this post was submitted on 08 Sep 2024
103 points (100.0% liked)

the_dunk_tank

15923 readers
6 users here now

It's the dunk tank.

This is where you come to post big-brained hot takes by chuds, libs, or even fellow leftists, and tear them to itty-bitty pieces with precision dunkstrikes.

Rule 1: All posts must include links to the subject matter, and no identifying information should be redacted.

Rule 2: If your source is a reactionary website, please use archive.is instead of linking directly.

Rule 3: No sectarianism.

Rule 4: TERF/SWERFs Not Welcome

Rule 5: No ableism of any kind (that includes stuff like libt*rd)

Rule 6: Do not post fellow hexbears.

Rule 7: Do not individually target other instances' admins or moderators.

Rule 8: The subject of a post cannot be low hanging fruit, that is comments/posts made by a private person that have low amount of upvotes/likes/views. Comments/Posts made on other instances that are accessible from hexbear are an exception to this. Posts that do not meet this requirement can be posted to !shitreactionariessay@lemmygrad.ml

Rule 9: if you post ironic rage bait im going to make a personal visit to your house to make sure you never make this mistake again

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
 

A news article about the Sep 4 school shooting in Georgia says the shooter was frustrated about the acceptance of trans people. LibsOfTikTok reinterpreted this to mean the exact opposite of what it says, and blamed trans people for the shooting, so all the twitter chuds were baying for blood all day yesterday.

They've done this for every major shooting in the US for the past few years

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] heggs_bayer@hexbear.net 29 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Never believe that chuds are completely unaware of the absurdity of their replies. They know that their remarks are frivolous, open to challenge. But they are amusing themselves, for it is their adversary who is obliged to use words responsibly, since he believes in words. The chuds have the right to play. They even like to play with discourse for, by giving ridiculous reasons, they discredit the seriousness of their interlocutors. They delight in acting in bad faith, since they seek not to persuade by sound argument but to intimidate and disconcert. If you press them too closely, they will abruptly fall silent, loftily indicating by some phrase that the time for argument is past.

[–] Ram_The_Manparts@hexbear.net 12 points 3 months ago (2 children)

Not a fan of this quote really. It seems to be built on the premise that humans are somehow incapable of sincerely believing in nonsense because, I don't know, we're just inherently rational or something?

It does fit obvious grifters like Jacob Wohl (or whatever his name is) and Alex Jones, but it's definitely not universally applicable. Just look at someone like Jordan Peterson, the guy clearly buys all of his own bullshit and so do most of his fans.

[–] KobaCumTribute@hexbear.net 20 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Not a fan of this quote really. It seems to be built on the premise that humans are somehow incapable of sincerely believing in nonsense because, I don't know, we're just inherently rational or something?

I think it's just observing a sort of nihilistic troll behavior that's probably a thing that some people have always done, where the contents of what's being said doesn't matter so long as they're at once inflammatory and self-serving. It shouldn't be taken to conclude that everyone who is awful is just maliciously pretending, but that there's a certain sort of bombastic troll who just makes up shit on the spot and says it with a shit eating grin and complete conviction, knowing that it's bullshit but enjoying the harm it causes and the way it furthers their own goals.

It's like a less formalized, more intuitive version of neoreactionary meme magic bullshit, just saying things you just made up over and over until people believe them.

[–] Ram_The_Manparts@hexbear.net 10 points 3 months ago (1 children)

I don't disagree with that, it's just how a lot of people seem to think it applies to literally every single reactionary that I have a problem with.

[–] ElChapoDeChapo@hexbear.net 9 points 3 months ago

Yeah, I've noticed that too

Good to make the distinction

[–] heggs_bayer@hexbear.net 8 points 3 months ago

It does paint with too broad of a brush - kind of like the essay Masses, Elites, and Rebels - but in the case of Chaya Raichik it's %100 true.