you're a dumb fuck lol
No u.
Jules of Nature

ellievsbear
KIROKAZE
let's talk about Bridgerton tea, my ask is open
Noah Kahan

blake kathryn
we're not kids anymore.

#extradirty
Keni
The Bowery Presents
The Stonewall Inn
untitled
wallacepolsom
art blog(derogatory)
Lint Roller? I Barely Know Her
d e v o n
Sweet Seals For You, Always
he wasn't even looking at me and he found me
No title available

Love Begins
seen from United States

seen from Germany
seen from United Kingdom
seen from Canada
seen from Canada

seen from United States

seen from Türkiye
seen from United States

seen from Russia

seen from United States
seen from Germany

seen from Malaysia

seen from Germany
seen from Croatia
seen from France

seen from United Kingdom
seen from Italy
seen from Croatia
seen from Canada
seen from Brazil
@dr-stefan-frank-2
you're a dumb fuck lol
No u.
U talk on too many subjects that have nothing to do with you
Your point being?
Lol got shadowbanned again. Well that was fucking quick. 😂
You would think on a website that runs like it’s been coded by five drunken monkeys, they would have something better to do than keep an eye on a blog with like 50 followers.
But guess not.
Anyways. See ya around kids:
https://dr-stefan-frank-3.tumblr.com/
I’m screenshotting so many of your replies because I’ve never seen someone be so wrong but so hilarious at the same time 😂😂
Have fun.
When you’ve resorted to creating BODY ARMOR for fucking children to wear in case someone brings guns into the school to slaughter them, maybe you should finally start to reevaluate your fucking stance on gun control.
Of course! Just make it extra triple illegal to bring guns into school and shoot kids!
Or try and ban devices used by a hundred million innocent people in America over a few nutjobs per year.
Also, people exploiting fear doesn’t make those fears valid. A kid is more likely to shoot themselves than get involved in a school shooting.
It’s so horrible that people have invented locks instead of simply making robbery illegal. uwu
Why even bother with gun control? Let’s just make premeditated murder illegal. In fact, let’s make it so the law considers it to be one of the most, if not the most, horrible crimes? Then nobody could use ANY weapon to kill someone!
To be fair, black Wokesters do the exact same thing.
Except they’ll be even more openly racist if you disagree.
And yet you still keep falling for identity politics
Notice how neither of these say what they’re being “gassed” (good ol’ emotional rhetoric) for. We’re just supposed to assume they’re innocent.
tiktok feels like gentrified vine. ive only ever seen teens on there with like really nice bedrooms covered in led strip lights and tyler the creator posters
i was right
it gets worse than the title suggests, emphases mine:
Under this policy, TikTok moderators were explicitly told to suppress uploads from users with flaws both congenital and inevitable. “Abnormal body shape,” “ugly facial looks,” dwarfism, and “obvious beer belly,” “too many wrinkles,” “eye disorders,” and many other “low quality” traits are all enough to keep uploads out of the algorithmic fire hose. Videos in which “the shooting environment is shabby and dilapidated,” including but “not limited to … slums, rural fields” and “dilapidated housing” were also systematically hidden from new users, though “rural beautiful natural scenery could be exempted,” the document notes.
The document, presented in both English and Chinese, advised TikTok’s moderators that for videos shot in someone’s house with “no obvious slummy charactor [sic],” special care should be given to check for slummy features such as a “crack on the wall” or “old and disreputable decorations.” The mere appearance of residential disrepair or crooked teeth in the frame, the document shows, could mean the difference between worldwide distribution and relative invisibility.
(…)
Gartner, the TikTok spokesperson, told The Intercept that “the policies mentioned appear to be the same or similar to those published by” German publication Netzpolitik in December in a story about how TikTok was artificially suppressing access to videos created by disabled, overweight, and LGBT users and represented an effort “at preventing bullying, but are no longer in place, and were already out of use when The Intercept obtained them.”
