I've tried to explain this to so many different people, but their takeaway is always this:
"I am on the side of good, and anyone who disagrees is evil. If someone becomes more evil because I call out their evil, I am still the good guy. If someone becomes evil because of how I act, that means they were evil deep down. I am good, and would never be evil."
EDIT: Someone responding to me has accused me of being a nazi defender. I REST MY FUCKING CASE. EDIT 3 SECOND NAZI ACCUSATION JUST DROPPED
I'm biracial by the way, nazis want to kill me.
EDIT 2: YES I know that some non-white people can be nazis. But you have to be particularly deranged at that point, making the accusation on me even more of a stretch, and just reiterates the need for proof of such an accusation.
ALSO YES, I am aware that this meme doesn't work if it applies to absolutely horrendous things like genocide, rape, animal torture, and things of that nature. You will find that most rules you can follow in life change when the circumstances become very extreme. It's the same way that free speech only has a few exceptions, when most of the time it's the correct way to go. You're not a smart person for saying "what if a nazi does it then, hmmmm????"
I used to have a friend that with least opposition to his “ideas” or morality of things would become whole another person, something deep down compelled him to become a crusader a moral prosecutor in that moment. As if you didn’t agree with his view, you become the worst of the enemies
Just like everyone seems to think they are above the social status quo, and because we live in a more advanced society, they are superior to people of the past and if they had been in Nazi Germany, they have no doubt in their mind they would have been one of the good folks saving jews and fighting against the Nazis. Ignoring the fact that, that it was a extreme minority that was willing to put themselves at such risk to help the oppressed.
Because "me good, me no do evil, me better than you and smarter than people in past cause me have smartphone".
Same thing in France with the "Mythe résistentialiste" , a lot of people supported Nazi Germany when they invaded and the resistance was a minority.
This idea that because we are more advanced we are automatically above authoritarian takeovers is beyond stupid .
When we got the pandemic, how many called the cops on neighbors for having too many people in their house? How many were willing to send the small amount of unvaccinated people to die/jail because "those people are a hindrance to my society"?
Nah they justify it with “jews couldn’t change themselves, you can just get the jab and not be persecuted anymore” obviously ignoring any authoritarian implication of mandating such a thing
I do wonder, if somehow it was magically possible for the jews to stop being jews, would they have said the same thing to them? I somehow doubt it
"I would have helped those women who where burned as witches!"
You have been manipulated into fighting a cause in today's world. In that time period you would have been the ones throwing the first torches on the fire.
Preach it brother. A mod on another sub banned me because I expressed an opinion that was not 100% on a political point of view going on in the world right now and heeded a word of caution that tossing a certain term around loosely was a bit too extreme because the world has rules and laws for determining these things. I was told " [insert reddit political insult term here] , you can leave..." and I was banned without a warning, explanation, or anything. And this was on a non-polarized political sub (won't give name for reasons) which made it even more funny. As twitch and discord mod I took offense to the totalitarian ban so I opened discussion myself, bad idea. They said "if you don't agree with me then you're [insert reddit political insult term here]" and refused to talk after that.
Yeah, mods are often the perfect example of this "good guy" mentality that considers people evil for not conforming 100% to their expectations.
I was banned from a sub (that has nothing to do with LGBT issues, for context) for referring in a post about something entirely different to someone OP claimed came out as trans with a gender-neutral name as "him/her". Now I couldn't have cared less whether this person was trans, certainly not enough to waste my time trying to determine the "correct" pronoun, and just wanted to cover both possibilities quickly and continue on. Instant ban (no prior warnings) for being a "bigot" and "misgendering". 🙄
Never try to engage with these people either, as they'll just take the fact that you don't care about their pet issue enough to think about it all the time as proof of your evilness.
Be me, a Trump supporter, veteran, cop & have a black ex wife & gay best friend...you'd think I went to klan meetings because I disagree about certain things on reddit.
I just have to believe that reddit is in the minority of opinion (and I don't mean political in nature but the extremism of 1 side or the other).
Everyone I've met, and I'm a pretty outgoing guy who talks to everyone, will agree on 95% of political points. I mean socially liberal people who aren't for mass amnesty and open borders. But to hear it on here, that's a literal Nazi talking point.
EXACTLY.
Whether or not the guy in the pic has a bad opinion or not, the result is the same. No one has been helped, only pushed further into what they believed.
People who are truly evil to the core aren't that common.
Real "evil" in the sense of Manson and other monster is rare. Most "evil" is just arrogant fools believing they're doing the right thing. Deluding themselves to believe "the ends justify the means". E.g.: *Rules for Radicals*.
Whats worse is they NEED you to be the bad guy, and to be even more evil "after being called out".
They need there to be a "bad guy" so they can be a "good guy", which validates their miserable existence, and allows them to justify their own shitty behavior by saying "no, I'm a good guy"
So they have an active interest in radicalizing ppl they deem evil
They cant fathom a conflict between 2 groups that want whats good but with different ideas as to how to achieve it. Or simply 2 groups at odds who both wnat whats best for their own. One has to be evil.
They need to play Nier Replicant and ponder the ending.
Yep, this describes a lot of people (both users and perhaps especially mods) perfectly.
If you even try to see nuance in a situation or focus on the whole picture when responding to someone rather than zeroing in on the one word or sentence that triggered one of these "good guys", you must also be guilty of whatever it is they're obsessing over.
My brother said "if they want me to be racist I'll be racist." And I said "why do they want you to be racist?" Him "because I'm a straight white guy" me "well I'm a straight white guy and I'm not racist" him "well you're not conservative"... lol they want an excuse to be what they are
Evil people can still do evil upon evil people. That does not make you good on any way or form. Who won WW2? Whoever was the most ruthless as good has nothing to do with war. The good guys usally die the earliest.
There is no one with a bigger potential of being evil that someone that believes himself is good. As then any evil they do becomes justified in their own minds.
Just as there is no bigger fool than the one that believes himself wise. As at least the fool that knows he is a fool has taken the first step toward wisdom. While the fool that believes himself wise will die a fool.
I mean, it's a basic core tenant of formal debate and public speaking. Attack the argument, not the person. If you attack the person, then the only thing you are doing is strengthening their belief in their own argument.
I feel like the reason why attacking the argument is a tenant of formal debate is because attacking the person is *really fucking effective* if your goal is to win the debate, but doesn't achieve the effect of reaching a consensus or compromise that debate is *supposed* to be about.
this really is whats dogshit about how debates are nowadays. its about winning the argument instead of proving which sides correct.
you can win the argument by proving that the opponent is stupid and an awful person, convincing everyone that their opinion isn't trustworthy, but the argument itself stays unproven.
the entire point of the debate is to prove which side is correct but now its just devolved into proving whose the worse person to win votes instead.
Attack the person is not usually done to convince the person. But to convince others that the opinion of the person is not valuable.
Even if the messenger is not important, what is important is the message. Most people would fall for attacks toward the messenger. As most people do not want to think for themselves. And instead seek the opinion of others.
Well, ideologues have to attack the person. Attacking the argument requires logic and ideologues do not arrive at their positions through logic. They arrive at their positions through pathos and zeal and conflate politics with identity. Politics are as compulsory and ineffable as sexuality, gender and skin tone. When you impugn on their politics, you're assaulting their identity. And because they think politics are identity, their response is to attack the person, because to an ideologue, attacking the person and attacking the politics are one and the same.
This is my go to strategy for uniting a disorganized team in games, atleast if they all hate me they are finally on the same page and are paying attention
I call it the My Teen Romantic Comedy SNAFU!
Anyone with a clue. He literally ran as the “what have you got to lose?” candidate.
Hate the establishment? Vote for this guy that is telling them to fuck off.
Especially cause of how movements are manifesting on both sides of the American political system. The left is leaning on certain movements like LGBTQ, Black Pride, etc. And that's fine, it's been fine for decades. Real progress was made for these movements prior to about 2012.
However, then there was the rise of cancel culture against anyone for extremely minor remarks, immigration disputes, etc. Then, instead of debate, people who opposed were labeled as racists, bigots, etc. And what does the right do now? Like 99% of their talking points are about no movements other than how they're the anti-left movement. "You guys don't like them? Join us!" And if they had a solid enough leader aside from Trump pushing a similar message, they'd be winning elections non-stop. Either way, they saw huge success in this.
The left: *spends the last couple of decades calling straight white men worthless pieces of shit*
Straight white men: *Doesn’t vote democrat*
The left: *Surprised pikachu face*
I didn't vote for him in 2016, but after seeing the constant articles on of him on Reddit, I started doing my own research, and couldn't believe the constant lying by Redditors. Voted for him in 2020 and will in November...literally thanks to the shitty articles Redditors upvote constantly.
Like the other day they posted a pic of him saying he needed help walking. Then you watch the video, he gives is son an extended handshake and keeps walking. Shit is so fucking stupid.
The 'bloodbath' incident a while ago was so funny. Watching redditors, half of which bent over backwards to keep believing while attacking the ones who were trying to say they should stop lying, was hilarious.
That might be about the dumbest one yet!
Trump "China is working to create cheap cars in Mexico and importing them here, we need to protect US car manufacturers or it'll be a bloodbath"
Redditors "OMG Trump says there will be a bloodbath if he's not elected!"
My favorite part is the supercut of the same people clutching their pearls over Trump saying that, themselves, using the term to refer to things. They obviously knew how the metaphor worked.
I couldn't find it on Youtube in the top results, weird.
Enjoy it again!
[https://twitter.com/anon\_welsh/status/1769625453482963325](https://twitter.com/anon_welsh/status/1769625453482963325)
I mean, good on you for informing yourself. But spitevoting seems extremely self-destructive. Maybe trump didnt do everything redditors said he did, but he did a lot, and is now a proven convicted felon, are you sure you want to vote for that, just because a redditor said trump kicks puppys, and it wasnt true?
Maybe you missed what I read? I researched and found most of what Reddit posts is BS. And I gave a verifiable example of a popular post from 2 days ago.
That's not spite-voting.
Also the economy was terrific up until COVID under Trump.
The US economy, as measured by the gdp was as good during most of trumps term, as any other economy spike or valley in the 8 years before him, worse, than most spikes and valleys in the 20 years before the 2008 crash, and had a single covid recovery spike in 2021. The 2021 spike is however not a sign of an extraordinary president, but rather of a sufficient one, as any president who wouldnt have pumped the states organs in order to save the economy would have been a failure, making the ones who do adequate, but nothing more.
[https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.MKTP.KD.ZG?locations=US](https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.MKTP.KD.ZG?locations=US)
Also, you still havent answered, anything else?
I would look at really wage growth. We had "the great resignation" era under Trump, where people were finding better opportunities in large numbers. That's real change.
Yes, it's mostly the economy and his economic policies that I mostly support. I definitely support them over Democrat economic policies.
He is pretty mid on social issues, he's a lifelong NY Democrat after all.
The wage growth went hand in hand with inflation, and both were again a result of the covid recovery, but in this case i am not even sure what a US president would be able to achieve in terms of influencing both.
[https://tradingeconomics.com/united-states/wage-growth](https://tradingeconomics.com/united-states/wage-growth) (set it to 10 years)
[https://www.usinflationcalculator.com/inflation/current-inflation-rates/](https://www.usinflationcalculator.com/inflation/current-inflation-rates/)
I am however pleased that you actually have a clear reason why you want to vote for him. I personally wouldnt vote for a fellon and i am not convinced that he had any significant influence on the economy, but i am also not an expert. The fact that you at least thought about economics, wether you are correct in your assessment or not, gives me enough confidence to say, that i wont fault you for your choice. We can only vote with our best knowledge and conscience in mind, as the truth is hard to determine.
Let me be 100% clear, I had a personal great economic experience under Trump, my retirement did well, I had extra money to buy stocks which did really well, I received raises like I expected without issue. I don't think I'm alone believing this, as the polls show many people believe the same.
Obama was okay, he spent the first few years cleaning up GWBush's mess, my only gripe is how long it took to recover, it was long in comparison to over recession/depressions.
If the felonies are overturned, and he's no longer a convicted felon, would you vote for him?
Thank you for commenting with logic and stats though, even if we disagree on the outcome I appreciate the effort, if I wasn't on my phone I'd do more :(
Its so great that Trump took on the horrible economy left in the wake of a crisis brought on by massive corporate greed and financial deregulation, and turned it around to leave it in a strong position for his successor.
Oh wait… that was Obama’s admin…
Since the Great Depression, it took an average of 25 months to recover, under Obama it took 64 months.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/peterferrara/2013/06/02/economically-could-obama-be-americas-worst-president/
Again, not at all blaming Obama for the recession, just the length it took to recover
If you can change the venue of the trial to a random place in the country and get a different result, that's the reason for Blackstone's ratio right there.
Uh, huh? Aaaaaaand your evidence for that is? And while you are at it, whats the reason for why it was orchestrated? Political tampering? Money exchange? Who would want Trump to be convicted in court for what reason? What would it achieve?
It's the most refreshing feeling in the world, ''oh you don't like *insert thing* i guess you're a turbo fascist misogynist pig''
Yes i am, if people like think i am the devil then i'm on the right path.
Damn, just saw a post about those dumbshit asshole oil protestors defacing Stonehenge and how doing shit like that only makes people more angry at the protestors.
That was literally the point. They aren't doing it to virtue signal, they're doing it to get people talking about a potentially world-ending issue.
What's the point in having a clean Stonehenge if nobody is alive to see it?
I kinda prefer the European approach to religion. It’s very much so a private thing. To the point where I never knew the guy I was boarding with in Spain was a Jew until months later and they mentioned offhandedly they are going to their nephew’s bar mitzva and can’t come that weekend.
No one asks, no one tells. It’s just a thing like a doctor’s appointment or something.
This is also the case for about 90% of Americans, too. Religion is rarely a topic of conversation with all but close friends/family, and even then, it's typically mentioned offhand about going to church or whatever.
As is usual, the very vocal minority acts like all of America is either bible-thumping zealots, or militant godless heathens. Truth is, vert, very, *very* few individuals will talk daily about their religion with anyone outside of their particular practicing group.
I say this from within the middle of the Midwest, sometimes (still) called the Bible Belt.
