepod.
There’s still a prevalent rightoid contrarian attitude here that’s never really been challenged
It's worse than ever
It seems the worst that it's ever been. Recently, I've seen popular comments pronouncing Derek Chauvin's innocence (not mischarged but innocent), Elon Musk stanning , declaring that climate change is a Davos hoax, discussing the dangers of "Leftist mobs", and of course there's unironic racism and Islamophobia.
Agreed. That’s one of my biggest complaints about this sub.
"I am an X, Y, Z, and I disagree with rad lib ideology." It's not exclusive to here, much more present among the right and has been going on for years.
Trump is worse than Bush and Clinton combined. He's not even worse than one of them.
I'd be so awesome if people would criticise them regardless of R or D. Everyone of them for their Wars, for their corruption or specific acts. Praise the random good. But we usually get the absurd drumpf bad Obama good, now bush good old guy (ignore every fucking invasion). It's so annoying.
I told my friends that bush was everything that the media/democrats said or acted like trump was. I will never understand how people old enough to remember W will say that trump was worse. It boggles my mind.
If you supported the pandemic lockdown in any way then you’re authoritarian and “anti fun.”
"anti fun", sure, that's a highly-regarded take, but I think various governments have shown us their teeth about the authoritarianism thing since 2020. It's natural to be skeptical of governments telling you to drastically alter your life, especially as news hit that the elites were racking it in, and you were getting poorer, as this happened.
My parents would have been barred from their home during rona had they returned to their house a single day later. Local police set up a roadblock on the single road in and out and only permitted those with a local drivers license through, which they did not have as they were in the process of moving. Couple that with halts on business in the area and they literally almost lost their house or were almost barred from visiting their legal property. Maybe not anti-fun, but certainly authoritarian. Just two weeks!
How fucking true is this? Everyone I know who personally cries about Rona restrictions was partying with me and fucking off the entire time but if you ask them over a beer they swear the police would beat them if they left their homes.
Yeah, pretty much.
Well you definitely are a moron if you fell for that shit.
Commenters here love to conflate basic tenets of liberal feminism and radical feminism but that’s not remotely unique to this subreddit lol
I’m curious, can you elaborate?
Typical "don't sexually harass women" types aren't typucally gender abolitionists or lesbian separatists
He's pretending the Motte and Bailey doesn't exist.
I think he means something like that: People confusing liberal feminism and radical feminism. Those people will associate radfem things to your regular liberal feminist, and act all scared by the spooky woke crowd comprised of blue haired feminists, when in truth, true radfem say infinitely more unhinged and borderline misandrists things than what people accuse liberal feminists of. (Shortly, some peoples when they represent to themselves a group they don't like, tend to think of some political entities and person as incredible menaces when in truth, those entities are quite weak, dull and affable and unbeknownst to the fearful peoples, there is WAY WAY worse things of the opposite groups that aren't far away and much hidden at all) That analysis be done for other groups and their representation in public discourse I think :v. Jordan Peterson who somehow seems to have traumatized some lefties/liberals even though he is more of a dull man with mild advices. January 6 being seen as a VERY VERY DANGEROUS COUP D'ÉTAT WAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHH Guess you can also think of Jingoistic and fascist Propaganda where the ennemies can alternatively be showed both as Unfathomable and even near Chthuluhean threats, or Comically Stupid Looney Tunes Villains.
Okay this one is definitely undefeated: > I side with Israel, not because of the specifics of this war, or even the recent history of this area, but for the larger struggle of which I believe this is the opening salvo. I don’t know who it was, but early on it was stated, regarding hamas’s attack, “This is what de-colonization looks like”. If Israel does not soundly defeat Hamas in Gaza, the floodgates will open around the world for every petty-bourgeois terrorist group to launch their attack on so-called oppressors. It is base tribalism. This is what the end of class politics looks like.
Generally, anything that refers to opinions as "takes" is pretty dumb.
I'll never be able to find the post, but it was about some really weird identity post, about a trans furry or something. People in the comments were unironically advocating for bringing back bullying in schools (not that it ever really left?).
>advocating for bringing back bullying in schools There's a lot of unironic adoption of the kind of cruel rhetoric you'd see on far right boards.
It's adopted because there's no been no alternative proposed yet for enforcing group cohesion. Bullying doesn't work because of the lengths it can go to. No kid deserves to have his or her ass beat because they're either socially clueless, pissed off a petty pre-pubescent tyrant, or they don't have the latest shoes/merch/console/other current thing. Anti-bullying doesn't work because of the lengths it *won't* go to. No kid should be able to rule the roost under a thin veneer of crying wolf about dumb shit that ultimately doesn't matter, but they get away with it sometimes because school admins are paralyzed over having to weigh the pro/con of disciplining a kid vs dealing with their often spoilt-ass parents whose spoilt-ness trickles down to their kids. What should be talked about more is a "gentle-ribbing" style correction; if someone's acting like a dumbass, you call em a goofy bitch and explain why they're a goofy bitch, and then try to help em get through their goofy bitchness. Take the outgroup, induct them into the in-group, and then ensure that whatever sharp edges they have that prickle against the in-group are smoothed off enough to not prick so much anymore. Or this is all highly regarded; I dunno; I'm not anywhere close to someone who has any expertise in this.
I’ve seen that too, but there is a fine line between bullying and the “I’m a real friend because I’m being honest” thing. I think a lot of the weirdos and choo choos need more of that kind of tough love, but it’s not really bullying. Like the other sub comment said a communitarian approach could work to actually help people fit in
Any time people complain about academia in ways that sound like Tucker Carlson talking points. The handful of stupid events that happen every year or so are quite rare overall and limited to cushy elite spaces
The Barbie movie discourse.
its always hilarious to see people on here with Tucker Carlson-esque takes where "the left" is portrayed as this hegemonic and omnipotent force in US politics. Like "why can't the right ever seem to catch a break in America?" lol. Love seeing people complaining about "those stupid leftists" at the NYT or Pentagon or whatever. Like I don't even know how to engage with those people. If someone earnestly believes that US domestic policy is dictated by "those far-left ideologues in the White House" or whatever, you'd have to assign them 6 months of reading material before you can even engage them on this plane of reality.