(…)
A “Personal live broadcast about state organs such as police office, military etc,” would knock your stream offline for three days, while documenting military or police activity would get you kicked off for that day (would-be protestors, take note).
Gartner refused to clarify whether the substance and intent of these restrictions are still in effect under different phrasing, for example, whether there is any current rule whatsoever against “harming national honor” or documenting police movements.
(…)
TikTok’s community guidelines also omit any signs that the content policies obtained by The Intercept — used behind the scenes by the service’s invisible moderator teams — have threatened free political expression and provided for the censorship of large swaths of the world’s population based on genetics, economics, and arbitrary decency standards. The matter of who decides what ugliness means for hundreds of millions of people in cultures around the world, what “disreputable” decor might mean, or how many wrinkles are considered “too many wrinkles” remain glaringly open and unaddressed, even in the internal moderator documents.
Remember TikTok is owned by the Chinese government and THAT’S why everyone hates it. It’s not “lol kids be cringe.” It’s “this app is owned by totalitarian dictators.”
Which is why Trump’s banning it now. Watch kneejerk liberal contrarians suddenly say TikTok is good because of that.
Are you psychic?
I saw someone on WitchTok claim that they loved TikTok because “it makes Trump so angry that we have it”
It’s funny how people say supposed conservatives just want to “own the libs”, when so many people on the left act out of Orange Man Bad.
Follow @mengwe on Instagram
Let's answer the demands shall we?
Depending on the case they are recieving Justice, no, Justice doesn't mean you get to lynch those you deem to be in the wrong.
There is no institutionalized racism, you can't point to any law or system designed to benefit others based on race unless you mean the advantages given to minorities, I'm all for dismantling those privileges.
I agree, police brutality is an issue, I disagree it only affects your special interest group.
Nope, never gonna defund police, get fucked.
Economic equity? Fucking commie, get in the chopper.
I don't need to do anything you list, but some things I do do, I do speak out against racism, I teach others what racism is ect ect, unfortunately for you that is actual racism, not what you define it to be.
If Black Lives Matter why aren't you speaking out on Black on Black violence? Black Gang Culture? Black Crime Rates? The children getting killed everyday by other blacks in Chicago, Detroit ect? Why do Black lives only seem to matter when you can use them as a platform for your ideology?
Get fucked, practice what you preach.
On the other hand, I see some things that I actually agree with (like justice for Breonna Taylor, stopping white people from virtue signaling by crying on social media, things like that).
Yes, most people with ulterior motives sprinkle their plans with a few good things don't they?
I mean Ignore the fact that Trudeau took away freedom of the Press, he gave us Weed, right?!
White Millionaires pull firearms on protesters cutting through their private street
In no other country in the world would this shit be o.k
These were peaceful protestors marching down a street (NOT on the property of the family) and they had guns pointed at them….
You can’t point guns at people who are walking in the street. Be it a ‘private road’ or otherwise.
Cardboard signs are not a weapon. Peaceful protesters are not a threat to your life.
(source : https://www.cnn.com/2020/06/29/us/st-louis-couple-protest-firearms-trnd/index.html)
Ok I know I don’t post stuff like this but what a lot of people missed about this story since new reporter forget to tell us is that
the protesters smashed through the gates aka trespassing on private property
The husband asked the protesters to not Stand on his lawn
The protesters yelled at the couple to Fuck off and that they will kill them and their dog
The couple has legal papers for their guns
The protesters were going to the mayors house which is on the street but yet
That town mayor is on the protesters side like wtf
And they ARENT millionaires the husband owns a pretty small business plus most of “their” money goes back in the business or their home they been working on for 30 years
And I know it has nothing to do with this story but I like to point out that in Texas at one of the children hospitals a bunch of peaceful protesters were throwing rocks at the building the Children’s Hospital also probably traumatized most likely traumatized a young little girl who just left the hospital with her father and also trash the fathers car luckily someone made a go fund me page for the poor guy ….