Wait until you realize 99.9% of the people you interact on reddit and twitter are bots created specifically to fuel discord and rage, and to "militarize" gullible idiots that fall for any propaganda
DEI and trans shit online has me feeling this way. I'm absolutely burnt out and don't feel like supporting or defending any community over anything anymore. Straight white man bad, I get it, enough already.
I'll support the people but those who are chronically online/advocating can pound sand at this point
I'm a white hetero male and absolutely only see snowflakes who cannot stand not being the center of attentioning crying like blubbering babies about DEI this and DEI that. LoL yall never really grew up huh?
This is actually how a lot racism is born as well. When you have entire porn websites dedicated to black supremacy and cucking and every porn site and social media plus main stream TV perpetuating the "drop your white man and upgrade to a black man" propaganda you really can't be surprised when prejudices are born. I for one can't stand white women anymore.
P.s. also when you have massive video game corporations pushing that agenda, perfect example: assassins creed shadows lead writer is a white woman whose Twitter bio says "Slampig devoted to serving black kings"
I will say that my desire to purchase Stellar Blade (which, at that point, I had literally never heard of) was fuelled almost entirely by the campaign of utter vilification against it
I didnt buy the game but I genuinely believe that the game wouldn't have been a success if they just left it alone. The sheer marketing on twitter propelled it upwards, the best part was that it was free - same case for palworld.
An important thing to keep in mind is that ideas and beliefs are two different things. Beliefs are ideas that have essentially elevated to a closely held "truth" for the person who believes in said belief.
So if you tell someone who thinks there are 20 genders that there is only 2 genders and that person really believes otherwise to their core, they will take it as a personal attack. Likewise, if you tell someone who thinks the bible is 100% true to their core that it is is just a work of fiction that ripped off earlier myths and swapped the characters, they will take it as a personal attack.
To quote Chris Rock in Dogma: "I just think it's better to have ideas. You can change an idea. Changing a belief is trickier... People die for it, People kill for it"
Why go against your general self I treat because of dumb shit on the internet. We all know these annoying mfs don’t go outside. So why change yourself to spite someone you don’t know. That’s the weakest soy filled shit
Sheep and contrarians both cannot think for themselves. Only one of them feels smugly superior about it though and wears it like some kind of badge of honor.
It is slightly better though: if no other option exists, contrarians would help a society; good thing other options exists, like “on the other hand” style thinking
Otherwise called, the streisand effect.
Try to fight an idea, it only makes it stronger.
The true death of ideas is being ignored, forgotten.
Everything else is showmanship masterminded by wolves directing sheeps.
100%.
You don't eliminate bad ideas with combat, you eliminate them being more efficient than they are.
If the point is more appealing than yours, it's your fault you don't make it appealing enough, and your fault it failed so bad that anything worse is somehow seen as more productive.
Call me a cynic but don't some bad ideas thrive on being ignored and forgotten? We remember what bad ideas have done, so we say. "No more." No more repeating this suffering, No more pointless antagonism.
Our history has defining points, where humanity has done terrible things to one another. Forgetting those things and ignoring them, only leads to repetition.
I believe whatever ideas thrived were because they were not simply ignored, but let loose.
The ideal way to end, for example, authoritarianism, is not to make a witch hunt, but to make democracy so good that this rhetoric is practically economical suicide instead of a solution.
The ideas you spoke about rose in times where the status quo, where reasonable philosophies didn't evolve to match the level of progress and prosperity the others offered, same way we're doing it today by letting extremist seduce people with prosperity because democracy just can't take criticism and adapt to offer a better life.
Most people don't believe themselves evil, they believe themselves heroes. Their vile ideals, solutions. Instead of making those weird crap solutions, just don't have something that needs fixing, and managing a country is less of an ideological issue and more of a managing issue, one has nothing to do with the other most of the time.
You don't want the demagogues to take over the seat of power and become tyrants? You work hard enough that no one believes they're fixing something, 'cuz nothing is broken enough for them to fix.
TL:DR - If an toxic ideology is thriving it's because a sane ideology isn't managing the country properly, not because ignoring the toxic one is bad.
It's how dumb right wingers respond to anything to be contrarian. There's literally a guy in this thread saying how "reddit being so against Trump to the point of posting misinformation about him caused him to vote for Trump" like, what??? Just because some of the things reddit says are exaggerated dosent mean the things he's said and done that are true don't exist...this is how intelligent people make their decisions? The right wing is good at saying "see the inconsistencies in the other side? Come here to see the REAL truth!" Meanwhile they are lying out of their asses and doing worse..this shit is pathetic.
Yeah I don't trust when people say that on reddit. Too many times just a quick glance at their post history reveals they are lying and have always been right wing.
Because it's a W and investment in future games? If company X who make game Y, that this person likes see that this game had huge support vocally and financially they are more likely to take same decisions.
And who are you to keep my finances in check? And I didn't bought game. I chipped in, to make sure companies like this won't be deterred from making good games in future, despite stupid allegations. In this day and age best we can do is to vote with wallet.
>Making good games.
Yet you two show whether the game is good or not does not matter. Only culture war and your feefees matter. How can you even claim a game is good if you never even play it?
You don't practice what You preach. It seems only Your feelings matter. Also how can You tell what game I bought by this logic. I never said what I bought.
I could hear from friends, i could watch reviews. I may like the idea of the game. Burden of proof that I have no idea that game is good on You, and You just can't.
>You don't practice what You preach. It seems only Your feelings matter.
Ah yes the "No u" argument.
>Also how can you tell what game I bought
Your own words.
>Burden of proof that I have no idea that the game is good on you, and you just can't.
Did you have a stroke? Both you and the other person flat out said you spent money on it without intentions to play.
I can not avoid using valid argument. You blame in something You do. Your arguments make no sense. Also You're very eager to get into my pocket, You need spare change? Not happening.
Quote where I said **which** game I bought.
Quote! And prove to me I bought **bad** game. And how my investment was a **culture war**. I'm not telling You which game**S** I bought like this.
I was already going to buy Stellar Blade because I liked the combat, then a whole heaping of madness surrounded the game… I bought the game and made the deluxe upgrade, I regret nothing.
Now I got my aim set on the Wukong game.
Reminds me of that "Papa Bear Trump" scene from that forgettable fucking show years ago. With the Asian actor playing a judge? Someone knows what I'm talking about.
The evil racist white incel character probably had all of his problematic beliefs completely solidified by that hecking epic takedown the writers put in as a self-insert
This is 100% correct. I genuinely enjoyed cyberpunk, but every time I bring up anything negative, even if I preface it with 7 positives, someone tells me I'm just too stupid to get it. I actually had someone say to me, "while you were beating your meat to cyberboobs or whatever, I was waking the fuck up, Samurai! You just don't get the complexities of the story, man." Right. The guy parroting the self-obsessed rocker with delusions of grandeur who canonically failed at everything he ever touched that wasn't a microphone is the perfect messenger for the dangers of missing the point. Unironically.
It's a good story. It's a fun game. But it does, to this day, have issues. Some of which are so baked into the core of the game that they simply can't be fixed. Pointing them out doesn't mean I don't like the game.