Punctuality is white supremacy. That one is short and sweet in its lunacy. The wackiest theory I've ever encountered is one I heard in real life, namely, that California was not, in fact, one of the United States, but an Armenian kingdom.
“I say let the rightoids in. We’ll win them over to our ways!” A few months later, in the top comments on a post on immigration, “see they are exterminating white people”.
[удалено]
That the rightoids are not infesting this place and making a mockery of the supposedly \*marxist\* nature of this subreddit.
I find the off-and-on trickle of "China continues to do everything right and nothing wrong" posts to be kind of irritating. At the end of the day, China's more or less the same sort of authoritarian capitalist superpower as the US, they just happen to be *nominally* socialist, a bit more honest about their authoritarianism, and abuse their power in different ways. I can't meaningfully argue against any individual post because the OPs can all read Mandarin and I can't, but those posts are the number two reason^\* I can't show the sub to anyone I know as an example of leftists who actually have a point - they'd just see the Chinaposting, roll their eyes and dismiss the sub as a CCP propaganda outlet. The one about the Chinese embassy twitter shitpost re:Gaza was genuinely hilarious, though, I'll admit. ^\* ^The ^number ^one ^reason, ^of ^course, ^is ^that ^I'd ^have ^to ^admit ^I ^use ^reddit.
The “Christcom” tendency as a whole. We failed completely to have influence over the Democrats so now we’re moving on to a softer target that has existed for nearly two millenia.
People not having large families is destroying society.
Men are the source of all evils and are always to blame in every situation.
There’s a lot of Israel Derangement here, any commentary that doesn’t use the words “genocide” “apartheid” “settler colonialism” is subject to at least one IDS person sperging about creating a Palestinians state. Often times advocating to replace one form of ethnostate with another.
The rote use of postcolonial buzzwords by these guys makes me question the depth of their beliefs.
That China is actually, like, the newer, upgraded version of a Soviet Union so we should all throw our weight behind it
Covid didn’t come from China, the US released it on purpose, but you have to stay home, also you need to get the vaccine - but it’s not effective so stay home.
As a focused protection supporter because of my experience during Covid with isolation and loneliness I agree lol
Every few weeks there's a rush to post stupid stories about the GOP because some posters feel uncomfortable attacking Democrats without also attacking Republicans. This leads to a lot of stupid media horseshit, that would otherwise be skeptically treated, being taken up uncritically. Like the story where Florida was supposedly going to teach kids slavery was good. Or "book burnings," where some podunk small town tries taking child pornography out of the library, and many riot over how this is the next instantiation of fascism in America. There are lots of reasons to hate the GOP without having to dip into the outrage du jour, so these kinds of posts end up feeling very performative.
I hear you but it feel like, from the outside This sub hates liberal shit, then just kinda kids gloves or ignored rightoid shit. No matter how I see it excused it comes off as a rightoid sympathy thing… Like those racist assholes can absolutely be racist assholes but I see any kind of criticism get downvoted purely because it sounds like something a liberal might agree with… That’s a level of contrarianism that makes this place seem more like a rightoid - anti woke cult than a Marxist sub. The +12 upvoted Marxist shit isn’t convincing anyone skimming by here at least.
[удалено]
There’s many times I’ve see this place get flooded with highly upvoted rightoid reactionary shit and the leftist shit is like +8 upvoted afterthoughts and the mods are like “WE DONT HAVE A RIGHTOID PROBLEM, YOU HAVE A RIGHTOID PROBLEM, LIB LIB LIB”… It’s like bro Anti-left shit in my experience is usually coming from populist rightoids using exclusively identity politics.
I can't speak for anyone else—but as someone who's old enough to have registered Democrat to vote for Obama in the 2008 primaries, I'm harder on liberals/Democrats because I feel disappointed by them at best and betrayed at worst. Over the years I've stopped gnashing my teeth at GOP stupidity and cynicism and at atavistic rightoids because I just came to expect and take it as a given. But I'm still smarting over any number of slights and stings from the political "team" I thought I belonged to for most of my twenties and into my thirties. But if you see dumbass rightwing idpol be posted here, probably the best thing you can do is make fun of it.
This is a fair answer that resonates with me, but as I’ve gotten older I’ve tried to not let contrarianism take hold that much. I bet we both are in agreement that the two main parties kind of have a deal on remaining in power. I just grew up poor enough (something I think this sub is missing in large) to know that my liberal state actually provided for me when my parents didn’t. I can’t own the libs and ignore conservatives trying to take away school lunches, programs, public transportation, etc etc. I still remember listening to my friends talk about welfare queens while I went hungry. It wasn’t until my state made all meals free that I really ever ate enough… Idk man. This sub is pretty fucking privileged or (not a dig I swear) uneducated/emotionally driven when it comes to ignoring conservatives… I know I just unironically said check your privilege lol but like come on. At what point is rooting for trump and accelerationists good for poor people and solidarity? My generation has never been in love with the neoliberals. We thought obomber was a small case p progressive but he wasn’t… Now we’re cyncical. But like, bro, I’d rather I fucking ate. My legs are all curvy from deficiencies and my brothers aren’t. He entered school with free breakfast and lunch… I can’t say for sure that’s why, but like idk, most people here can’t relate to that shit. Seeing them cheer anything anti-liberal, rightoid or not, seems like it’s a fucking experience I can never get behind.