Sorry I had to post my say
PS also people who have been posting random links to the different news sites The exact same copy and paste story line most of the comments are that people are pretty much saying what I just said about the side that really happen versus what they like to portray it
What, like Keanu? Or Us?
You do know he’s been in and made more movies than just “Get Out”, right? And even that was a metaphor for cultural appropriation?
And that a superficial resemblance isn’t enough to make a judgement on anything?
Then again, you seem like a very superficial person.
EDIT: Since OP keeps blocking everyone and responding to themselves in the notes;
> survivor28 said: This post keeps getting so many comments of people defending pointing guns at peaceful protesters. They were not defending their property. That’s why they got charged for it. Because they did something illegal. If you post anything to the contrarty it’s a block a delete for you.
Except the charges are not the same as guilt, genius. The governor said he’d pardon them if the case went forward. And defending your property with inappropriate force would still be defending your property.
Also, you’re defending a movement whose central premise is “the System can be biased” and you suddenly trust the System when it does things you like?
If we're so here to redeem Iroh on his past wrongdoings, then why is a clearly traumatized Native elder considered just pure evil.
I feel that people are missing the point when they bring up how Hama was not redeemable because of the things she did.
To me, it’s more about how her character was written in general. It’s about how white men specifically wrote a native woman who experienced trauma and torture at the hands of her oppressors and then ended her story with her being captured again. We need to consider how that looks when native women have a history of being abused -- and that what the Fire Nation did to the Water Tribe reflects too strongly with real life.
They gave her trauma and they made her hellbent on revenge to the point where she would not be redeemable. And it feels wrong that they would also push the line to make sure she can only be seen as a villain because, at her core, she wants retribution for the things that were done to her and her people.
It’s not wrong for her to want retribution. It’s not wrong that she used whatever means she could to get out of the Fire Nation’s hands. The Fire Nation had already taken everything from her -- she doesn’t owe them patience or compassion.
And yes, the way she handled things was wrong but you also have to consider that this is just how they written her to be? They framed the entire fact of her developing blood bending as a horrible act that made her unhinged and crazy. The focus isn’t on her pain or what she and her people suffered, it was on how she went crazy and lashed out at people.
Maybe it’s just me but I was sad at the fact that we missed out on Katara being able to connect with someone from her tribe and for them to relate to each other’s pain. It would have been nice to have Hama, jaded and paranoid from being forced to live as a recluse in the Fire Nation, to begin to open up more when first meeting with Katara and the gang and realize she could heal from her pain and become more -- she could pass on her skills and become a mentor. Grow her family and tribe.
When it comes to stories that revolve around the marginalized, I think it means so much more to have them on the path of healing and growth, especially if it is in spite of the pain they have been dealt with at the hands of their oppressors.
The fact that her blood bending as demonized has always bothered me, because it was the one tool she used against her oppressors. It was more demonized than fire benders, and the show collectively forgot just why it was made.
I had such bad feelings about it.
One of the things that irked me about Hama was that one of the major plot points of ATLA is that no kind of bending is inherently bad, and that it’s the intentions of the people who use it that matter.
Except for bloodbending. Bloodbending is always bad. ( b ._.)b
Yea uh I don’t think Hama deserved redemption. What happened to her is horrible and she has every right to be angry and embittered by it BUT her trauma doesn’t excuse the fact that she was kidnapping villagers that did nothing to her with her blood bending and keeping them in a cave to starve. Blood bending is demonized because its sole purpose is to hurt others, it doesn’t have any healing properties like water or fire
Tumblr users are full of people with a chronic inability to recognize how abusive they are because they feel any possible trauma gives them justification to be abusers, are y'all really surprised? Once again I tell you Netflix bringing it to the American side of things was a mistake.
