JD Vance has to defend Thiel’s alt-catholocism. They’re in a “rad trad” cult.

Lets see, the hard right are the substrate of economic and political inequalities across the board. Some when idiot centrists peddle this “it’s not about left or right” crap, they’re really just saying they’re either completely politically, historically, and sociologically uninformed… Or they’re just saying “Yes, I’m a fascist”.

So which is it with you? Have you just never paid attention to the history of politics and society, or are you just some right wing douche posing as a centrist?

Weirdly anti-vegan too.

Kind of boomer humor, in that the joke has been done to death + OP has a bad reputation for being anti-women.

It’d get a different response with a different artist and poster.

You don’t like how a community self-moderates, or the views it goes by, then you’re free to construct an alt-right battleground comic strip community as an alternative.

But some of us like to have nice things and nice places, without mistaking furries and beastiality.

You want personal political growth? Go join a political debate sub, or learn philosophy and history. There are places for the battlelines, where you can learn these lessons, and then there are places where we uphold the rewards of the good, the right, and the true.

NOT the edgy. “Edgy” is called that, specifically because it’s on the edge of what’s socially unacceptable. It’s the political battlefront of the Overton window. Well, not everyone wants that everywhere, all the time.

You believe this is the venue for it. I don’t want it to be. I’m not on the frontline of some alt-right culture war right now. I seek to be among friends in safe spaces.

If you seek alt-right, edgy comedy, and far-right spaces, you should go do that somewhere else… Or at the very least, if that’s not your jam… Then don’t advocate on their behalf here.

You’re mistaken in thinking “The Algorithm” is some objective equation. I can’t stress this enough -

It’s not.

It’s a lever, a programatic tool billionaires can adjust to control public opinion. What’s more there’s evidence of this. Internal leaks from Facebook/Meta reported that they were fully aware certain types of commercial beauty standard promotions embeded in social media in an unmoderated fashion on their sites were inadvertently causing young girls to display suicidal ideation.

They didn’t stop it (because of the ad profit). There’s a whole two part podcast on this (and other forms of confirmed algorithmic damage here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xIR0Kd27RhI ).

Likewise, YouTube prior to Trump’s election were very much aware that their algorithm was leading young men through a pipeline to far-right ideas and Nazi content (again, this podcast episode discusses the news and facts of this case: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IekScPTekz8 )

I CANNOT STRESS THIS ENOUGH, the idea that Sunlight will disinfect our views, is no-longer (and I believe the sources cited in those two podcasts show this), is no longer a viable opinion. It’s really an abdication to a higher power, without anywhere NEAR enough awareness of what that “higher power” really is: A loaded version of free speech, where the richest promote and demote views that best suit their interests.

I’m not saying I have a solution, but it’s really fucking important that we all strongly recognize the gravity and extent of the problem. Because people are now growing up in, and entire social circles are being actively politically groomed by these algorithms in a way that’s never happened to this extent before.

The free market of ideas is a convenient LIE which benefits the wealthy and most people do not push back on at all (they see it as objective and impartial). We need far left radicalism but there are no billionaires interested in allowing that into their algorithmically walled gardens - where they control the “sunlight” of what your feed thinks is popular.

They aren’t accusing the left of indoctrinating the young because it was happening. They were accusing them, because they were doing it themselves already, algorithmically.

I think the joke is: Sometimes you gotta take a stance… But maybe choose when and where better (obviously in an isolated encampment when there’s just the two of you might not be the best time to go off at someone you have to get along with to survive).

I believe having no-rules is a choice that damages the world, when the aim should be to improve it. After all: If you choose no-rules, you’re choosing extremism; 3D printed guns might be comics, lolicon, violent porn, and hate groups.

Society is built on moderating the few for the good of the many. Currently the few that need moderation are alt-right billionaires, and corrupt rightwing officials. It’s okay for the community to agree with this, and adopt that fact as a viewpoint (which means protecting trans people, and being open to the economic left).

Anthropologists observe societies, writing about them dispassionately and adopting a non-interference, non-judgement policy.

At some point a group of academics decided they wanted to include moral discussions (particularly about their own society), on how things come to be a certain way, and how they could develop differently. Thus Sociology was born.

