#walkaway

[Kingu Kurimuzon]

The way the wokesters and certain followers of a certain F word have increasingly marginalized gay men in their ranks, I don’t find it all that surprising to see some gay men flirting with the right.

I don’t agree with it or believe it’s to the advantage of these men, but it’s understandable.

I ran across a surprising number of gay men (not to mention many male POCs) in the MRM. Many claimed to be ex feminists. Still humanists. Not that the MRM is an exclusively right wing movement, but they’ve been characterized as such by everyone from the MSM to orgs like SPLC. At some point, it becomes futile to fight the label. Ironic how those efforts to define and contain the right lead to its perceived growth, based on the very criteria used by orgs like the SPLC.

 

[Tellenbach]

Here are two "walkaway" testimonials from gay people:

This guy got de-friended by 500 "friends" over a post he made. These SJWs think your entire life is defined by a single word or phrase you use on the internet. Yikes.

This Armenian gay person was offended by the false genocide of black people narrative and found out that SJWs don't care about the Armenian genocide because Armenians aren't black people. "No one cared."

 

[Jaguar]

Hey, I was a liberal

No kidding.

 

[Julius_Van_Der_Beak]

Trump made me farther left again, tho, after a period in which I'd moved toward the center. He's just not appealing to me at all except as a kind of oafish circus clown. I never watched his dumb show to begin with.

Trump kinda symbolizes all the bad parts of this country for me. The fact that he has a personality cult in the GOP... for me it just confirms that everything I've suspected about the GOP is true and everyone who tried to make it seem otherwise and tell me that "we really all want the same thing" are either liars or fools. The only real right-wing value in this country is blind loyalty. The stuff about "small town virtues" is a crock of shit. If they cared about anything worthwhile and defensible, they wouldn't have nominated Trump as their candidate.

It says a lot that he helped me make my peace with clumsy inept performative wokeism; in the end I think it causes far less harm than that which the GOP has inflicted on the country. Both parties don't really care about inflicting harm on the world... but at least one party is acting like all the deaths from covid are kind of a big deal.

 

[anticlimatic]

I'm ready for Trump to get out of the way so we can get a better representative of right wing values. To that end, one term of Joe Biden might not be such a bad thing. I don't have a problem with Trump personally like so many do, and I appreciate all he's accomplished, but he drives the left far too insane. Something they both share fault in. Trump could be less of troll, and the left could be more emotionally secure. I always thought Trump would settle into the presidency and everything would kind of calm down after everyone realized he wasn't a war mongering authoritarian shyster, but he made very little effort in that regard, and the left in response ran a dramatic four year long meltodwn accusing Trump of one awful accusation after the next as soon as the first was debunked. Accuse someone often enough, regardless of merit, and eventually people start to believe the accusations.

I'm curious to see if the establishment left hates Trump so much because he's himself- or if it's just because he's a fighter, and the deep state can't abide such direct threats to their power. Or maybe they just need to be bought and paid for by special interests to avoid such an institutional barrage. We will have to see when the right has a new front man. They know now that they have to be an adept fighter to survive, which should be no surprise as the right knows such things in their bones, so I'm looking forward to the next incarnation.

It still surprises me (though I guess it shouldn't), how many people are OK with corporate America, blatant MSM propagandists, indoctrinating academic institutions, the clearly-partisan-but-supposedly-not debate commission, Bill Gates/Bezos billionaires, anti-american woke mob anarchists, etc- all being on the same side, and more than that- supporting that side. The goddamn Empire. Like, this doesn't bother anyone, that they are all together and you support them? We hate Trump so much we're ok with selling the country to George Orwell's nightmare? C'mon, Millennials. I know you're afraid of criticism and need to fit in, but surely there's a voice in the back of your head somewhere speaking some sense to you through the vapid social media fog of your conscious minds.

 

[Lark]

I'm ready for Trump to get out of the way so we can get a better representative of right wing values.

I always knew he was not the final boss.

