They’ve handily proven time and time again in recent memory how they can in fact just do things and the rest of the world will sit back and take it lying down, though. That’s the problem. Anyone who thinks it’s just an America issue or something like that grievously misunderstands the tenuous house of cards that the pax americana and era of modern peace is built upon. Realistically, how far are you willing to go to prevent fascism? Would you die for it? Would you crawl through the trenches in a land many seas away from home? Some people might say yes but realistically most Westerners and others would never dare give up their creature comforts. It’s not delusional to think the world can change in the way they suggest precisely because they’ve suggested it - that is the hallmark of the fascist movement and what ties their collective ethos together, a philosophy of domination in all aspects.

Idk in short, I agree that yeah these people are certainly morally bankrupt. Lots of them are delusional. Any group of people has some like that. That doesn’t mean we should strawman them. There’s lots of idiots and they might think the US could invade Greenland without causing an international crisis. Either fortunately or unfortunately, these aren’t the people saying that the US wants to own Greenland or that we should go to war with Iran, for example.

The people who control and run this movement are not delusional. They’re dangerous.

i made the freudian slip originally before publishing the comment but decided to keep it in because it felt apt. lol

they’re doing it very knowingly… they wrote an entire nearly 1000 page fucking document detailing exactly what they’re doing in excruciating detail.

the fascists == idiots trope needs to go bc that’s exactly what makes them dangerous. lots of these fuckers are quite intelligent and conniving. you should be weary.

I mean, it’s not misfortune it’s an intentional act of deception; kind of like naming yourself national socialists while being racist brownshirts… it’s an intentionally obtuse lie!

Well, not to play devil’s advocate, but they do own and control virtually every facet of global society…

Granted, probably not for much longer. But, it is pertinent that we live in the status quo we do.

Over the years we’ve gradually seen this ratio in society of wealth vs the size of the population it is concentrated getting more and more grotesque. First we had the 1%, then the 0.1%, then the 0.00001%… shit recently we saw that some ridiculously small number of individuals you can count on your hands own over half of the entire globe’s wealth.

Does this mean these people are somehow superior superhuman specimens? No, of course not.

I’m not so willing to accept that the increasingly small circle of people who control society is decided by lot, either, though. When global wealth is further concentrated, how do they even decide who gets kicked off the island, so to speak? Everyone has their snarky answer of how they can so obviously see how this works, usually based on their life experience or something they’ve read, but I genuinely don’t think anyone public is privy to the true nature of this system. And you or I are in no place to even ponder it, or make wild conjecture, as it exists in a world so far removed from us as to be alien. We couldn’t even know where to begin.

it isn’t talked about enough but we’re all calendar challenged. timekeeping in the modern sense is unnatural and is a significant contributor to stress in the Western lifestyle. the clock is the single greatest tool of oppression ever invented. you just can’t talk about it bc the moment you do even other leftists might start calling you a lazy chud.

why is this weird like, anti-american-exceptionalism so prevalent on the internet?

it’s so reactionary. you’re… actively engaging in the same kind of thought process that is the secret ingredient to american stupidity. if you’re not careful what’s happened and happening here will happen wherever you are, if it hasn’t already. and this sort of shit is why…

You seriously couldn’t piece together I’m an anarchist of sorts without it being spoon-fed to you? And I’m the idiot? Jesus christ…

Not to mention you and other libs have this weird tendency to decry anything you find even mildly unpalatable as “mental illness,” which is some straight up ableist rhetoric. The way people like you use “mentally ill” as an insult is deplorable. I hope you have no one in your life who is differently abled that looks up to you or relies upon you, you sound awful.

I think we can agree on one thing, here, however. I’d rather not waste my time and energy conversing with someone lacking the cognitive faculty to actually hold the conversation at hand without degenerating into strawmanning, begging the question, ad hominem, and more importantly - being trashy and bigoted. Whatever reasoning you have to explain away why you behave like shit I’m not really interested in hearing out, either.

Have a terrible day, please.

Obviously “presidency” is not compatible with a free society, so what are you on about?

I mean yeah, I agree with that statement too. I think it’s funny you find that so absurd as to be your point of satire. You’re so fucking deep in the shit and you can’t even see it yourself.

What am I on about? Anarchism, which seems to be something people have a hard time grasping. Not because anarchism itself, but because they’re thoroughly inoculated against thinking outside of the existing framework they live in, ya know, kinda like your take right here.

So, what matters to you is that theoretically a monarch in a constitutional monarchy still has some powers.

Yeah, this does matter, because I’m not a boot licking pussy dude. Lmfao. Your comment unintentionally captures the entire point here that power intrinsically leads to corruption and rot. It’s a feature, not a bug. Stop acting like every time this happens it is some egregious failure of the system that came about by pure luck or chance. It isn’t. This is the entire function of the system we live in.

No gods, no kings.

no i think out of all the absurd things americans think their take on kingship is actually the most based.

we know “what a king is,” the magna carta is taught here and most at least know what it is and have a basic understanding of the difference between an absolute monarch or otherwise.

what americans disagree with is the sentiment monarchy is compatible with free society, and they’re right. every time i hear someone from some country that still has a monarchy try and defend it as “ooooh it’s okay it’s constitutional/symbolic/whatever copium…” or even worse shit like “well it brings in all this tourist money!!?!” or the worst: “well it’d just be easier to keep it the way it is at this point…”

every time i hear this stuff… i cringe so fucking hard. people who live in contemporary monarchies are on the most batshit insane lib copium about it and should probably reconsider what flavor of boot they’re chowing on, at least.

no lmao.

surprisingly hot take these days but I prefer critical analysis to being an emotional reactionary.

i suppose that’s just "cringe’ tho, isn’t it?

yeah let’s let elon elope to one of our most significant international rivals after letting him plunder virtually every datapoint owned by the federal government. i look forward to the russian bot farms becoming personalized down to the individual.

i mean no offense but are you guys that are cheering for this fucking stupid? do you just read stuff and respond based on how it makes you feel?

or maybe it is uncanny because there are beans the size of boulders??

smh. “result of the uncanny AI effect.” talking about image generation like it’s some sort of magic taint that pervades the image. i’ll go draw large beans myself just to point out how fucking absurd what you’re saying is, brb.

I’m personally scared for what the future holds, we are living in a post-Enlightenment society.

At the risk of sounding a little chud-y… we are tasked with the same challenge people like Newton or Spinoza dealt with in life; we need to rebuild meaning, reason, and thought from first principles in a way that is amicable to the modern order.

People, like those that we’re seeing in action here, probably think Modest Proposal is actually encouraging the audience to eat children. It’s a serious problem.

of course he means it literally?

that’s why i think, as i said, his comment is reductionist. the key word is

I think the only bad thing…

he’s just trying to draw an edgy hyperbolic narrative that the world only cares about the Holocaust in particular not because it is a genocide but because it threatened the international status quo. he’s wrong, but he’s not a nazi, at least as far as i can tell from his singular comment. i won’t come up to bat for the original commenter, he very well could be a bigot or a nazi. i don’t have enough context to know as a reader. his use of leftist diction and the way he wields it is a pretty strong indicator that this was his intended thesis, on top of obvious contextual clues.

man fuck idek what else to say. your response here is purely reactionary, you aren’t even saying anything other than reaffirming things you’ve already said.

i don’t agree with the original comment bc it is pessimistic reductionism but i think you and the people dogging on it severely lack media literacy and critical thinking skills, as kindly as that can be stated.

in what way is the former reading more likely than the latter??

you need to make far more assumptions about the original comment and commenter to come to the conclusion that he made the comment out of some weird bigoted malice than to just accept the obvious reading of it being a commentary on global society’s attitudes towards various genocides.

jesus fucking christ i see this shit all over the internet and it is why our society is collapsing. just droves of people behaving and thinking in ways that would fucking abhor a literature teacher from even just a decade ago.

actually in theory yes any catholic can be pope.

in practice, however…

the other guy pretty clearly meant liberal in a social & political philosophy sense and not a “liberal v conservative” modern american political theater one. i won’t speak for ferrous but i would imagine that’s why you didn’t get a reply of sorts yet. it’s kind of surprising and unsettling the amount of upvotes your comments have relative to each other but then again it seems reading comprehension is a skill more and more left to a select few.

like, anyone from .ml probably means liberal in that sense but in the particular context of this comment he definitely did and i’m confused why you’re getting upvoted when your reply is nonsensical considering liberalism is not diametric to conservative ideology within most frameworks.

sorry not to be a chode but wishy washy symbols like the ambiguity of the word “liberal” in modern discourse is a large part of what has landed us here in the first place.

no, i just think i don’t like dealing with idiots like yourself who’s perogotive is to abscond anything you read that makes you feel any cognitive dissonance.

i have nothing good to say to those who can’t engage in good-faith discussion, like yourself. you’re part of the problem with the world nowadays.

um yes? because it’s the truth? do some research before posting man. even if you were alive back then that doesn’t mean you knew wtf was up everywhere in the country with every demographic.

apologies for reddit as a source but full time wage in 1974 for mcdonald’s was, coupled with aid like the GI program, absolutely more than enough capital to buy a family home. don’t spread misinformation. remember what was stolen, or for some never even given.