This has not gone unnoticed by the *chans themselves. The branding of Pepe and "Okay Sign" as being "racist" are the result of deliberate campaigns by the *chans to get them declared hate symbols in order to mess with mainstream media.

It's because that tactic has been effective for so fucking long. They are the reason Trump became president: he was the first "politician" to just shrug off the attacks of "sexism" rather than nuke his own campaign by grovelling at their feet asking for forgiveness.

That sounds like something a Nazi would say!

(As you hinted at, this has become the go-to response to anyone questioning calling everyone "Nazis")

It's because Elon Musk is "Green" but not far left. He believes in a market economy and individual liberty which makes him essentially Green Hitler.

Just a heads up, the term you're looking for is "Objectivist."

Ultimately the problem is emotional reporting that confirms our biases is what sells.

We're simple creatures and most of us just want to be told that we're right about everything and all of the problems are someone else's fault. The narrative of an "evil villain" is one of the oldest there is for a reason.

> a war started by false flag incidents?

This is literal fan fiction about the movie because the director was so terrible at satirizing the book and made it look like a utopia. It was not a false flag - Carmen's character dodged the rock on its way to Earth.

The movie is a terrible "takedown" of the book. "Look at this multicultural, gender and racially equal utopia where everyone is rich that would result if we just embrace fascism!"

In the movie, the society itself is amazingly progressive apart from people acting like creepy boomers telling kids to stomp on bugs.

Human rights are human rights, regardless of who violates them. I'm amazed I have to even say this.

LOL are you now acting like the right of freedom of association should trump other rights? Have you heard of the Civil Rights Act? "Freedom of association" has long been used as a challenge to anti-discrimination laws. Strange that a "progressive" is all of a sudden championing it.

The problem is there's a large contingent of people who think disagreement is hostility. They think resistance to change is somehow akin to "advocating people like me get murdered". When someone descends into that level of hyperbolism, it's kind of hard to take them at their word about the severity of the problems they face.

It's definitely regional. My wife had a completely different k-12 experience growing up rural than I did in suburbs.

From what I've gathered from discussions with friends, urban is another thing entirely.

Screwed up my formatting.

> With one slight difference - white people already benefit from institutionalized power. While I don't disagree with your points about "white pride", how does your statement jive with successful minority groups who also have institutional power? For example, Jews and Asians in the USA are quite successful. Jews have 300% representation in congress vs population size. Does that mean they shouldn't be allowed to have advocacy groups or practice identity politics?

Being a little hyperbolic, no? This discussion is in the context of codes of conduct banning discussions of things like sex or gender differences.

Most people would agree advocating a new holocaust would fall under the "don't be a dick" rule. We don't need layers and layers of rules, advisory committees, and "trust and safety" commissions for that.

Or are you one of those that thinks a vote for Donald Trump is a vote for mega-Hitler?

*WHOOSH*