Those who are considering showing mercy to the libs when the tables have turned. Have you received a SINGLE apology from anyone over any of the hundreds of ways we have been vindicated?
You haven't, because they're not sorry. In fact, they are not even done. We have not even won yet. We have five minutes of success and suddenly we act like we should apply the mercy rule?
No, make every solitary person affiliated with the left feel serious consequences until they relent or expatriate. We can't live with these people.
I’m still bitter with a hint of myocarditis from the “Catholics” that held their nose and didn’t vote Trump in 2020 because their classiness was offended by his poor behavior. At least they got to pat themselves on the back on their moral superiority.
imo the whole approach to the "getting libs fired" stuff had been wrong. The libs see it as a logical extension of their dominance. If one of us got fired for fedposting, they'd think "yeah, of course you'd get fired for that. Duh. Why would we let you say it?"
Right wingers, on the other hand, view it from a place of weakness, i.e. they mistake petty power for real power. When these people got fired for their comments on Trump and the random guy who died, right wingers on Twitter mistook it for the sudden emergence of actual power.
In reality, we just saw a pre-established norm temporarily applied evenly (something that admittedly didn't happen much before). It's quite possible, even likely, that this will even reverse itself by the end of the month and we'll get back to libs repeating "freedom of speech doesn't mean freedom from consequences" or "FAFO" ad nauseum.
This stuff is really a distraction and we need to focus on finding ways to accrue real power. Although I do see the value in your line inquiry that you described in the article. We should generally avoid becoming the highly unpleasant people that we despise on the left. Even if doing so may work in the short term, people don't want to be ruled by Sociopaths.
My counter-argument stems from your statement, "people don't want to be ruled by Sociopaths."
People don't want to be ruled at all, they want to rape and murder and steal, while not themselves being raped, murdered, or robbed. The compromise is individuals do not get to do those things, with government enforcing that compromise. Unfortunately, that government often has to do those things, or at least the latter 2. This is also a compromise, but one that is far better than not having an enforcer. People will put up with a lot in order to not have random rape, murder and robbery. The expected and orderly rape, murder, and robbery of government is seen as far superior.
History has shown that people would far prefer being ruled by sociopaths who rein in all the other sociopaths than to just let all the sociopaths run wild. History has also shown that most people are normies whose opinion only matters if someone with power foolishly decides to give them some power. If we win, let's not make that mistake again.
I guess I should rephrase my statement then. People SHOULDN'T be ruled by sociopaths. Good governance can only stem from understanding of and compassion for one's people. How that looks in practice is not always "nice" or gentle, in fact it necessarily requires great strength and willingness to (skillfully) use violence, but leadership that lacks these qualities, especially if led by petty whims and sadism, will always produce negative results.
That's more along the lines of what I'm trying to get at.
Same, but no matter how much of "accelerationists" we are, you have to retain some tact to keep the aesthetic (say nothing of moral...) high ground. This feel like beating a dying horse--similar feeling to the biden hospice debate...very sad.
I guess the question then is just whether this helps or hurts and I'd say it hurts since most ppl that see this just think he's a jackass. And what is gained? This old hag is out of her job and angry...🤷🏻♂️
Can't say I support the cancelling of some old spinster aunt, even if she does have the physiognomy of an old maid with eleven cats and a penchant for wine who manages to ruin every Thanksgiving dinner. Seeing the tables turned, if briefly, may be satisfying, but it is both very ugly and doesn't support the cause. We shouldn't be cancelling random footsoldiers, because the DR isn't made up of the same vindictive losers that typify the Left. If they must be crushed, let it be in our manner (be it by the sword or the gavel), not by copying their backstabbing longhouse nonsense. Moreover, it doesn't even qualify as a tactical victory. This will if anything harden the enemy's position, and weaken our ability to convert the undecided and the uncertain.
Or, to put it simply, cancelling is a leftist technique for a reason and we should avoid it
Not that I'll lift a finger to help her. Just desserts and all that
"If you can justify taking a job from a poor-as-dirt wagecuck, who has to wear compression socks and pop a few Advil just to make it through the day, over an errant Facebook post, what’s stopping you from just gulag’ing libtards? Killing them? After all, we hate cancel culture and tattling to HR, so if we’re embrace the left’s methods, why not go all the way? Is it really just “who/whom" and “the ends justify the means” “by any means necessary?”"
Nothing.
Nothing.
Good point.
Yes.
If you do not hate that which threatens what you love, then you do not truly love.
I don't know how cucks are still debating this shit.
Sam Hyde's tweet on this shoulda made your list around the cancel culture stuff: https://x.com/wigger/status/1813772431955497073
Good to see who is coming out as too limp wristed to fight though.
Yeah I saw this after it was pretty locked up. Will maybe pick it up on Monday.
Banger tweet. So true!
Those who are considering showing mercy to the libs when the tables have turned. Have you received a SINGLE apology from anyone over any of the hundreds of ways we have been vindicated?
You haven't, because they're not sorry. In fact, they are not even done. We have not even won yet. We have five minutes of success and suddenly we act like we should apply the mercy rule?
No, make every solitary person affiliated with the left feel serious consequences until they relent or expatriate. We can't live with these people.
I’m still bitter with a hint of myocarditis from the “Catholics” that held their nose and didn’t vote Trump in 2020 because their classiness was offended by his poor behavior. At least they got to pat themselves on the back on their moral superiority.
Congratulations. You are now a leftist.
imo the whole approach to the "getting libs fired" stuff had been wrong. The libs see it as a logical extension of their dominance. If one of us got fired for fedposting, they'd think "yeah, of course you'd get fired for that. Duh. Why would we let you say it?"
Right wingers, on the other hand, view it from a place of weakness, i.e. they mistake petty power for real power. When these people got fired for their comments on Trump and the random guy who died, right wingers on Twitter mistook it for the sudden emergence of actual power.
In reality, we just saw a pre-established norm temporarily applied evenly (something that admittedly didn't happen much before). It's quite possible, even likely, that this will even reverse itself by the end of the month and we'll get back to libs repeating "freedom of speech doesn't mean freedom from consequences" or "FAFO" ad nauseum.
This stuff is really a distraction and we need to focus on finding ways to accrue real power. Although I do see the value in your line inquiry that you described in the article. We should generally avoid becoming the highly unpleasant people that we despise on the left. Even if doing so may work in the short term, people don't want to be ruled by Sociopaths.
I disagree, but appreciate your logic.
My counter-argument stems from your statement, "people don't want to be ruled by Sociopaths."
People don't want to be ruled at all, they want to rape and murder and steal, while not themselves being raped, murdered, or robbed. The compromise is individuals do not get to do those things, with government enforcing that compromise. Unfortunately, that government often has to do those things, or at least the latter 2. This is also a compromise, but one that is far better than not having an enforcer. People will put up with a lot in order to not have random rape, murder and robbery. The expected and orderly rape, murder, and robbery of government is seen as far superior.
History has shown that people would far prefer being ruled by sociopaths who rein in all the other sociopaths than to just let all the sociopaths run wild. History has also shown that most people are normies whose opinion only matters if someone with power foolishly decides to give them some power. If we win, let's not make that mistake again.
I guess I should rephrase my statement then. People SHOULDN'T be ruled by sociopaths. Good governance can only stem from understanding of and compassion for one's people. How that looks in practice is not always "nice" or gentle, in fact it necessarily requires great strength and willingness to (skillfully) use violence, but leadership that lacks these qualities, especially if led by petty whims and sadism, will always produce negative results.
That's more along the lines of what I'm trying to get at.
Straight Sensible Centrism™ over here
That's my middle name!
That AK guy tweet is a banger. Didn't know he had it in him.
I watch his YouTube videos frequently, and i can just tell he’s hiding his power level
Many such cases.
Agree, calling out that old lady at work is a dirty business.
I'm torn but it feels slimy.
Same, but no matter how much of "accelerationists" we are, you have to retain some tact to keep the aesthetic (say nothing of moral...) high ground. This feel like beating a dying horse--similar feeling to the biden hospice debate...very sad.
Don't have a batman complex. Winning over everything else.
I guess the question then is just whether this helps or hurts and I'd say it hurts since most ppl that see this just think he's a jackass. And what is gained? This old hag is out of her job and angry...🤷🏻♂️
They learn the same fear that we had to learn. John gets it: https://barsoom.substack.com/p/right-wing-cancel-squads
Well, they put a 75 year old grandmother in prison for praying, and mocked her concerns she would die in jail.
Can't say I support the cancelling of some old spinster aunt, even if she does have the physiognomy of an old maid with eleven cats and a penchant for wine who manages to ruin every Thanksgiving dinner. Seeing the tables turned, if briefly, may be satisfying, but it is both very ugly and doesn't support the cause. We shouldn't be cancelling random footsoldiers, because the DR isn't made up of the same vindictive losers that typify the Left. If they must be crushed, let it be in our manner (be it by the sword or the gavel), not by copying their backstabbing longhouse nonsense. Moreover, it doesn't even qualify as a tactical victory. This will if anything harden the enemy's position, and weaken our ability to convert the undecided and the uncertain.
Or, to put it simply, cancelling is a leftist technique for a reason and we should avoid it
Not that I'll lift a finger to help her. Just desserts and all that
“and perhaps most stinging of all, I am…a…”libertarian.” 😭” hahaha
JD Vance is playing a bit of 4D chess, while others are simping for Asians and Latinas he went to the ephemeral Aryan fountainhead
Refugees friend regime to Compact magazine:
"Ready or not, here I come, you can't write.
Gonna find you and take furniture with me".
It's true, footage shows that SWAT-style police even took the furniture.
To the victor go the spoils.
Neo Liberal Feudalism said something I’d never thought of:
‘The target of incompetence shtick is preying on Christian notions of forgiveness.’
Perhaps the same applies to the appeal to mercy.
"If you can justify taking a job from a poor-as-dirt wagecuck, who has to wear compression socks and pop a few Advil just to make it through the day, over an errant Facebook post, what’s stopping you from just gulag’ing libtards? Killing them? After all, we hate cancel culture and tattling to HR, so if we’re embrace the left’s methods, why not go all the way? Is it really just “who/whom" and “the ends justify the means” “by any means necessary?”"
Nothing.
Nothing.
Good point.
Yes.
If you do not hate that which threatens what you love, then you do not truly love.
I don't know how cucks are still debating this shit.