Video games like this one there's always two or three phases to the ultimate boss fight.

Although I know when the boss fight is done that finally perks and cheat modes will become available and it'll be so much more fun to play.

 

[Lark]

That last paragraph sums up why we’ll probably never achieve any lasting bottom unity with ancaps. The core philosophies are fundamentally different. You can’t partner shepherds with wolves and expect the sheep to be in a better position

Interesting analogy.

The whole wolves and sheep or sheeple thing, when I started to read it years ago when 101 things to do until the revolution was selling big, never struck me as anything other than the latest self-congratulation of elites and faux rebels. Its like the whole "insider" or "in the know" of the newly duped conspiracy junkie.

A lot of the people flattering themselves that they're wicked bad gangsta capitalists without a shred of decency or conscience arent anything other than parasites, forget wolves they're all worms and leeches.

The whole ancap thing never ever impressed me, it wasnt ever about anything other than privatizing tyranny, never challenging it and letting money talk (or swear).

 

[Lark]

Thankfully RBG can't see this crazy shit.
Barrett tied to faith group ex-members say subjugates women

President Donald Trump’s nominee for the U.S. Supreme Court has close ties to a charismatic Christian religious group that holds men are divinely ordained as the “head” of the family and faith. Former members of the group, called People of Praise, say it teaches that wives must submit to the will of their husbands.

Submit to the will of their husbands. What century is she stuck in?

I live for the day that some sort of hardline feminist take over happens and this crap is consigned to pre-history.

 

[Lark]

Wilders is gay ? (for some reason I don't find that surprising)

I know that many will find the upper post "disturbing" but there is some truth in that. Plus if I am not mistaken leader of Austrian far right was also gay at the time. Leader in one dictatorship close to my country has far right government and the guy on top is probably also gay. After all his deputy is self declared lesbian. There probably aren't any too strict correlations but far right or right wing economics probably aren't nearly in contradiction with being gay as some would like to think.


On the other hand one of the definitions of the first world is that there is no real left in the political system. Therefore people in those countries tend to see liberal values as left wing values, what isn't really correct since most of the first world countries have no real left. Therefore judging the closest thing you have to the left as the left is kinda simplistic. In other words the biggest macho in my local politics is my left wing president that often starts rallies with "Hello comrades". Who btw. just the other day slammed the association that protects women. Calling them incompetent, useless, imprecise (and that they have a lousy group name). Then when that exploded he also slammed the main commissioner for gender equality. While day after that he slammed really hard two liberal anti-corruption MPs (both women), saying they are crybabies, second class "experts", frauds etc. I mean next to him the leader of our far right really looks kinda gay when you think about it (folk singer). Also we had elections recently and it turned out that one of key people that our main left wing party put forward was gay ... and then they quickly removed him from the leading position in the middle of campaign. Therefore overall center right and their centrist partners probably did more for local LGBT than the left (which are what the US would consider strong left, what is because out entire spectrum is moved to the left of the one of US). Also in one of the countries in this part of the world the left even banned gay marriage through constitution. Etc.
In other words LGBT stuff are completely incompatible with genuine extreme left positions, since they are very individualistic in nature and the extreme left wants to phase out those kinds of things in order to have more compact society (communism).


Just saying.

I do think there are tendencies on the left of the political spectrum that seek to homogenize people and things and detest individualism, difference, diversity, just as there are on the right wing of the spectrum too.

I dont like either of those camps. I also dont know why diversity and difference are things that movements support when they are weak, looking to be tolerated, but forget about when they are in a stronger position (or seem to support in word but no longer in deed). Its enough to make you cynical

There's nothing at all that necessarily makes LGBT "left wing" and it is probably rooted in very liberal/lifestyle theories about conformity vs. non-conformity being THE political divide. Maybe it is for some people. I think its should be about distribution/redistribution and resources.

 

[Virtual ghost]

I do think there are tendencies on the left of the political spectrum that seek to homogenize people and things and detest individualism, difference, diversity, just as there are on the right wing of the spectrum too.