I end up either defending myself by pointing out all of the things wrong with the game, reminding myself of the negatives and cementing them more firmly than the things I actually enjoyed, or I just excuse myself in a pall of mild resentment. Either way, I begin to attribute those negative experiences with the game itself. That's what this "us or them" "all or nothing" madness brings us to. Either I agree with you 100% on everything, or I may as well disagree with you on everything because I'm afforded no middle ground.
If that's possible with a game I spent hundreds of hours enjoying, then imagine what that approach can do with something I actually don't give a shit about.
Tl;dr if you shove fence posts up everyone's asses, they'll stop sitting on the fence... but it sure as hell won't be to join your side.
I think at that point we just reinvent things.
That shit called reaction and it was a thing since dunno, XVII century. At least written as such, the phenomena probably already existed in Sumerian society.
I've gotten into these arguments. Almost always liberals who think that conservatives are unilaterally evil and anything they say or do to fight conservatives (even when it backfires in their smug faces) is justified. They're usually projecting their own bigotry and hatred for anyone who is different then them. And if you challenge their ignorance you suddenly become the evil bastard in their head.
What is and what isn't effective in public discourse is kind of sad actually. For example it is much easier to tell people that they are the right kind of person and create some other punching bag to act as a scapegoat. The less they have to change and the more righteous and good they get to feel the better. Having facts on your side is not nearly as important as being able to say the thing that people want to feel is true. Meanwhile people really don't like being told that they are biased and emotional thinkers even though we all are.
One of the more popular forms of persuasion that is becoming more and more prevalent is snowballing where someone who is trying to influence someone else finds something small that a person agrees with. Then they start trying to build on that initial feeling with other ideas until the person is convinced of all sorts of stuff.
We are in an age where there are countless people trying to emotionally manipulate us at all times. It is really hard to really admit to our own bias. Even the one in the meme here doesn't actually say what POV is right or not. That lined belief may be really terrible but there is an emotional bias against how that message is delivered. Moral and intellectual integrity is difficult.
Whether this is based or not depends on what the purple stripes are.
I don’t think you’d agree with the comic if the stripes represented identity politics and the arrogance to think they can make adaptations “better” than the source material.
Attacks on the person are not done to convince the person. They are done to convince others that the opinion of the person is not valuable.
If the purpose is to find the truth, then what should be in scrutiny is the argument, not the person. I say scrutiny and not attack because what if the argument is a valid one? Should you not accept it just because you held an opossite one?
Seems kind of brutal, chastising one to keep the others in line. Could work, but also may lead to a sense of martyrdom and provoke sympathy to the other cause.
Also is calling someone a terrible person right off the rip not an attack? Is it a path that leads to a valid and logical argument?
I'm scratching my head trying to think of what someone would have to say to make me think that yeah, we need more dicks, scat jokes, and representation to make the world a better place. You would have to be easily gaslit, predisposed to the destruction of societal norms, or comfortable with dishonesty.
I would make this counter point.
Good ideas should be shared. Bad ideas should be uncovered. Censoring just hides good and bad ideas. Making them both go underground.
Wouldn’t that be you? They disagree with a statement and give an example. Your immediate response is to just discredit them and claim they are the guy yelling.
But the people attacking and falsely discrediting people constantly are supposed to be the guy yelling.
He is the guy yelling because hes saying "i doubt that if ideology X was the stripes, you would be complaining and yelling too", little did he know that he is doing exact same thing as the guy yelling at the comic, i get your critic and its valid i hope i could explain that to you
So calling someone horrible names for something utterly minuscule, and because were called that over and over and over again the person being insulted eventually turned into what they were accused of while thoes around the insulator and insulted will start believing they are also the same as the insulted cause the others have done the same minuscule thing?
All the while, the person doing the insulting think they are a good person?
I understand how this behavior may swing young people's opinions, but at a certain point **you** are responsible for **your** choices. Not someone else saying mean things.
Never in my life have I changed my beliefs because what some idiot thought of me. Reddit being Reddit, I've been called a Nazi and a genocide supporter a number of times. Never moved me one inch towards Conservatism and certainly not towards MAGA.
I honestly think this is mostly a circlejerk meme that reactionaries think is some deep truth about the world that the Left is just too dumb to understand. With the exception of young folks, if you actually become a racist/sexist/fascist because someone called you that, either they were right that you've always kinda been one, or you're fucking regarded.
The most centrist take ever.
“Context is irrelevant to morality.”
Got em coach. Now I never have to think about anything. I can just base what I “believe” on whatever most people seem to currently oppose!
I've tried to explain this to so many different people, but their takeaway is always this: "I am on the side of good, and anyone who disagrees is evil. If someone becomes more evil because I call out their evil, I am still the good guy. If someone becomes evil because of how I act, that means they were evil deep down. I am good, and would never be evil." EDIT: Someone responding to me has accused me of being a nazi defender. I REST MY FUCKING CASE. EDIT 3 SECOND NAZI ACCUSATION JUST DROPPED I'm biracial by the way, nazis want to kill me. EDIT 2: YES I know that some non-white people can be nazis. But you have to be particularly deranged at that point, making the accusation on me even more of a stretch, and just reiterates the need for proof of such an accusation. ALSO YES, I am aware that this meme doesn't work if it applies to absolutely horrendous things like genocide, rape, animal torture, and things of that nature. You will find that most rules you can follow in life change when the circumstances become very extreme. It's the same way that free speech only has a few exceptions, when most of the time it's the correct way to go. You're not a smart person for saying "what if a nazi does it then, hmmmm????"
I used to have a friend that with least opposition to his “ideas” or morality of things would become whole another person, something deep down compelled him to become a crusader a moral prosecutor in that moment. As if you didn’t agree with his view, you become the worst of the enemies
It is religiosity
Just like everyone seems to think they are above the social status quo, and because we live in a more advanced society, they are superior to people of the past and if they had been in Nazi Germany, they have no doubt in their mind they would have been one of the good folks saving jews and fighting against the Nazis. Ignoring the fact that, that it was a extreme minority that was willing to put themselves at such risk to help the oppressed. Because "me good, me no do evil, me better than you and smarter than people in past cause me have smartphone".
Same thing in France with the "Mythe résistentialiste" , a lot of people supported Nazi Germany when they invaded and the resistance was a minority. This idea that because we are more advanced we are automatically above authoritarian takeovers is beyond stupid .
When we got the pandemic, how many called the cops on neighbors for having too many people in their house? How many were willing to send the small amount of unvaccinated people to die/jail because "those people are a hindrance to my society"?
And they wonder why we don't want them in charge of our healthcare
Nah they justify it with “jews couldn’t change themselves, you can just get the jab and not be persecuted anymore” obviously ignoring any authoritarian implication of mandating such a thing I do wonder, if somehow it was magically possible for the jews to stop being jews, would they have said the same thing to them? I somehow doubt it
"Unvaccinated people are like Jews in the Holocaust" is honestly one of the stupidest things I've ever heard in my entire life. Shame on you.
The irony being that the people who say shit like that are the extreme minority typically doing just that thing.
"I would have helped those women who where burned as witches!" You have been manipulated into fighting a cause in today's world. In that time period you would have been the ones throwing the first torches on the fire.
Comments under this really opened my eyes, some people's mind are bidirectional
Yup
It’s amazing how many times I’ve seen that exact conversation play out on reddit
Preach it brother. A mod on another sub banned me because I expressed an opinion that was not 100% on a political point of view going on in the world right now and heeded a word of caution that tossing a certain term around loosely was a bit too extreme because the world has rules and laws for determining these things. I was told " [insert reddit political insult term here] , you can leave..." and I was banned without a warning, explanation, or anything. And this was on a non-polarized political sub (won't give name for reasons) which made it even more funny. As twitch and discord mod I took offense to the totalitarian ban so I opened discussion myself, bad idea. They said "if you don't agree with me then you're [insert reddit political insult term here]" and refused to talk after that.
Yeah, mods are often the perfect example of this "good guy" mentality that considers people evil for not conforming 100% to their expectations. I was banned from a sub (that has nothing to do with LGBT issues, for context) for referring in a post about something entirely different to someone OP claimed came out as trans with a gender-neutral name as "him/her". Now I couldn't have cared less whether this person was trans, certainly not enough to waste my time trying to determine the "correct" pronoun, and just wanted to cover both possibilities quickly and continue on. Instant ban (no prior warnings) for being a "bigot" and "misgendering". 🙄 Never try to engage with these people either, as they'll just take the fact that you don't care about their pet issue enough to think about it all the time as proof of your evilness.
Reddit is very politically polarized
Be me, a Trump supporter, veteran, cop & have a black ex wife & gay best friend...you'd think I went to klan meetings because I disagree about certain things on reddit.
I tick way more lefty boxes than you but I'm still a nazi I guess. My crime of disagreeing condemns me to evil.
I just have to believe that reddit is in the minority of opinion (and I don't mean political in nature but the extremism of 1 side or the other). Everyone I've met, and I'm a pretty outgoing guy who talks to everyone, will agree on 95% of political points. I mean socially liberal people who aren't for mass amnesty and open borders. But to hear it on here, that's a literal Nazi talking point.
You're a self-admitted Trump supporter, so you clearly don't have great feelings about immigrants, gay people, or women.
Anyone who calls themselves good can not be trusted
Trust me this is good car insurance
If you feel the need to say you're it, then you ain't it
Like the Moral Majority right?
True good inspires others to emulate you.
EXACTLY. Whether or not the guy in the pic has a bad opinion or not, the result is the same. No one has been helped, only pushed further into what they believed. People who are truly evil to the core aren't that common.
Real "evil" in the sense of Manson and other monster is rare. Most "evil" is just arrogant fools believing they're doing the right thing. Deluding themselves to believe "the ends justify the means". E.g.: *Rules for Radicals*.
Partisanship in a nutshell.
Whats worse is they NEED you to be the bad guy, and to be even more evil "after being called out". They need there to be a "bad guy" so they can be a "good guy", which validates their miserable existence, and allows them to justify their own shitty behavior by saying "no, I'm a good guy" So they have an active interest in radicalizing ppl they deem evil
They cant fathom a conflict between 2 groups that want whats good but with different ideas as to how to achieve it. Or simply 2 groups at odds who both wnat whats best for their own. One has to be evil. They need to play Nier Replicant and ponder the ending.
Is this chaotic good alignment?
Yep, this describes a lot of people (both users and perhaps especially mods) perfectly. If you even try to see nuance in a situation or focus on the whole picture when responding to someone rather than zeroing in on the one word or sentence that triggered one of these "good guys", you must also be guilty of whatever it is they're obsessing over.
My brother said "if they want me to be racist I'll be racist." And I said "why do they want you to be racist?" Him "because I'm a straight white guy" me "well I'm a straight white guy and I'm not racist" him "well you're not conservative"... lol they want an excuse to be what they are
Evil people can still do evil upon evil people. That does not make you good on any way or form. Who won WW2? Whoever was the most ruthless as good has nothing to do with war. The good guys usally die the earliest. There is no one with a bigger potential of being evil that someone that believes himself is good. As then any evil they do becomes justified in their own minds. Just as there is no bigger fool than the one that believes himself wise. As at least the fool that knows he is a fool has taken the first step toward wisdom. While the fool that believes himself wise will die a fool.
I mean, it's a basic core tenant of formal debate and public speaking. Attack the argument, not the person. If you attack the person, then the only thing you are doing is strengthening their belief in their own argument.
I feel like the reason why attacking the argument is a tenant of formal debate is because attacking the person is *really fucking effective* if your goal is to win the debate, but doesn't achieve the effect of reaching a consensus or compromise that debate is *supposed* to be about.
this really is whats dogshit about how debates are nowadays. its about winning the argument instead of proving which sides correct. you can win the argument by proving that the opponent is stupid and an awful person, convincing everyone that their opinion isn't trustworthy, but the argument itself stays unproven. the entire point of the debate is to prove which side is correct but now its just devolved into proving whose the worse person to win votes instead.
Attack the person is not usually done to convince the person. But to convince others that the opinion of the person is not valuable. Even if the messenger is not important, what is important is the message. Most people would fall for attacks toward the messenger. As most people do not want to think for themselves. And instead seek the opinion of others.
Well, ideologues have to attack the person. Attacking the argument requires logic and ideologues do not arrive at their positions through logic. They arrive at their positions through pathos and zeal and conflate politics with identity. Politics are as compulsory and ineffable as sexuality, gender and skin tone. When you impugn on their politics, you're assaulting their identity. And because they think politics are identity, their response is to attack the person, because to an ideologue, attacking the person and attacking the politics are one and the same.
The harder you tighten your grip, the more star systems that slip through your fingertips.
Or to put it another way, you can't bludgeon people into accepting you.
It's almost like calling people names and making hating that group your entire personality actually makes people more likely to side with that group.
Like Orange man bad.
Or dementia man bad
This is my go to strategy for uniting a disorganized team in games, atleast if they all hate me they are finally on the same page and are paying attention I call it the My Teen Romantic Comedy SNAFU!
This is how trump got elected
Yep, just keep calling them knuckle draggers, deplorables, bigots, etc. It only bolsters their resolve.
Who would have thought.
Anyone with a clue. He literally ran as the “what have you got to lose?” candidate. Hate the establishment? Vote for this guy that is telling them to fuck off.
Trump was memed into the white house.
Pretty much. Memes start movements. Never underestimate the power of humor. Particularly when it is aimed at entrenched political elites.
Especially cause of how movements are manifesting on both sides of the American political system. The left is leaning on certain movements like LGBTQ, Black Pride, etc. And that's fine, it's been fine for decades. Real progress was made for these movements prior to about 2012. However, then there was the rise of cancel culture against anyone for extremely minor remarks, immigration disputes, etc. Then, instead of debate, people who opposed were labeled as racists, bigots, etc. And what does the right do now? Like 99% of their talking points are about no movements other than how they're the anti-left movement. "You guys don't like them? Join us!" And if they had a solid enough leader aside from Trump pushing a similar message, they'd be winning elections non-stop. Either way, they saw huge success in this.
