Can't have a nuanced perspective on Political Memes@Lemmy.World
Can't have a nuanced perspective on Political Memes@Lemmy.World
It's also funny that rather than removing all of my comments, they just decided to remove those I referenced and one particular reply, meaning whoever they were they cared more about the narrative and making the conversation unintelligible so that in the framing that was left people could just fill in the gaps just based on the downvotes and the accusations.
Like I said to some people and now extend to the mod,
I love how people like you are the flip side equal of Trump people warping reality to shit on it. Same bullshit, both sides aren't equal but people like you certainly resemble them closer.
ITT, people who couldn't comprehend cult psychology (and given the inherent Stanford prison experiment abuse within it, any psychology) or even the inevitable conclusion of what they are claiming and accuse me for being ignorant of what I'm literally alluding to in the first comment.
Even supposing that there was some legitimacy to the removals, it's telling how selective it was and where it wasn't. And literally labeling nuance "trolling" in a circlejerk meme reddit ... probably makes sense. But still, imagine being so fragile the huge number of downvotes could not do it for you.
Some of you really want to divide society as much as MAGA does. My message didn't neatly fit into the circlejerk meme, so I guess I must be "trolling, or worse" - amazing.
I can also confirm, can't delete or edit the comments to provide context, but people can still vote on comments that have been removed. Huh, didn't think I'd find something like this reddit was so clearly better at. So now I guess I know why they decided to selectively remove comments and framed the thread into what has been left.
I'm sorry but your temp ban from that community imo is justified. The line between shitposting and trolling is quite fine. However sympathy for Neo-Nazism and blaming people who are pointing it out for why they support it is well beyond a reasonable shitpost. The Texit-style remark really is the part that is troll-like if you aren't serious, and if you are serious you absolutely are falling for Trump and his team's divisive rhetoric. I'll attempt to explain.
Not everyone who supports Trump is a Nick Fuentes character, of course. But denying the association is just deluding yourself. In order to establish a tolerant society we mustn't tolerate intolerance. Pushing racist, misogynist, xenophobic views is not something that can be "heard out", if you will. The thing is the right-wing media network attaches real problems and struggles that people have, to hating and blaming your neighbour for it. With Nazism that was blaming Jews for various economic and societal problems that Germans had. We must separate the problem from the hate to even discuss a solution, and identifying that to a person is one of the first steps. We cannot start at a position that entertains the hateful argument or association as legitimate, we start from what the problem actually is and that involves calling out and recognizing the hateful parts for what they are. That is why the Democrats are appealing to both progressive-lites, liberals and past Trump voters on the issues, while MAGA is all in on the conspiracy theories, fabricated stories, fear, division and hate-based politics.
Hopefully this helps with understanding a little.
There was absolutely no "sympathy for Neo-Nazism". I never denied the association, I just made a point of that stands on its own, akin to that "Not everyone who supports Trump is a Nick Fuentes character, of course" and even when flawed if labeled as something worse just pushes them away to be influenced by people like Trump. "Not everyone who supports Trump is a Nick Fuentes character, of course", a point which you have just made. Should you be banned for it? Because I sort of feel I was. I never "started at a position that entertains the hateful argument or association as legitimate". You are shifting the argument to an extreme caricature.
Explain to me how the following leads to all that you are claiming:
This was the post:
https://lemm.ee/post/42673367/14912144
I replied:
If someone has a flaw and you accuse them of being much worse than it is, it does push them away and make them think that maybe other people who are also getting accused unjustly, making them more willing to listen and get influenced by those people. The probability they get lulled into a bubble becomes much higher. It's why a lot of families that trusted each other have been broken up by politics.
This comic had been reposted before but it is also incredibly reductive. But if you seriously believe those other guys are that bad, just break out into a civil/world war already, there's basically no other way to solve that problem... Maybe the US really should dissolve into multiple nations.
To critics who just strawmanned the argument or alluded to extreme misrepresentation, I replied:
I love how people like you are the flip side equal of Trump people warping reality to shit on it. Same bullshit, both sides aren’t equal but people like you certainly resemble them closer.
I expanded upon my comment by replying:
The MAGA movement definitely plays on and has racist undertones. But everything I’ve said still stands, and you are still only seeing extremes. Maybe the nerve that was hit was you pissing on centuries of psychology about cults and how people like you are as willing as them to burn bridges.