I dont like either of those camps. I also dont know why diversity and difference are things that movements support when they are weak, looking to be tolerated, but forget about when they are in a stronger position (or seem to support in word but no longer in deed). Its enough to make you cynical

There's nothing at all that necessarily makes LGBT "left wing" and it is probably rooted in very liberal/lifestyle theories about conformity vs. non-conformity being THE political divide. Maybe it is for some people. I think its should be about distribution/redistribution and resources.

Yes, anti-individualism can be found in the far extremes on the both side of the political spectrum. This is exactly why I claim that there is no such thing as political spectrum. In other words political spectrum is actually political circle. Since it can be very easy to switch from one extreme into the other (and politicians in my part of the world are actively doing it). After all the difference between Hitler and Stalin really wasn't that large in political practice. As a matter of fact just as we speak in my parliament far left and far right are together pushing measures against "the globalist center". What is kinda the axis both liberals and libertarians are often afraid of, what isn't unfounded uncomfort. After all here more and more people are going extreme due to economy, pro eastern economic ties are growing, while election turnout is generally dropping as the years go by. Therefore here we are on the last step that is considered democracy and a number of our neighbors have already fallen into hybrid regime category under eastern influence. Which kinda has both extreme left and extreme right elements in it, since it is against liberal democracy at almost any cost. Therefore it is kinda strange when western people spit on liberal values, since almost all of them are some kind of liberal deep down. Even if they don't get it.

 

[Julius_Van_Der_Beak]

I'm ready for Trump to get out of the way so we can get a better representative of right wing values.

True conservatism/capitalism has never been tried, eh?

 

[anticlimatic]

True conservatism/capitalism has never been tried, eh?

Trump did it really well on a policy level, but his personality just has far too many holes for the power hungry corporation/media/education deep state system to take advantage of. So even though pretty much everyone's lives and standard of living have improved over the last four years (even in the middle east, which is insane- until Covid at least), a large chuck of the population has been vulnerable to the manufactured frenzy that trump=end of the world. That's why all the criticism is of him personally, and rarely with the things he's actually done- unless those things can somehow be bent to fit the fear mongering narrative (again, see Covid).

It's gross and frightening that such a powerful coalition exists, but people on the right are well used to uphill battles, and one thing we can do I think is to take some of the wind out of their sails by promoting someone that isn't constantly sticking their foot in their mouth hand delivering their political opponents years worth of superficial ammunition.

 

[Kingu Kurimuzon]

Interesting analogy.

The whole wolves and sheep or sheeple thing, when I started to read it years ago when 101 things to do until the revolution was selling big, never struck me as anything other than the latest self-congratulation of elites and faux rebels. Its like the whole "insider" or "in the know" of the newly duped conspiracy junkie.

A lot of the people flattering themselves that they're wicked bad gangsta capitalists without a shred of decency or conscience arent anything other than parasites, forget wolves they're all worms and leeches.

The whole ancap thing never ever impressed me, it wasnt ever about anything other than privatizing tyranny, never challenging it and letting money talk (or swear).

These ancaps who pride themselves on being wolves or sharks—to me they’re sheep dressed as wolves, but the dangerous thing about them is they believe they are wolves and will treat the other sheep accordingly

 

[Lark]

True conservatism/capitalism has never been tried, eh?

That sort of thing always reminds me how the first Christians anticipated Jesus return within their life times.

That was a while back.

 

[Julius_Van_Der_Beak]

Trump did it really well on a policy level, but his personality just has far too many holes for the power hungry corporation/media/education deep state system to take advantage of. So even though pretty much everyone's lives and standard of living have improved over the last four years (even in the middle east, which is insane- until Covid at least), a large chuck of the population has been vulnerable to the manufactured frenzy that trump=end of the world. That's why all the criticism is of him personally, and rarely with the things he's actually done- unless those things can somehow be bent to fit the fear mongering narrative (again, see Covid).