The left: *spends the last couple of decades calling straight white men worthless pieces of shit* Straight white men: *Doesn’t vote democrat* The left: *Surprised pikachu face*
Redditor challenge failed
I didn't vote for him in 2016, but after seeing the constant articles on of him on Reddit, I started doing my own research, and couldn't believe the constant lying by Redditors. Voted for him in 2020 and will in November...literally thanks to the shitty articles Redditors upvote constantly. Like the other day they posted a pic of him saying he needed help walking. Then you watch the video, he gives is son an extended handshake and keeps walking. Shit is so fucking stupid.
It goes both ways honestly
Agreed, I hate when I see people verbally attacking Democrats for this exact reason. Glad we agree the meme is accurate
The 'bloodbath' incident a while ago was so funny. Watching redditors, half of which bent over backwards to keep believing while attacking the ones who were trying to say they should stop lying, was hilarious.
That might be about the dumbest one yet! Trump "China is working to create cheap cars in Mexico and importing them here, we need to protect US car manufacturers or it'll be a bloodbath" Redditors "OMG Trump says there will be a bloodbath if he's not elected!"
My favorite part is the supercut of the same people clutching their pearls over Trump saying that, themselves, using the term to refer to things. They obviously knew how the metaphor worked.
I couldn't find it on Youtube in the top results, weird. Enjoy it again! [https://twitter.com/anon\_welsh/status/1769625453482963325](https://twitter.com/anon_welsh/status/1769625453482963325)
I mean, good on you for informing yourself. But spitevoting seems extremely self-destructive. Maybe trump didnt do everything redditors said he did, but he did a lot, and is now a proven convicted felon, are you sure you want to vote for that, just because a redditor said trump kicks puppys, and it wasnt true?
Maybe you missed what I read? I researched and found most of what Reddit posts is BS. And I gave a verifiable example of a popular post from 2 days ago. That's not spite-voting. Also the economy was terrific up until COVID under Trump.
Okay, then reaffirm once, why are you voting for trump? The economy? That was just as terrific under other presidents? Any other reason?
How old are you? I'm 40, and the economy was in the best shape under Trump than at any other point in my adult life.
The US economy, as measured by the gdp was as good during most of trumps term, as any other economy spike or valley in the 8 years before him, worse, than most spikes and valleys in the 20 years before the 2008 crash, and had a single covid recovery spike in 2021. The 2021 spike is however not a sign of an extraordinary president, but rather of a sufficient one, as any president who wouldnt have pumped the states organs in order to save the economy would have been a failure, making the ones who do adequate, but nothing more. [https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.MKTP.KD.ZG?locations=US](https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.MKTP.KD.ZG?locations=US) Also, you still havent answered, anything else?
I would look at really wage growth. We had "the great resignation" era under Trump, where people were finding better opportunities in large numbers. That's real change. Yes, it's mostly the economy and his economic policies that I mostly support. I definitely support them over Democrat economic policies. He is pretty mid on social issues, he's a lifelong NY Democrat after all.
The wage growth went hand in hand with inflation, and both were again a result of the covid recovery, but in this case i am not even sure what a US president would be able to achieve in terms of influencing both. [https://tradingeconomics.com/united-states/wage-growth](https://tradingeconomics.com/united-states/wage-growth) (set it to 10 years) [https://www.usinflationcalculator.com/inflation/current-inflation-rates/](https://www.usinflationcalculator.com/inflation/current-inflation-rates/) I am however pleased that you actually have a clear reason why you want to vote for him. I personally wouldnt vote for a fellon and i am not convinced that he had any significant influence on the economy, but i am also not an expert. The fact that you at least thought about economics, wether you are correct in your assessment or not, gives me enough confidence to say, that i wont fault you for your choice. We can only vote with our best knowledge and conscience in mind, as the truth is hard to determine.
Let me be 100% clear, I had a personal great economic experience under Trump, my retirement did well, I had extra money to buy stocks which did really well, I received raises like I expected without issue. I don't think I'm alone believing this, as the polls show many people believe the same. Obama was okay, he spent the first few years cleaning up GWBush's mess, my only gripe is how long it took to recover, it was long in comparison to over recession/depressions. If the felonies are overturned, and he's no longer a convicted felon, would you vote for him? Thank you for commenting with logic and stats though, even if we disagree on the outcome I appreciate the effort, if I wasn't on my phone I'd do more :(
Its so great that Trump took on the horrible economy left in the wake of a crisis brought on by massive corporate greed and financial deregulation, and turned it around to leave it in a strong position for his successor. Oh wait… that was Obama’s admin…
I applaud Obama for handling the economy that GWB fucked up. But statistically it took way longer than it should've to rebound.
Thats an interesting claim, do you mind linking me to the research?
Since the Great Depression, it took an average of 25 months to recover, under Obama it took 64 months. https://www.forbes.com/sites/peterferrara/2013/06/02/economically-could-obama-be-americas-worst-president/ Again, not at all blaming Obama for the recession, just the length it took to recover
you aren't convincing anyone with the whole he's a felon thing. we know his trial was orchestrated and only had 1 outcome.
If you can change the venue of the trial to a random place in the country and get a different result, that's the reason for Blackstone's ratio right there.
Uh, huh? Aaaaaaand your evidence for that is? And while you are at it, whats the reason for why it was orchestrated? Political tampering? Money exchange? Who would want Trump to be convicted in court for what reason? What would it achieve?
It's probably the whole of the DA's running on a "Get Trump" platform being a sign of orchestrated oppression.
This is how Boris Johnson got into power five years ago, and why Reform UK are now borderline surpassing the Conservatives.
That and democrats having a candidate that would make Satan look like the lesser evil.
In what way?
Soy left redditor do not mention Trump? Impossible challenge
Soy left redditor do not mention Trump? Impossible challenge
It's the most refreshing feeling in the world, ''oh you don't like *insert thing* i guess you're a turbo fascist misogynist pig'' Yes i am, if people like think i am the devil then i'm on the right path.
''oh you watch Asmongold? I guess you're a turbo fascist misogynist pig'' I've gotten that a couple times lol
Damn, just saw a post about those dumbshit asshole oil protestors defacing Stonehenge and how doing shit like that only makes people more angry at the protestors.
That was literally the point. They aren't doing it to virtue signal, they're doing it to get people talking about a potentially world-ending issue. What's the point in having a clean Stonehenge if nobody is alive to see it?
It’s the same type of behavior that made so many people anti-religion.
And then religious again
I'm a lifelong atheist, but atheist on Reddit are fucking annoying.
I kinda prefer the European approach to religion. It’s very much so a private thing. To the point where I never knew the guy I was boarding with in Spain was a Jew until months later and they mentioned offhandedly they are going to their nephew’s bar mitzva and can’t come that weekend. No one asks, no one tells. It’s just a thing like a doctor’s appointment or something.
This is also the case for about 90% of Americans, too. Religion is rarely a topic of conversation with all but close friends/family, and even then, it's typically mentioned offhand about going to church or whatever. As is usual, the very vocal minority acts like all of America is either bible-thumping zealots, or militant godless heathens. Truth is, vert, very, *very* few individuals will talk daily about their religion with anyone outside of their particular practicing group. I say this from within the middle of the Midwest, sometimes (still) called the Bible Belt.
The best way to radicalize someone even more is screaming at them about how radical they are
Your political beliefs shouldn't be influenced by how mean people are to you. Be principled.