This dumbass takashi still has a tumblr???
hama deserved a happy ending for creating/discovering a new form of bending that allowed her to survive. Should she have kidnapped innocent people- no, but who says all of them people were innocent. She lived to be a little old lady and escaped a literal genocide by bloodbending.
Did you just literally just excuse kidnapping???
"But who says all of them people were innocent?"
This line of thinking can be used to defend a mass shooter. Sure they killed a lot of people, but who is to say that all the victims were innocent? Maybe one or two were bad. So that apparently makes it okay.
Honestly, Hama deserved to rot in prison, and since she escaped before by using bloodbending, the death sentence in my opinion would be the only option for her.
He killed people, among them delivery boys, who probably were no older than 15; and to the very end she was unapologetic and mocking the victims.
She didn't kill fire nation soldiers, she was too a coward to do so.
She killed innocent people by letting them starve to death in a cave, she considered everyone in the fire nation an enemy of hers, even children.
The difference is that Iroh actually realized he was wrong and tried to change and make aments, in case anyone was wondering.
Also, she wasn’t a “Native” person, any more than any other ethnic group.
So far, getting put on Netflix has been the worst thing that happened to that show.
Actually I think they’ll be ok 🙃
Not everywhere is handling this as shittily as the US, ya dingus
#this is important because we have to remember #we have to remember it *did not have to be as bad as it was*
and that it WAS as bad as it was, specifically, because of trump and his supporters.
there is no WAS in america, we are still in the IS BAD NOW stage of all this. second wave my ass, we are still in the first wave of this mismanaged bullshit side show of death.
I hate these dumbass braindead comparisons so fucking much.
I’m sure that absolutely none of this is due to New Zealand being a tiny-ass country that’s surrounded by water. Absolutely none of their susceptability or lack therof can be attributed to this, and it’s all the result of their oh-so-pwogwessive government that’s in coalition with a party called New Zealand First that nobody ever brings up.
Not to mention most of you fuckwits have no idea that Trump left the goddamn STATES to run it. It isn’t HIS FUCKING FAULT, as much as I fucking hate the man, it’s the Governors and Mayors who are at fault, for either A: Allowing massive riots to happen, therefore increasing risk of transmission Not enforcing mask laws And generally being dumb. It isn’t like this in all states, but New York is one of the fucking worst, because New York is run by a bunch of retards.
It isn’t his fucking fault, he just ignored all of the experts at every turn, dismantled the first responded program, overruled the CDC, actively denied the virus for months, and then offered false solutions. Oh and he also publicly spoke out against mask for months, including at his own sad little rally. And now the states which supported him are getting hit the worse, while NY is doing the best in regards to reopening in the nation.
I mean Jsus @legendarythotbuster Its pretty obvious that you aren’t the sharpest tool in the shed but you know why literally every single expert on the subject of disease has condemned Trump’s response. Maybe try getting your information not from the stupidest people on Tumblr?
Oh jesus the parasite’s jumped onto me now, thanks @siryouarebeingmocked Also let me just say that you just have completely made up half the shit you are spewing dude. I know you wanna act smart and smug, but come on, it’s embarassing and you’re coming off as attention seeking. Or you want meaningless internet points. Let’s just see New York’s response and current handling of the situation shall we?
Oh what’s this? New York is the Fourth worst state in terms of Covid right now? Color me fucking shocked, this was just a quick Google search. Not to mention good ol’ California at the tippy top. You know, California, the Trump supporting state /s You also forget that Trump does not fucking control what goes on state level, you fucking troglodyte. He left it specifically to the states and cities to deal with it, so most of his response is the Governors. You just want to blame him, when in reality Governors and Mayors are doing a piss poor job. Allowing fucking riots to happen which in turn spreads COVID isn’t helping the situation either. The fact you continue to mention other people to fling insults and nothing else of value is pathetic and petty. I absolutely refuse to believe someone as stupid and narcissistic as you exists in this world genuinely, and that you aren’t some ironic troll account.