Anthropology still exists, Sociology eclipsed it, it didn’t kill it. They’re aspects of each other, not in competition.

This is the censorship debate in a nutshell. A community picks a side, and the other side is free to branch off. The choices here are: Comics can be anything, even 3D printed gun files, or porn! No limits! We’re all here to just observe.

Or; we need to advocate some limits, some values. Some values are better for the world, and some are worse.

I believe the no-limits crowd have the less considered standpoint. No group is free from having standards and values. We already moderate, it’s the nature of social groups with implicit rules and ideals.

In my opinion, we’re here to do more than just observe the chaos. We adopt a stance. Improving the world as best we can. So we must decide what improves it, and what doesn’t.

I don’t think totally uncensored free speech improves the world. It still imposes a set of values that impact the world - even if advocates pretend that no choice has been made.

You know, the books the Nazis burned were from the library of Magnus Herschfeld, the director of the Berlin Sexology Institute. He was gay, and much of the library was ABOUT queerness, and transgender studies.

The comic strips we’re talking about aren’t being destroyed. But a lot of trans people in the world are, and they risk themselves simply by being who they are.

That is more worthwhile than access to edgy comics on a public forum like this. Better that far-right stuff gets blocked, than trans people getting burned.

It’s okay for a forum to have a political position. I’d prefer it to be left of center.

Go try to gatekeep comments somewhere else you dumb little bitch. I get to spread news against billionaires wherever the fuck I like, suck it up shit stain.

Get on board or get the fuck out, don’t waste my time.

…and this in response to the attacks on Iran:

A man broke into Shannon Airport in Ireland today, climbed onto the wing of a parked US Air Force C-130 Hercules and damaged the fuselage, taking the aircraft out of service.

Via Reddit

Police in San Francisco have arrested a 20-year-old man after a Molotov cocktail was thrown at the home of OpenAI CEO Sam Altman, setting a perimeter gate alight.

Officers responded to a call in the North Beach neighbourhood of the city in the early hours of Friday.

While SFPD did not identify the man or the house that was attacked, a spokeswoman for OpenAI, the major artificial intelligence (AI) company behind ChatGPT, confirmed on Friday that the incident had occurred at Altman’s home.

A spokeswoman added that the same person had “also made threats at our San Francisco headquarters”.

Via The BBC

Trump and Israel bombed a bunch of hospitals.

Oil prices are gonna stay high for some time.

No shit, I was using the royal “you” to wonder about the already wealthy. What goes on in their heads.

This is how the vaat majority of wealthy people acquired the vast majority of their money. There was a study recently.

But with all that money, why would you care whose ahead and behind you… And do they care about that, or is that just a narrative we’ve bought into, something to make us feel a certain way about the wealthy being unpleasant?

I’m not reading that or replying to you further. I sent a ten minute video to help you understand, you replied to me in less than a minute. You want to remain an incel brained red pill dumb ass that’s on you loser.

I understand your confusion because I’m talking about both what the comic is depicting, and what REAL WOMEN in THE REAL WORLD have the freedom to say and do.

…but if you think the comics creator is trying to depict a gay man checking out someone’s style whilst the person next to them is expressing jealousy. Then I think you need your eyes checked.

That is NOT what the comic is about… And even if it were you’re skipping the fact that the conversation is about how media depictions (so yes, we are discussing the media) contains messages that effect women in the real world.

Also, policing and thinking about people’s gaze is part of social communication. Sarte writes about this in Being and Nothingness. If you watch this video you’ll see it’s about solitude and self, you too by feeling your natural gaze is being “policed” are ALSO experiencing “The Gaze” or “The Look”…

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=5r-qoABSF9E

So you’re reacting to that policing which you feel “seen” by. You are probably a male (as I am), we both, I suspect, like looking at tits. I’m not trying to invalidate that process, the policing isn’t intended to stop that, it’s intended to get certain messages and social boundaries around that “corrected”.

… BECAUSE this comic, is a type of misinformation, where women are naturally contradictory, rather than their behavior being a construction and imposition of outside gender rules …which media like this, is propaganda to reinforce.

I mean, some of my friends are a bit sleazy, but I wouldn’t call them creeps.