HotTopicRebel t1_isw58at wrote
It's pretty crazy that anyone can see the right pictures, read the right things and they become a mass shooter with no way to resist it
lilrabbitfoofoo t1_isw6b4s wrote
It is crazy, because it isn't the least bit true.
It takes a certain kind of ignorant, gullible, cowardly person to be susceptible to the fearmongering lies and narcissistic entreaties of religious swindlers in the first place.
And then it takes someone who is mentally ill on top of that to be "radicalized" by violent cultish/religious hate propaganda like this.
So, no, not everyone is at risk of falling for this rightwing LowIQanonense.
[deleted] t1_isxgktz wrote
[deleted]
lilrabbitfoofoo t1_isy10km wrote
So, you read my post and decided to pull these ridiculous strawman arguments and series of false equivalencies out of your ass instead?
Let me make it CLEARER to you, since you claim to have been paying attention but yet didn't seem to understand the very key factors here:
First, people with a larger than normal amygdala instinctively respond to the unknown with fear instead of with curiosity. This is not within their unconscious control. However, with education and personal experience (facing this unknown) they can learn to ameliorate this de facto response. This is why "conservatives" are always trying to segregate people by race, beliefs, etc. and why they always attack education and open discussions with the larger group.
Second, religious charlatans target these people at a very young age with fearmongering lies and scams. Children are programmed in their DNA to trust their elders as a survival mechanism, which is why charlatans target children with ignorant superstitious nonsense and propaganda.
Third, children indoctrinated into such nonsense cults have a very hard time escaping them as adults. Especially when they are kept away from a proper education in critical thinking skills and from meeting people with other beliefs and from other cultures.
Fourth, people raised religious overlap overwhelmingly with LowIQanon rightwing white supremacist Trumpist conspiracy drivel in the USA. This is not suprising since these conspiracy kooks and would be demagogues use the same fearmongering approaches proven to work by religious scammers. It's why Trumpism in the US, for example, is obviously a religious sub cult of Christian Nationalism.
And finally, in order to keep the cult fed with hate and fear, the cult leaders need to targets to attack as "them" in order for the suckers and followers to feel part of "us".
So, they always attack perennial minorities like racial differences, homosexuals, religious minorities, etc. because those groups are always outnumbered. "Them" always adapts and expands to whatever local minorities exist (Sunnis in Shia nations, vice versa, etc.).
And then it expands to whatever is new and unfamiliar to the fearful old fools still caught up in the cult long past the age of reason, like Rock n Roll is bad, then Heavy Metal, then Dungeons & Dragons, then Death Metal, then Rap, then Harry Potter, and on and on.
Fortunately, these large amydala ignorant, gullible cowards are a genetic minority everywhere in the world. Otherwise, the human race would have died out a very long time ago.
Unfortunately, they exist in large enough numbers to be a perennial pain in everyone's ass, which is why civilization has been fighting the same culture war with these ignorant fools over and over again for hundreds of thousands of years.
And why decent folk who believe in egalitarianism must always remain vigilant against religious swindlers, snake-oil salesmen, and would be demagogues like Hitler, Stalin, Putin, and Trump.
Those are the REAL "patterns" based on SCIENCE covering hundreds of thousands of years of human development and history.
[deleted] t1_isy38ts wrote
[deleted]
EmptyCalories t1_isxzmdh wrote
>And is simply being Right wing tantamount to homicidal?
Ever notice how people from r/conservative lose their freaking minds every time someone correctly draws a correlation between right wing propaganda targeting gullible people, and people with mental issues that take the rhetoric and have to go one step further to actually become violent?
https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/10/02/las-vegas-shooting-fake-news-guns-215670/
>But amid this well-worn dance of Democrats versus Republicans, there came another response to Stephen Paddock’s massacre: a spate of false flag proclamations and conspiracy theories, emanating from the darkest corners of the internet and the likes of Alex Jones, 4chan and Reddit.
[deleted] t1_isy1pl7 wrote
[deleted]
EmptyCalories t1_isy1ym0 wrote
>So my benign and banal observation
I disagree with that assessment. You offered up a strawman of an argument and since it's a strawman no one should bother engaging with you other than to tell you you're wrong.
[deleted] t1_isy6il0 wrote
[deleted]
EmptyCalories t1_isydral wrote
Maybe if you started off with something besides, "Right wing tantamount to homicidal?" You immediately begin with hyperbole and then expect people to think you are arguing in good faith? Not even close.
Nobody believes that all right-wingers are homicidal killers, but that does not mean there are no right-wing homicidal killers.
You won't even attempt to address the statement of the person you originally responded to, which is that essentially, "Right wing rhetoric is responsible for right wing whackjobs becoming violent." Instead, you came up with your strawman.
Example 1:
>Shiffer frequently posted about going to the Capitol on social media.
>
>In the days after the FBI searched Mar-a-Lago, Trump's compound in Palm Beach, Florida, he appeared to post multiple times on Trump's social media platform, Truth Social.
Example 2:
https://www.local10.com/news/local/2022/04/03/parkland-shooters-disturbing-social-media-posts/
>The suspect, who is white, allegedly posted a manifesto on Google and livestreamed the fatal shooting of 10 people at a supermarket in a predominantly black neighbourhood on Twitch, a company owned by Amazon.
Finally, an explanation:
>Republicans have become more explicit about embracing the actual words, helped by the amplification of Fox News, particularly prime-time host Tucker Carlson. Rather than implying it, as many on the right previously had, Carlson is explicit — even if he denies somehow that he's talking about the "racist fantasy," as he called it.
>
>But just look at his words:
>
>"I know that the left and all the little gatekeepers on Twitter become literally hysterical if you use the term 'replacement,'" Carlson said in April 2021, "if you suggest that the Democratic Party is trying to replace the current electorate, the voters now casting ballots with new people, more obedient voters from the third world. But they become hysterical because that's what's happening actually."
I don't believe that all conservatives want to be violent against liberals, but there are some that do. Even if they don't want to become violent personally, they will support those that are violent, making said violence acceptable in their peer group, as long as it's against someone that group sees as a threat, or wants a punching bag, or whatever.
[deleted] t1_isynr6n wrote
[deleted]
EmptyCalories t1_isyqgdj wrote
Original comment:
>It takes a certain kind of ignorant, gullible, cowardly person to be susceptible to the fearmongering lies and narcissistic entreaties of religious swindlers in the first place.
>
>And then it takes someone who is mentally ill on top of that to be "radicalized" by violent cultish/religious hate propaganda like this.
Your response:
>Oh, is Reddit right wing now? And is simply being Right wing tantamount to homicidal?
You took a perfectly reasonable statement and created a strawman for which you have a hyperbolic response... so you can point out hyperbole and moving goalposts? I don't see any logic in your thought process and neither does anyone else.
[deleted] t1_isywewv wrote
[deleted]
EmptyCalories t1_isywwkv wrote
He didn't characterize the entire right wing as homicidal, but a smaller subset of it. It's good that you're out because you don't seem to grasp the concept of subsets and supersets all that well.
eyes_without_lids t1_isztj5r wrote
the US is not 50% right
first off a not insignificant amount of the country is largely apolitical, secondly a large amount of republican control is in rural areas which are by their nature are less populated lastly if you look at stats on voter turn out the odds are always stacked in favor of the left when the turn out is high suggesting that the US is largely left leaning and politically apathetic
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments