Peanut

we’re due for a modern re-framing on rights and personal autonomy.

but we might need to design it fully as local coops and roll over the epstein-class in order to get it enshrined.

if you let them change it, they’ll, (as obtusely as possible,) re-phrase everything to not actually accomplish what it was supposed to.

we need big changes, and we need them yesterday, because the future is here and it’s fucking us all up. the only people with the time and social placement to affect change are the ones that have been coddled into that position through either nepotism or corporate interest. yadda.

still need voter reform… hopefully the next people voted in specifically on voter reform don’t just go “oops actually we weren’t for that at all, hee hee.” (canadian liberal party are also just the backup conservatives i guess)

and my god, there should be some accountability for directly lying to and misleading the voter base. the number of USA politicians i see that can’t answer a fucking question is embarrassing to anyone thinking they don’t live in a fascist state.

like, those promises, or statements, or blatant intentional incompetence should come with some form of accountability. if i fuck up too many lattes i have to live on the street, but politicians can laugh in your face after doing fuckall and taking your money.

generally anyone willing to take a position of power to hugely affect all of our lives and well being should be scared shitless for betraying their voters so blatantly.

more than anything we just need a whole new damned system which is built on modern science and not hundred years ancient aristocracy. it is possible. the only reason it doesn’t seem feasible is that the people with power and influence have been spending a weird amount of their excess ensuring that the system doesn’t enable or benefit anyone outside of the epstein class.

yadda yadda rant rant, i’m tired.

“look the guy who spends all day every day saying things said a cringe thing once! stop listening to him about israel and billionaires!”

there’s a huge hasan smear campaign by corpo “democrats” right now, because obviously he’s the real danger for some reason and not the cheeto rapist in power.

when people are calling democrats controlled opposition, this is what they mean.

remember hasan’s dog? don’t think about the entrenched democrats actively enabling the fascist takeover. don’t think about their support for funding israel’s genocide of gaza. what if his dog possibly potentially had a shock collar because the way it moved once! keep hasan on the defensive so he isn’t talking about israel or billionaires!

etc.

i definitely am not the biggest hasan fan, but i find myself defending him regularly from absolute bullshit.

if there’s was ever a time to be picky about hasan’s choice of emotionally biased statements on non-issues, this is really not it.

" gets so much traction with dudes acting like its a mayor cultural abuse of men while scarcely connecting to other genital mutilation happening to women"

FGM is already illegal in the states, otherwise i’m sure the constant comparison would matter more. also why are we making zero sum games for progressives when making a progressive safe environment would give more rights to everyone?

this is one of the frustrating points of contention that managed to get atheists and feminists fighting each-other rather than fighting groups like the heritage foundation well over a decade ago. i legitimately believe a lot of people pushing the need to suggest that somehow people are pretending FGM is being dismissed whenever addressing MGM are just bots/instigators trying to get people fighting. that is stupid. nobody is arguing this. why are we making this divisive bullshit salient and real?

“all genital mutilation is bad. it’s fucked up that it’s still legal in any capacity.” =/= “we hate women.”

even almost twenty years ago, saying “this is stupid, we should be supporting each-other progressively in rights and freedoms against thing like religious mutilation of baby genitals, and stopping religiously empowered political groups from dominating the discourse,” earned an inbox full of mutilated penis imagery, because somehow feminism is supposed to somehow be incompatible with a world where male babies don’t get their genitals mutilated to show that it’s just “not as bad” or something. ignore the kids who die from infection or w/e.

this was successfully made into the dominant social response in any context.

then we saw a couple decades of atheists and feminists being too distracted defending against incel/SJW branding to do anything about the fascist takeover, and progressives, dejected, vacated spaces allowing whole new incel chud armies to breed and take over. you’d think some would see this as a backfiring, but “it proves our point” so we won’t think about that.

i just wish i would stop seeing the same completely unnecessary divisive arguments that have helped groups like the heritage foundation get into power to remove rights for EVERYONE.

helping men =/= helping the patriarchy.

luckily, it looks like this thread is full of non-divisive conversation on the subject. this makes me happier.

heritage foundation types are destroying the world, we need solidarity and action focused at the problem, rather than anger at trans people wanting basic human rights, or at atheists/activists for wanting to remove classic religious patriarchal baby genital cutting traditions, because being against that makes you the patriarchy somehow. etc.

“i’m going to ignore all of your points and simplify things again in a way that’s convenient for me.” literally what MAGA cultists do.

“don’t call people you disagree with nazis!” is unfortunately also what people say when people call non-nazis ‘nazis,’ such as progressive groups like feminists or atheists.

now suddenly both are nazis? and they have to fight each-other instead of the heritage foundation?

why can’t a single person here actually engage with this part of the conversation instead of the made up one they want to simplify to?