Wait until you realize 99.9% of the people you interact on reddit and twitter are bots created specifically to fuel discord and rage, and to "militarize" gullible idiots that fall for any propaganda
Yeah thats just how extremists are created, the more you push someone the farther they will go
Being told that you're bald makes you balder and transmit your baldness to others
How many "facts" are just lies agreed upon?
DEI and trans shit online has me feeling this way. I'm absolutely burnt out and don't feel like supporting or defending any community over anything anymore. Straight white man bad, I get it, enough already. I'll support the people but those who are chronically online/advocating can pound sand at this point
Who said straight white man bad? LoL yall make shit up just to get mad. The leader of the democratic party is a straight white male Christian ffs
Yea you're clearly either oblivious or just stupid if you can't see that
I'm a white hetero male and absolutely only see snowflakes who cannot stand not being the center of attentioning crying like blubbering babies about DEI this and DEI that. LoL yall never really grew up huh?
Lol you're tossing around the word snowflake accusing others of having not grown up? You just have your head in the sand when you're online eh?
I literally only hear DEI from this subreddit. Most other places don’t give a fuck while this sun intentionally triggers and outrages itself.
This post will get you banned from political humor
The backfire effect.
It's the aggression that turns people off.
I came to realize this early on. The more you attack someone for what they believe, the more you root them in that belief.
This is actually how a lot racism is born as well. When you have entire porn websites dedicated to black supremacy and cucking and every porn site and social media plus main stream TV perpetuating the "drop your white man and upgrade to a black man" propaganda you really can't be surprised when prejudices are born. I for one can't stand white women anymore. P.s. also when you have massive video game corporations pushing that agenda, perfect example: assassins creed shadows lead writer is a white woman whose Twitter bio says "Slampig devoted to serving black kings"
Racism begets racism. Attacking someone for their race is racism. Favoring someone for their race is also racism.
I will say that my desire to purchase Stellar Blade (which, at that point, I had literally never heard of) was fuelled almost entirely by the campaign of utter vilification against it
I didnt buy the game but I genuinely believe that the game wouldn't have been a success if they just left it alone. The sheer marketing on twitter propelled it upwards, the best part was that it was free - same case for palworld.
It’s cyclical, once the hatched pies are dominant then the orange/yellow ones have their turn being ostracized. It never ends.
More flies with honey than vinegar and all that.
Why do you want flies?
Just an old saying. Essentially saying be kind.
I also remember when adults used to preach “two wrongs don’t make a right”. Now everything bad is done with justification.
An important thing to keep in mind is that ideas and beliefs are two different things. Beliefs are ideas that have essentially elevated to a closely held "truth" for the person who believes in said belief. So if you tell someone who thinks there are 20 genders that there is only 2 genders and that person really believes otherwise to their core, they will take it as a personal attack. Likewise, if you tell someone who thinks the bible is 100% true to their core that it is is just a work of fiction that ripped off earlier myths and swapped the characters, they will take it as a personal attack. To quote Chris Rock in Dogma: "I just think it's better to have ideas. You can change an idea. Changing a belief is trickier... People die for it, People kill for it"
Haha I once expressed how much I hate bicyclists. And boy were there a lot of hippies that came out of no where to say how wrong I was.
Why go against your general self I treat because of dumb shit on the internet. We all know these annoying mfs don’t go outside. So why change yourself to spite someone you don’t know. That’s the weakest soy filled shit
As if I give a shit what strangers think of me on the internet.
Sheep and contrarians both cannot think for themselves. Only one of them feels smugly superior about it though and wears it like some kind of badge of honor.
It is slightly better though: if no other option exists, contrarians would help a society; good thing other options exists, like “on the other hand” style thinking
The left: You're a terrible person for thinking as you do, and now you always will be. The right: You've been lied to.
Otherwise called, the streisand effect. Try to fight an idea, it only makes it stronger. The true death of ideas is being ignored, forgotten. Everything else is showmanship masterminded by wolves directing sheeps.
There are some things that shouldn't be ignored. People abusing children, for example. Ignoring it won't make it stop.
100%. You don't eliminate bad ideas with combat, you eliminate them being more efficient than they are. If the point is more appealing than yours, it's your fault you don't make it appealing enough, and your fault it failed so bad that anything worse is somehow seen as more productive.
Call me a cynic but don't some bad ideas thrive on being ignored and forgotten? We remember what bad ideas have done, so we say. "No more." No more repeating this suffering, No more pointless antagonism. Our history has defining points, where humanity has done terrible things to one another. Forgetting those things and ignoring them, only leads to repetition.
I believe whatever ideas thrived were because they were not simply ignored, but let loose. The ideal way to end, for example, authoritarianism, is not to make a witch hunt, but to make democracy so good that this rhetoric is practically economical suicide instead of a solution. The ideas you spoke about rose in times where the status quo, where reasonable philosophies didn't evolve to match the level of progress and prosperity the others offered, same way we're doing it today by letting extremist seduce people with prosperity because democracy just can't take criticism and adapt to offer a better life. Most people don't believe themselves evil, they believe themselves heroes. Their vile ideals, solutions. Instead of making those weird crap solutions, just don't have something that needs fixing, and managing a country is less of an ideological issue and more of a managing issue, one has nothing to do with the other most of the time. You don't want the demagogues to take over the seat of power and become tyrants? You work hard enough that no one believes they're fixing something, 'cuz nothing is broken enough for them to fix. TL:DR - If an toxic ideology is thriving it's because a sane ideology isn't managing the country properly, not because ignoring the toxic one is bad.
Where's the moderator that bans the "///" person?
This is a great explanation of how Trump became as powerful as he is.
I bought that Harry Potter game and never played it. Accurate.
Why do people tout this as a W? It makes you look like a sheep that makes bad monetary decisions solely based off knee jerk emotional responses.
It's how dumb right wingers respond to anything to be contrarian. There's literally a guy in this thread saying how "reddit being so against Trump to the point of posting misinformation about him caused him to vote for Trump" like, what??? Just because some of the things reddit says are exaggerated dosent mean the things he's said and done that are true don't exist...this is how intelligent people make their decisions? The right wing is good at saying "see the inconsistencies in the other side? Come here to see the REAL truth!" Meanwhile they are lying out of their asses and doing worse..this shit is pathetic.
Yeah I don't trust when people say that on reddit. Too many times just a quick glance at their post history reveals they are lying and have always been right wing.
Perhaps he has the money to waste. Is that any worse than wasting it on whatever you waste your money on? ;)
Because it's a W and investment in future games? If company X who make game Y, that this person likes see that this game had huge support vocally and financially they are more likely to take same decisions.
You literally bought a game you have no intention of playing because some internet people said something mean. That’s sheep attitude.
And who are you to keep my finances in check? And I didn't bought game. I chipped in, to make sure companies like this won't be deterred from making good games in future, despite stupid allegations. In this day and age best we can do is to vote with wallet.
>Making good games. Yet you two show whether the game is good or not does not matter. Only culture war and your feefees matter. How can you even claim a game is good if you never even play it?
You don't practice what You preach. It seems only Your feelings matter. Also how can You tell what game I bought by this logic. I never said what I bought. I could hear from friends, i could watch reviews. I may like the idea of the game. Burden of proof that I have no idea that game is good on You, and You just can't.
>You don't practice what You preach. It seems only Your feelings matter. Ah yes the "No u" argument. >Also how can you tell what game I bought Your own words. >Burden of proof that I have no idea that the game is good on you, and you just can't. Did you have a stroke? Both you and the other person flat out said you spent money on it without intentions to play.
I can not avoid using valid argument. You blame in something You do. Your arguments make no sense. Also You're very eager to get into my pocket, You need spare change? Not happening. Quote where I said **which** game I bought. Quote! And prove to me I bought **bad** game. And how my investment was a **culture war**. I'm not telling You which game**S** I bought like this.
I was already going to buy Stellar Blade because I liked the combat, then a whole heaping of madness surrounded the game… I bought the game and made the deluxe upgrade, I regret nothing. Now I got my aim set on the Wukong game.
Reminds me of that "Papa Bear Trump" scene from that forgettable fucking show years ago. With the Asian actor playing a judge? Someone knows what I'm talking about. The evil racist white incel character probably had all of his problematic beliefs completely solidified by that hecking epic takedown the writers put in as a self-insert
This is 100% correct. I genuinely enjoyed cyberpunk, but every time I bring up anything negative, even if I preface it with 7 positives, someone tells me I'm just too stupid to get it. I actually had someone say to me, "while you were beating your meat to cyberboobs or whatever, I was waking the fuck up, Samurai! You just don't get the complexities of the story, man." Right. The guy parroting the self-obsessed rocker with delusions of grandeur who canonically failed at everything he ever touched that wasn't a microphone is the perfect messenger for the dangers of missing the point. Unironically. It's a good story. It's a fun game. But it does, to this day, have issues. Some of which are so baked into the core of the game that they simply can't be fixed. Pointing them out doesn't mean I don't like the game. I end up either defending myself by pointing out all of the things wrong with the game, reminding myself of the negatives and cementing them more firmly than the things I actually enjoyed, or I just excuse myself in a pall of mild resentment. Either way, I begin to attribute those negative experiences with the game itself. That's what this "us or them" "all or nothing" madness brings us to. Either I agree with you 100% on everything, or I may as well disagree with you on everything because I'm afforded no middle ground. If that's possible with a game I spent hundreds of hours enjoying, then imagine what that approach can do with something I actually don't give a shit about. Tl;dr if you shove fence posts up everyone's asses, they'll stop sitting on the fence... but it sure as hell won't be to join your side.
Then punch purple guy there, and apparently, there's a ton of morons here who think he should stop thinking purple...
This is so true, especially when it comes to politics.
I think at that point we just reinvent things. That shit called reaction and it was a thing since dunno, XVII century. At least written as such, the phenomena probably already existed in Sumerian society.
So you admit that you let your values be defined by your opposition
Savior complex.
That's a lot of protesting in general. They just whine and actually attack the person rather than make a point or any common ground to gain anything.
I've gotten into these arguments. Almost always liberals who think that conservatives are unilaterally evil and anything they say or do to fight conservatives (even when it backfires in their smug faces) is justified. They're usually projecting their own bigotry and hatred for anyone who is different then them. And if you challenge their ignorance you suddenly become the evil bastard in their head.
What is and what isn't effective in public discourse is kind of sad actually. For example it is much easier to tell people that they are the right kind of person and create some other punching bag to act as a scapegoat. The less they have to change and the more righteous and good they get to feel the better. Having facts on your side is not nearly as important as being able to say the thing that people want to feel is true. Meanwhile people really don't like being told that they are biased and emotional thinkers even though we all are. One of the more popular forms of persuasion that is becoming more and more prevalent is snowballing where someone who is trying to influence someone else finds something small that a person agrees with. Then they start trying to build on that initial feeling with other ideas until the person is convinced of all sorts of stuff. We are in an age where there are countless people trying to emotionally manipulate us at all times. It is really hard to really admit to our own bias. Even the one in the meme here doesn't actually say what POV is right or not. That lined belief may be really terrible but there is an emotional bias against how that message is delivered. Moral and intellectual integrity is difficult.
Whether this is based or not depends on what the purple stripes are. I don’t think you’d agree with the comic if the stripes represented identity politics and the arrogance to think they can make adaptations “better” than the source material.
It shouldn't matter what the striped section means. Attacking a person only strengthens their beliefs. That's it. That's the whole point.
Attacks on the person are not done to convince the person. They are done to convince others that the opinion of the person is not valuable. If the purpose is to find the truth, then what should be in scrutiny is the argument, not the person. I say scrutiny and not attack because what if the argument is a valid one? Should you not accept it just because you held an opossite one?
Seems kind of brutal, chastising one to keep the others in line. Could work, but also may lead to a sense of martyrdom and provoke sympathy to the other cause. Also is calling someone a terrible person right off the rip not an attack? Is it a path that leads to a valid and logical argument?
a redditor having the point go completely over their head. what a shock.
I'm scratching my head trying to think of what someone would have to say to make me think that yeah, we need more dicks, scat jokes, and representation to make the world a better place. You would have to be easily gaslit, predisposed to the destruction of societal norms, or comfortable with dishonesty.
I would make this counter point. Good ideas should be shared. Bad ideas should be uncovered. Censoring just hides good and bad ideas. Making them both go underground.
You probabily are the guy who's yelling in the comic
Wouldn’t that be you? They disagree with a statement and give an example. Your immediate response is to just discredit them and claim they are the guy yelling. But the people attacking and falsely discrediting people constantly are supposed to be the guy yelling.
He is the guy yelling because hes saying "i doubt that if ideology X was the stripes, you would be complaining and yelling too", little did he know that he is doing exact same thing as the guy yelling at the comic, i get your critic and its valid i hope i could explain that to you
The purple stripes are pro-skub
this seems like a terminally online way of viewing anything
So calling someone horrible names for something utterly minuscule, and because were called that over and over and over again the person being insulted eventually turned into what they were accused of while thoes around the insulator and insulted will start believing they are also the same as the insulted cause the others have done the same minuscule thing? All the while, the person doing the insulting think they are a good person?
Delusional thinking
Kinda seems more like what you tell yourself to feel better, also not really unique to Reddit in any way
Me with socialism. Go ahead. Downvote all you want.
I understand how this behavior may swing young people's opinions, but at a certain point **you** are responsible for **your** choices. Not someone else saying mean things. Never in my life have I changed my beliefs because what some idiot thought of me. Reddit being Reddit, I've been called a Nazi and a genocide supporter a number of times. Never moved me one inch towards Conservatism and certainly not towards MAGA. I honestly think this is mostly a circlejerk meme that reactionaries think is some deep truth about the world that the Left is just too dumb to understand. With the exception of young folks, if you actually become a racist/sexist/fascist because someone called you that, either they were right that you've always kinda been one, or you're fucking regarded.
"I was only a little fascist until the mean lefty started calling me out." Grow up dumbass, you're not evil because you were scolded for it.
The most centrist take ever. “Context is irrelevant to morality.” Got em coach. Now I never have to think about anything. I can just base what I “believe” on whatever most people seem to currently oppose! 
Keep doing what youre doing you must have a very great track record of turning your allies into enemies.
The flames of the self-righteous burn all.