It's gross and frightening that such a powerful coalition exists, but people on the right are well used to uphill battles, and one thing we can do I think is to take some of the wind out of their sails by promoting someone that isn't constantly sticking their foot in their mouth hand delivering their political opponents years worth of superficial ammunition.

Why are you so afraid of those people? Aren't they just effeminate losers from big cities?

I'm not sure what's supposed to be so evil about Bill Gates for someone who is a supporter of capitalism. He's a successful capitalist. What's the problem? And as far as computing goes.... Windows computers aren't the ones trying to quash USB 3. Is it that he took the virus more seriously than the President?


Yes... he has more money than either you and I combined will ever see in a lifetime. So? Isn't you're line of thinking that he's entitled to all that because he earned it due to hard work?

Trump isn't a gross misrepresentation or aberration of the American right. He's the logical "next step". He represents them perfectly; he just says what they actually think but without the level of bullshittery and civility that politicians are traditionally expected to engage in. That's why a lot of people on the right love him, in fact. You can't claim he doesn't represent what you are actually are while at the same time praising him for saying what he actually thinks.

 

[anticlimatic]

Why are you so afraid of those people? Aren't they just effeminate losers from big cities? I'm not sure what's supposed to be so evil about Bill Gates for someone who is a supporter of capitalism. He's a successful capitalist. What's the problem? And as far as computing goes.... Windows computers aren't the ones trying to quash USB 3. Is it that he took the virus more seriously than the President? Yes... he has more money than either you and I combined will ever see in a lifetime. So? Isn't you're line of thinking that he's entitled to all that because he earned it due to hard work? Trump isn't a gross misrepresentation or aberration of the American right. He's the logical "next step". He represents them perfectly; he just says what they actually think but without the level of bullshittery and civility that politicians are traditionally expected to engage in. That's why a lot of people on the right love him, in fact. You can't claim he doesn't represent what you are actually are while at the same time praising him for saying what he actually thinks.

You're so cute when you're telling people you don't understand what they feel.

The problem with gates is the primary problem with capitalism, and one of the areas I believe in government intervention. He's a monopolist. A convicted one, at that. He doesn't just want money and power, he wants to prevent others from acquiring it. That's where I, and everyone else on the right, draws the line.

I don't know how anyone could forget how awful and untrustworthy that guy is, other than maybe they weren't around in the 90s.

 

[Julius_Van_Der_Beak]

You're so cute when you're telling people you don't understand what they feel.

The problem with gates is the primary problem with capitalism, and one of the areas I believe in government intervention. He's a monopolist. A convicted one, at that. He doesn't just want money and power, he wants to prevent others from acquiring it. That's where I, and everyone else on the right, draws the line.

So capitalism is the best, most perfect system we can ever have, but it has problems that need to be fixed? It seems like you have contradictory positions on capitalism.

By the way, the bolded is obviously false. I wouldn't say that's even true for the majority (most people on the right, if they way they talk, is accurate, seem to believe that any kind of government intervention is socialism. Hence, opposition to mask mandates. ) If it was, what are they doing voting for Trump? Biden's record isn't much better, but Trump is obviously one of those people, he just doesn't have the civility that's necessary to make him palatable to the establishment. I think he's loathed in part by the establishment because he tends to "give up the game."

Anticlimactic, you're sounding like a real socialist. Why do you hate our American traditions of liberty and freedom so? Why are you seeking to punish people for being successful and imposing feminine values on captains of industry?

 

[ceecee]

Actually since this thread is here...I am curious how some of you respond to "Black Voices for Trump"

Do you think there's a particular reason these people deviate from others? Many of them I notice discuss feeling more "freedom of thought", in a way I have seen a small select few LGBT+ youtubers discuss going from left to right for the "freedom of thought." Do you think it perhaps is damaging to these movements to try and force them all to fall under a specific theory, or for the general public to stereotype them into these places? Do you think they'll remain on the "right"? Do you think this is just a rebellion for them? If you see the steady train of conversation it seems there would be little benefit to them being for it. Why aren't they against it? How could the democratic party do better to make these people feel less like this?