“you are jumping to defend nazis.”

where in your addled imagination did i say that?

because i’ve said in several different ways “fuck nazis, and fuck the social mechanisms empowering nazis.”

but “this framing is bad and has actively helped the nazis.” becomes “i love nazis” to people who can’t fucking read.

which is why they love the uneducated.

and why the progressive movements actively fighting this shit for decades have been socially dogpiled into being “cringe,” and chastised by insulting people with big words, because only nazis talk about framing and use big words. i often talk about jordon peterson types poisoning this particular well with their intentional bullshit.

was it my support for atheist and feminist thinkers? was it my hate for the heritage foundation? what part of that is defending nazis exactly?

as i said,

the meme does NOT say to call out people offended by “fuck nazis”

there would be no issue if it said that. we all agree with that.

it says to call out people who are offended by being called nazis,

and people who call out the incorrect framing are conflated with arguing a non-existent point, because comprehending framing is too much work i guess

“fuck nazis” -> good

“if i call your group nazis, and you get offended, you’re a nazi.” -> bad

“don’t call people you disagree with nazis” is a response to the second example. conflating it with the first is the problem.

words matter, and calling out bad framing should not set off tribal dogpiling.

justify why it’s ok to be triggered by ‘fuck nazis’.

nobody here is arguing this. because you can’t interpret the words doesn’t mean they actually mean this.

“fuck nazis” -> good

“if i call your group nazis, and you get offended, you’re a nazi.” -> bad

“don’t call people you disagree with nazis” is a response to the second example. conflating it with the first is the problem.

and i talk about it because it is important for antifascists to comprehend what framing is when it used against them. and maybe shit wouldn’t be half as bad if americans were socialized into comprehending and using more big words, so they can tell the difference between jordan peterson bullshit and actual attempts to communicate more complicated topics.

hard to talk about the issues if people don’t socialize the words and concepts around them.

and being a running dog for Nazism

at literally no point was i being “a running dog for nazism” and repeatedly i showed how this exact failing was useful for the current fascist movement.

"Interesting lingo you use there "

how can i phrase it without setting off your imaginary dog whistles? also i get these concepts from… anti-fascist academics.

i do agree that it’s important to flag nazis as bad, and socially reify that, but also that we need to be able to point out when the more clever nazis get the stupidest portion of progressives to socialize that other progressive groups are the real nazis, and that even trying to discuss the matter is an admission of guilt.

the original comment i was discussing a bout was talking about the FRAMING.

like saying “right thing for the wrong reasons.” which is important, because sometimes failing to distinguish helps the nazis.

this is the part about blue curtains, but you have not yet actually noticed the point we are making beyond your simpler interpretation of what is being said.

as a progressive and a leftist, i find this exhausting, because the inability for people to comprehend words past the social signalling is directly responsible for much of the recent fascist success.

but let’s keep ignoring all of that, because academics are mean for saying we have to think about context sometimes.

the world is complex, and nazis will use this type of oversimplified comprehension to stop progressive groups from finding common ground.

divide and conquer has been extremely successful for the motives of fascism.

which is no small part why USA is currently run by fascists that keep making threats against my allied country.

we can hate nazis while also being capable of communication past the hypersimplified binaries that are actively useful for nazis.

this is why all the academics keep shouting that americans need to learn to read, and why it really is “that deep.”

this isn’t “happening in my head.” at least any more than anything else from the framing of predictive processing. but that dismissal is generally the response academics have gotten when trying to affect the general social comprehension.

but you haven’t really engaged with any of the points i’ve actually made, creating your own re-interpretation of the conversation that allows you to ignore the points being made, responding to yourself instead, which is great for oversimplified social dogpiling.

Don’t think they disagreed with that part.

I think it’s just recognizing the complexity of a world where even nazis will call their enemies “nazis” if it’s useful to them.

The “if you are offended when I call you a nazi you are a nazi” is a weird take to begin with.

I think the comment you are replying to isn’t arguing with the fuck nazis part, but the behaviour where progressive groups can be divided and conquered by socializing animosity between them.

Like when atheists were fighting against the heritage foundation, until they had to defend against claims of being bigots because “wanting to make circumcision generally illegal in the USA means you are pro FGM and you hate women, and if you argue otherwise it is an admission of guilt”

And all of the progressives were shamed out until the very groups that were actively fighting groups like the heritage foundation were terraformed into actual incel chud hangouts, while academic feminists were drowned out by the same culture war bullshit, helping to generally paint feminists as cringe karens, rather than a bastion against political movements by groups like the heritage foundation.

If you don’t know why I keep talking about the heritage foundation, it’s because they are the project 2025 people in no small part responsible for the current actual fascist push.

But… That’s difficult to explain while confronted by absolutist tribalism.

Don’t be divided and conquered. It’s harder for progressives to coordinate due to group complexity, but it’s important not to do the work of the fascists for them.

Progressives fighting progressives because its socially expedient to not think about the bigger picture is indeed a big part of why trump is in power, which that comment seems to indicate as a bad thing.

That doesn’t matter though if you just imagine their comment was “don’t be mean to nazis!!”

If you just pretend they said that, it’s so much easier to do the social peacock thing that has kneecapped progressive/leftist groups, and we can just ignore the failures of this behavior, because self reflection is bad for some reason.

i find it distressing how little i see people bring up the half million dead kids from his chainsaw.