> I mean Jsus @legendarythotbuster Its pretty obvious that you aren’t the sharpest tool in the shed but you know why literally every single expert on the subject of disease has condemned Trump’s response.
Oh look. The person who likes to brag about the “texts” they’ve read uses a textbook Appeal to Authority.
And one which deliberately ignores the most critical actual point, stated in plain English, from the text right in front of him; Trump wasn’t responsible for state responses.
I’m betting that ‘false solutions’ bit is a reference to the ‘Trump said we should drink bleach!’ strawman. Or the people who insisted hydrowhatever was complete garbage, just because Trump said it might work.
Gotta admit, haven’t seen a thread that jumps shark so hard just to make sure “I’m right by semantics.“ and everyone is doing it.
Where?
Lol, my country was all “we so great we beat it let’s go back to normalcy” in June.
Guess what.
Mask law now back in action. Did take hardly more than a month.
you realize youre an adult, over 30, calling an 18 year old a “dishonest asshole”, right? could you calm down a bit? you’re not going to prove anything by insulting someone who’s barely an adult.
I’m sorry, what about their age excuses being liar?
‘You can’t hold me up to any standards, I’m too young to be expected to behave like a normal person!’ why is this so common among kids? If you’re too young to be treated like an adult, then you’re also too young for anyone to take seriously. It’s the unfortunate trade-off, either you’re taken seriously, with the consequences of it, or you’re irrelevant, and the consequences from that.
Schrodinger’s teenager.
Not even underage now, you’re not allowed to be minimally insulting to someone “barely an adult.” This time next year, 25 will be too young and frail to hear the mean people tell them they’re wrong.
If you’re too young for online discussion, you’re too young to vote.
My understanding is that TikTok is an absolute security nightmare to have on your phone, and that every single major app is also an absolute security nightmare to have on your phone. If there is an argument to ban it, it’s in the ways that TikTok is worse than usual. But if the argument is “but it’s Chinese tech companies with access to your data, not US tech companies,” I think I would literally rather it be China; they can do less to me as a US citizen than US tech companies can
The difference is when China steals ur info and eventually your identity, no one can prosecute them. If tik tok is "worse than usual" then.... don't download it? Tik tok pings your location every 30 seconds. At least facebook actually asks your permission by providing a feature to use with it.
Tik tok falsely boosts your views to give you confidence at first. Tik tok has been known to hide videos from people deemed ugly or disabled or sick or living in less-than-desirable living conditions. Tik tok can access not only your current apps but your past apps.
Can you honestly say with a straight face, that the government that persecutes its own citizens, has slave labour, and silenced everyone who tried to speak up about coronavirus, and pays off WHO to imply it was other countries' fault, who spies on their own citizens in other countries, that you wouldn't care if your data ended up in their hands? Ask yourself, WHY does tiktok need a ludicrous amount of power over your phone?
Oh, and the lovely side effect of having all that access, is the opening up of a cool backdoor to thieves and hackers. Which is why you should never have your bank passwords or sensitive info saved on your phone anyway.
All we need now is for trump to suddenly backflip or someone who isn't trump to denounce this app.
Lots of people who aren’t trump have denounced the app, it’s been censoring content from LGBT users, poor users, disabled users, anybody who isn’t conventionally attractive, and anybody who criticizes the wrong people right from the start and there was huge public outcry about that before the massive, massive security and privacy problems came to light. But everybody forgot about those and flipped around to insisting that it’s good actually because the orange man doesn’t like it.
forgetting #3 “I never suffered so the people claiming they’re suffering are exaggerating”
This from the tankie who supports BLM. Which has spent two months ignoring or downplaying the human cost of its riots.