I mean, I also see these people mentioning "freedom of thought", but I find it interesting to hear LGBT+ or general minority people discuss how they went from being SJWs to being more on the right. When I listen to them, I would actually consider most of them to be more moderate than true right, but I think it is a problem when even people in these communities feel alienated or are bullied for having a different POV about the situations...

I don't think there actually is "Blacks for Trump". If it was something rooted in reality (not the reality of the few You Tubers and actors being paid to say this), why would they need to create fake accounts and astroturf the fuck out of something that could be a legit movement for black Americans?

Viral pro-Trump tweets came from fake African American spam accounts, Twitter says

The fake accounts were purported to be run by Black people whose viral tweets received tens of thousands of shares in the past month. One of the accounts, @WentDemToRep, logged over 11,000 retweets on a single tweet that claimed that the user was a lifelong Democrat who was pushed to vote Republican by the Black Lives Matter movement. The tweet was posted shortly after the account was created Tuesday.

Because none of this is real. Blacks for Trump, Women for Trump, Latinos for Trump, Gays for Trump, none of this is anything but a $$$ venture for the people posing as a member of one of these groups.

And this one...

All they are trying to accomplish is to make people think #walkaway or Blacks for Trump or Blexit means there actually are people walking away or black people are actually voting for Trump. But they aren't.

I don't really understand the way people use SJW on this forum. If someone hates being told - what you're doing is hurtful or offensive to a group of people - why is getting explosively angry THE way to react to it? Instead of, yanno, listening to why something is hurtful or offensive, while the vein in their forehead goes down.

 

[Julius_Van_Der_Beak]

I don't really understand the way people use SJW on this forum. If someone hates being told - what you're doing is hurtful or offensive to a group of people - why is getting explosively angry THE way to react to it? Instead of, yanno, listening to why something is hurtful or offensive, while the vein in their forehead goes down.

Part of the issue is that, for a while, some people wouldn't actually explain why something is hurtful. They'd call something out, and then draw further outrage at any confusion about what they were calling out. I think in some cases, this is rooted in emotional exhaustion which makes it understandable. But other times it just seems like it was a way to get the upper hand socially.... often this behavior would be directed at people they see as "losers" rather than the people they want to be associated with, even if those people are saying things equally, and often more, problematic. Alnd often it wouldn't be enough to simply call you out... they'd seek ways to ostracize or get you removed from a particular community.

I think that's gotten a lot better, though. The high watermark for that kind of thing was really Obama's second term.

 

[Red Memories]

Part of the issue is that, for a while, some people wouldn't actually explain why something is hurtful. They'd call something out, and then draw further outrage at any confusion about what they were calling out. I think in some cases, this is rooted in emotional exhaustion which makes it understandable. But other times it just seems like it was a way to get the upper hand socially.... often this behavior would be directed at people they see as "losers" rather than the people they want to be associated with, even if those people are saying things equally, and often more, problematic. Alnd often it wouldn't be enough to simply call you out... they'd seek ways to ostracize or get you removed from a particular community.

I think that's gotten a lot better, though. The high watermark for that kind of thing was really Obama's second term.

Perhaps because my original experience with discussing politics were these people, and the fact some of them do still exist...they just scream I'm right without justifying, explaining anything.

Like [MENTION=4050]ceecee[/MENTION] explains everything to me, she has details, she's got all this stuff that make it a great learning experience, a positive discourse, and overall a good thing. similar with you.

then there's people on both parties at this point, are they RJWs? Right Justice Warriors? who just scream I IZ CORRECT AND IF YOUZ DISAGREE WIT ME YOUZ IS EVIL AND SHIT AND SHOULD KILL OYURSELF AND IMMA DOX YOU SO YOU LOZE YOUR JOB AND SHIT. How the fuck is that okay?

whenever the right scream about SJWs I laugh because its like those memes where Karen becomes a manager.

you became the very thing you sought to destroy. XD