To claims that my original comment was reductive while believing they were that flawed, I replied:
It is reductive, mostly because I’m not capable of considering someone redeemable and irredeemable at the same time. Take your pick. It is a two way street, and you see them as that flawed and they certainly aren’t going to cross outside of their bubble, no chance to ever meet on that street.
I don’t live in lala land, but then again, I’m not the one seeing all of them that flawed. To me, that’s like saying that every member of a cult that went to do something infamous was despicable, it shows zero psychological awareness.
And when they did eventually recognize it was like a cult, I replied:
Then either they are that flawed and are really literal Nazis getting their Nazi tattoos, or they get increasingly sucked into participating within a cult, take your pick.
You know one way that helps them carve off people from the wider populace? Being accused of having a flaw greater than it really is, carving them away from those they should be sticking to from their side and letting them be pulled into the cult’s bubble. And for many, that flaw is simply being senile, not racist, and even then still generally needing a fair dose of cult programming to eventually instill those racist sentiments.
When people thought I just should read up on Nazis and that I didn't realize the parallels,
The problem is on your side, not seeing that that was also what happened to those pulled into the Nazi cult of personality.
If someone has a flaw and you accuse them of being much worse than it is, it does push them away and make them think that maybe other people who are also getting accused unjustly, making them more willing to listen and get influenced by those people. The probability they get lulled into a bubble becomes much higher. It's why a lot of families that trusted each other have been broken up by politics.
This comic had been reposted before but it is also incredibly reductive. But if you seriously believe those other guys are that bad, just break out into a civil/world war already, there’s basically no other way to solve that problem… Maybe the US really should dissolve into multiple nations.
The fact that you are as oblivious as a Trumper to it when I literally mention world war in my second sentence is astounding, but not surprising.
I was flippant, but I stand behind my argument. And it stands, now reproduced in several threads whereas before it would have stood downvoted and I would not have cared. I will continue to make it, because society is as it is right now because too many people just want to burn bridges. The outcome of that seems inevitable to me, specially when people will just resort to extremes.
And like I've said, even supposing the ban was justified, the selective removal of comments is very questionable and hints at something else.
I'll try one more time. The appropriate context to start is from the post. The post is a comic about a MAGA supporter supposedly being forced to act more racist and Nazi-like simply because they are accused of being racist. In the comic the MAGA person is bringing in the topic of Nazism unprompted as the central part of the joke. With that context in mind, do you see that your comment(s) effectively justify or lend legitimacy to what the joke MAGA character is doing?
The parts where you and I are saying the same thing, the primary difference is in the delivery. I'm not an admin or moderator, but if you think moderation is selectively being used against you, you have had another ban a while back with this as a suggestion:
be constructive: there is no need of another internet space full of competition, negativity, rage.
Please try to work on it if you can, and with your help we can bring better quality discussion to this site. Have an excellent day.
Comic strip: Makes fun of American neo-nazis.
Nuanced opinion: Some of my friends look kind of like that guy. Are you calling me a nazi? Okay then, let's go, time for a civil war.
I've said it before and I will say it again.
I love how people like you are the flip side equal of Trump people warping reality to shit on it. Same bullshit, both sides aren’t equal but people like you certainly resemble them closer.
The comic was not focused on making fun of American neo-Nazis, rather, it portrays a profoundly twisted caricature of MAGA voters that makes them all out to be neo-Nazis. You'd be closer to the truth if you left the neo- part, but I doubt you'd truly realize why.
As to the allusion to the US Civil War or World War II, where division was as irrecoverably rampant, you'd have to be a moron not to see that that is the inevitable conclusion when all you want to see is the worst of the other side. Trump may be a problem, but supposing Harris wins, you will still have Trumpers left over. It got this bad when things were much better, and while they don't mind burning bridges, clearly the flip side of the coin that you are does not mind burning bridges either. Biggest difference between you and me, I can easily follow this to its inevitable conclusion, but if Harris is being such a great candidate it's because she's not burning bridges like you guys are.
I doubt you know nuance. Knowing nuance involves not running off into wild caricatures, gross exaggerations, and outright lies like you have. While I was accused of trolling, your comment is a prime example of it.