#4 is “I have never suffered, but other people with my skin colour did, so now all people that don’t have my skin colour should suffer.”
the left isn’t just waging culture war they are waging it with the expectation that the other side isn’t allowed to fight back and if that doesn’t say something about who is actually dominant in society I don’t know what will
i mean
having both houses plus the presidency might say something.
wearing a hat with the slogan of the sitting president is a gesture of hatred unconscionable in polite society
like there are multiple forms of power and they are very far apart
Someone near where I live was wearing a hat, mask, and shirt all bearing slogans of the sitting president yesterday, and I don’t imagine he encountered or stands to encounter any serious negative consequences from doing so. Like, yes, Covington Catholic, but also all the other times where that doesn’t happen.
saying “well, yeah, Covington, but what about all the other times” is kind of like saying “but what about all the people I didn’t kill, huh?”
“what about the number of places where the logo of the sitting President isn’t considered unconscionable, huh?”
But “what about the number of places where the logo of the sitting President isn’t considered unconscionable, huh?” is a good argument. Because you’re saying that the left is the dominant cultural force in society to such an extent that any expression of support for the right is considered taboo and instantly shamed, but here someone is presenting an admittedly anecdotal but presumably true instance of that explicitly not being the case. I think you’re looking at your particular environment and your particular social circle, which is probably legitimately very left-leaning, and extrapolating that to all of “polite society”, but that just isn’t the case - and the fact that the sitting president and a large proportion of the federal government is conservative should be ample proof of this, because it indicates that a significant proportion of the population supports them.
“a significant proportion of the population supports them, enough to elect them, yet it is considered unconscionable to wear their election slogans in mixed company” 8s exactly the thing I am pointing to, dude
the fact that the guy who had so much support that he won the election has been declared “so far outside the mainstream it cannot be tolerated” by so many people in so many places us really fucked up! it’s not normal! it’s not fucking normal at all! you can’t say “well what about the spaces that haven’t been politicized, or were politicized by the enemy?” because there are a lot less of those than there should be considering that what we’re talking about is support for the guy who had so much support that he won!
you can’t say “well we haven’t marched upon and conquered everything in the world yet!” as proof that you’re not marching upon and conquering things, nor can you say “well there’s spaces that are politicized for the right that we don’t control, so we must not be politicizing things”
does the left as a whole tolerate people’s ability to express support for the guy who had so much support that he won? no. do they employ all the power they have available to destroy people who do? yes. do they have a lot of power to do this? yes. “well but they aren’t omnipotent yet” is not a defense.
“think about all the innocent kids whose only crime was to sit there and try not to lose their cool while people screamed in their faces because they wore hats proclaiming support for the guy who had so much support that he won who we DIDN’T form a nationwide feeding frenzy over where we explicitly called them the faces of bigotry and rhapsodized about how morally pure it would be to harm or kill them!” no! no you don’t get credit for those just like you don’t get credit for the people you didn’t murder!
Your original claim was that the left “is actually dominant in society”. Not “trying to be”, but “is”. I interpret this to mean that they are currently, at this time, the mainstream political, societal, and cultural force that dominates the nation, to such an extent that there are vanishingly few spaces in which they do not have a stranglehold on, to the point that such spaces can be handwaved away as outliers. So yes, I do think that “we haven’t marched upon and conquered everything in the world yet!” is proof of the opposite, and I do think that “well but they aren’t omnipotent yet” is a valid defense. It’s worded in the most hyperbolic and aggressively bad faith tone possible, but I mean, it directly refutes what you are trying to claim, so I don’t know how you can say those things as if they’re ridiculous statements. If there exists a non-insignificant number of spaces in which the conservative viewpoint is the norm rather than the progressive one, and if there are a significant number of people in power who lean conservative, then the left is not, in fact, the dominating force in society - at least, not to the degree that you seem to claim that they are. And we know that this is the case because the government is, at the moment, skewed conservative. Actually, we don’t even have to rely on that; basic knowledge about the political system of the United States tells us this. “Republicans exist in the US and there are a lot of them” feels like a very obvious statement to me, and like, they’re not all spread out in such a way that they all find themselves in the minority position. There are states, cities, towns, friend groups, social circles, internet communities, etc. in which conservatism rather than progressivism is the norm, and in which left-leaning opinions are shamed and shunned rather than right-leaning ones. I realize that it sounds like I’m just making a bunch of trivially true statements, but in order for your original claim to be true, you would have to deny these statements. Now, you can make the argument that the left is trying to become the dominating force in society, which is what you seem to also be doing, but that is a separate argument, and you can’t act as if those are the same arguments.
You have different definition of “dominant” than everyone else. And I suspect it’s different from the definition you use in any other context. LeBron James can be a dominant force in basketball without killing every other team.
The left has the most power by far of any involved party and the most ability to employ that power of any involved party. The fact that you have to say “there are spaces where right wing ideas are the norm” instead of “most of the time wearing the slogan of the guy who had so much support that he won isn’t super noteworthy and a cause for controversy” is because the left has used its dominant power to politicize every space in its perception, and the only spaces able to resist it are the ones already explicitly polarized against them.
This is just the same conversation again, isn’t it? “There are spaces we haven’t yet conquered, so you shouldn’t notice us in the process of conquest. We don’t get everything we want, so we must not be exerting any power. We’re not omnipresent and totalizing and corroding the world, it’s just literally every space you have access to, why would you complain about that?”
“I control the media, academia, and even entertainment, but do not hold office so I am clearly powerless.”
“One side has the power to nuke countries and has most of the military and police forces (which are extrajudicially kidnapping members of the Other side right now) on its side plus the most powerful person in the entire world but the other side can get Netflix shows cancelled so its clear that they are more powerful”
Oh and on top of that, that is one more power than the US government has and culture is upriver of politics.
Thus having the power to change and shape culture is more powerful than any political office in a constitutional democracy or republic.
Reminder that people regularly equate MAGA hats to Nazi insignia.
> “One side has the power to nuke countries and has most of the military and police forces (which are extrajudicially kidnapping members of the Other side right now) on its side
You mean the federal police that had to be sent in because the local cops weren’t doing their jobs by order of the city’s government? The federal cops were arresting people in perfectly legal fashion, with clear insignia on?
Do you think they’re the first cops to use unmarked cars to arrest people?
I also like how controlling media and academia is just “get Netflix shows cancelled.” Meanwhile, in reality, Wokesters have and continue to literally kill people.
There has to be some pithy name for this. Where someone criticizes your side and you pretend it’s basically powerless.
the left isn’t just waging culture war they are waging it with the expectation that the other side isn’t allowed to fight back and if that doesn’t say something about who is actually dominant in society I don’t know what will
i mean
having both houses plus the presidency might say something.
wearing a hat with the slogan of the sitting president is a gesture of hatred unconscionable in polite society
like there are multiple forms of power and they are very far apart
Someone near where I live was wearing a hat, mask, and shirt all bearing slogans of the sitting president yesterday, and I don’t imagine he encountered or stands to encounter any serious negative consequences from doing so. Like, yes, Covington Catholic, but also all the other times where that doesn’t happen.
saying “well, yeah, Covington, but what about all the other times” is kind of like saying “but what about all the people I didn’t kill, huh?”
“what about the number of places where the logo of the sitting President isn’t considered unconscionable, huh?”
But “what about the number of places where the logo of the sitting President isn’t considered unconscionable, huh?” is a good argument. Because you’re saying that the left is the dominant cultural force in society to such an extent that any expression of support for the right is considered taboo and instantly shamed, but here someone is presenting an admittedly anecdotal but presumably true instance of that explicitly not being the case. I think you’re looking at your particular environment and your particular social circle, which is probably legitimately very left-leaning, and extrapolating that to all of “polite society”, but that just isn’t the case - and the fact that the sitting president and a large proportion of the federal government is conservative should be ample proof of this, because it indicates that a significant proportion of the population supports them.
“a significant proportion of the population supports them, enough to elect them, yet it is considered unconscionable to wear their election slogans in mixed company” 8s exactly the thing I am pointing to, dude
the fact that the guy who had so much support that he won the election has been declared “so far outside the mainstream it cannot be tolerated” by so many people in so many places us really fucked up! it’s not normal! it’s not fucking normal at all! you can’t say “well what about the spaces that haven’t been politicized, or were politicized by the enemy?” because there are a lot less of those than there should be considering that what we’re talking about is support for the guy who had so much support that he won!
you can’t say “well we haven’t marched upon and conquered everything in the world yet!” as proof that you’re not marching upon and conquering things, nor can you say “well there’s spaces that are politicized for the right that we don’t control, so we must not be politicizing things”
does the left as a whole tolerate people’s ability to express support for the guy who had so much support that he won? no. do they employ all the power they have available to destroy people who do? yes. do they have a lot of power to do this? yes. “well but they aren’t omnipotent yet” is not a defense.
“think about all the innocent kids whose only crime was to sit there and try not to lose their cool while people screamed in their faces because they wore hats proclaiming support for the guy who had so much support that he won who we DIDN’T form a nationwide feeding frenzy over where we explicitly called them the faces of bigotry and rhapsodized about how morally pure it would be to harm or kill them!” no! no you don’t get credit for those just like you don’t get credit for the people you didn’t murder!
Your original claim was that the left “is actually dominant in society”. Not “trying to be”, but “is”. I interpret this to mean that they are currently, at this time, the mainstream political, societal, and cultural force that dominates the nation, to such an extent that there are vanishingly few spaces in which they do not have a stranglehold on, to the point that such spaces can be handwaved away as outliers. So yes, I do think that “we haven’t marched upon and conquered everything in the world yet!” is proof of the opposite, and I do think that “well but they aren’t omnipotent yet” is a valid defense. It’s worded in the most hyperbolic and aggressively bad faith tone possible, but I mean, it directly refutes what you are trying to claim, so I don’t know how you can say those things as if they’re ridiculous statements. If there exists a non-insignificant number of spaces in which the conservative viewpoint is the norm rather than the progressive one, and if there are a significant number of people in power who lean conservative, then the left is not, in fact, the dominating force in society - at least, not to the degree that you seem to claim that they are. And we know that this is the case because the government is, at the moment, skewed conservative. Actually, we don’t even have to rely on that; basic knowledge about the political system of the United States tells us this. “Republicans exist in the US and there are a lot of them” feels like a very obvious statement to me, and like, they’re not all spread out in such a way that they all find themselves in the minority position. There are states, cities, towns, friend groups, social circles, internet communities, etc. in which conservatism rather than progressivism is the norm, and in which left-leaning opinions are shamed and shunned rather than right-leaning ones. I realize that it sounds like I’m just making a bunch of trivially true statements, but in order for your original claim to be true, you would have to deny these statements. Now, you can make the argument that the left is trying to become the dominating force in society, which is what you seem to also be doing, but that is a separate argument, and you can’t act as if those are the same arguments.
You have different definition of “dominant” than everyone else. And I suspect it’s different from the definition you use in any other context. LeBron James can be a dominant force in basketball without killing every other team.
The left has the most power by far of any involved party and the most ability to employ that power of any involved party. The fact that you have to say “there are spaces where right wing ideas are the norm” instead of “most of the time wearing the slogan of the guy who had so much support that he won isn’t super noteworthy and a cause for controversy” is because the left has used its dominant power to politicize every space in its perception, and the only spaces able to resist it are the ones already explicitly polarized against them.
This is just the same conversation again, isn’t it? “There are spaces we haven’t yet conquered, so you shouldn’t notice us in the process of conquest. We don’t get everything we want, so we must not be exerting any power. We’re not omnipresent and totalizing and corroding the world, it’s just literally every space you have access to, why would you complain about that?”
“I control the media, academia, and even entertainment, but do not hold office so I am clearly powerless.”