I've had far too many conversations with Trump supporters proving this point, where they think he can do no wrong
Personally, I've seen more people say this is the case than actually encounter these types of people.
Might just be that you are approaching them the wrong way and setting them into the defensive tribalism mode, because I've never met a Trump person I couldn't reason into admitting fault quite easily. Sans a few old ass folks who are full into schizo "jesuit bukkake" levels.
Personally, I've seen more people say this is the case than actually encounter these types of people.
Have you ventured into the right wing normie sphere, ever? Check out Patriots.win, or Facebook, or the normie sphere of Gab. These people are unashamed sycophants. A lot of it is driven by shills, but not all of it, and many right wing normies swallow that propaganda eagerly.
Might just be that you are approaching them the wrong way and setting them into the defensive tribalism mode, because I've never met a Trump person I couldn't reason into admitting fault quite easily. Sans a few old ass folks who are full into schizo "jesuit bukkake" levels.
I very rarely interact with them at all any more. I just read comments from other people and see how they talk and what they believe.
Have you ventured into the right wing normie sphere, ever?
No, I generally go outside and talk to people to their face. Because its a night and day difference in what people will say online for upvotes (or likes or whatever) in their safety chamber and their actual beliefs in conversation when you engage with them.
I'd wager Mr. "if by rock you mean JESUS" doesn't go around doing that in real life, and is just virtue signalling here because it'll make people clap like seals, for an example. And if he does, nobody likes him for being cringe and annoying for shoehorning it in even if they agree with him.
People say things online because the anonymity provides them cover to say what they truly feel. That's why anonymity is precious when society becomes tyrannical and despotic toward rationality and truth. But, it also allows people to express their true feelings, regardless of context or circumstance.
Why was u/Joe_Shmo 's comment cringe? How is it virtue signaling? Why is to make people clap like seals? Do we not seek agreement and community with people who are like us, and espouse the truth to those that need to hear it? Does upvoting people you agree with count as "clapping like seals"? Why does nobody like him? What topic was he shoehorning into the conversation? I looked through his profile. He's not a single issue user, and his criticism of Trump and Palantir is legitimate.
You're the one that seems incredibly biased against that particular user, and it bleeds through in what you wrote. I'm not sure why anyone would disagree with his comment either, except if they were a Trump sycophant. If you're a Christian and view Trump with even a shred of critical thought, you should agree with him. Trump isn't perfect, and he's made tons of mistakes, and is in the midst of numerous mistakes. And I remember being in a debate with you previously about the release of the Epstein files (or lack thereof), and how it shines an incredibly negative light on Trump, and you actively defended him. You're not exactly unbiased here.
That's why anonymity is precious when society becomes tyrannical and despotic toward rationality and truth
It is important and I wouldn't take it away from anyone. But, much like alcohol before it, saying "your truth without inhibitions" isn't always your actual truth. Its marred by factors, and is not always what you truly feel when you actually sit and think about it.
In simplest cases, the echo chamber. With it, you will say things you don't entirely believe out of fear of being against the grain, even if completely anonymous without any actual consequence. That's human nature. Same with the reversal where you say things to fit in better and get those precious dopamine hits from upvotes. Not to mention being surrounded by people gives immense social pressure in this regard regardless on if dissenting opinions are welcome, compared to simple 1v1 conversations.
That's without even getting into the murky waters that real life people actually are representing themselves, while online you can just say shit to say it for the fun of it or just to get it out of your system. Unless you think every person who ever said nigger on CoD was making a hard stance on racism.
Why was u/Joe_Shmo 's comment cringe? How is it virtue signaling?
Because it jammed a completely unrelated topic into a different one with the worst non-sequitur I've seen in a while, seemingly just to say "I BELIEVE IN JESUS."
Why does nobody like him?
Said nothing of the sort, said if he acted like that in public then nobody would. Because its an insufferable trait to have to simply throw Jesus into a conversation that isn't related to him. We've all met that person and if you haven't you should go to more churches.
You're the one that seems incredibly biased against that particular user
I know nothing about him, his name or his history. This is the first time I even register reading his name. And by the weekend if I see him elsewhere I won't remember he said this to color my thoughts about him. Good try though.
except if they were a Trump sycophant
I see why you see sycophants everywhere. You've lowered the bar so deep that its "doesn't agree with me" and "doesn't immediately doomer about him." I can disagree with his comment because I'm capable of the nuance necessary to support someone without worshiping them like a messiah.
Trump isn't perfect, and he's made tons of mistakes, and is in the midst of numerous mistakes
He isn't even close to perfect. He is a Jew loving retard to a fault, somehow finds the most retarded people possible to appoint more than half the time, and isn't a quarter the draconian tyrant he needs to be to actually accomplish any of the goals people want.
Should I put that disclaimer before every comment about him lest I receive your swift judgement of sycophancy?
Personally, I've seen more people say this is the case than actually encounter these types of people.
Might just be that you are approaching them the wrong way and setting them into the defensive tribalism mode, because I've never met a Trump person I couldn't reason into admitting fault quite easily. Sans a few old ass folks who are full into schizo "jesuit bukkake" levels.
Have you ventured into the right wing normie sphere, ever? Check out Patriots.win, or Facebook, or the normie sphere of Gab. These people are unashamed sycophants. A lot of it is driven by shills, but not all of it, and many right wing normies swallow that propaganda eagerly.
I very rarely interact with them at all any more. I just read comments from other people and see how they talk and what they believe.
No, I generally go outside and talk to people to their face. Because its a night and day difference in what people will say online for upvotes (or likes or whatever) in their safety chamber and their actual beliefs in conversation when you engage with them.
I'd wager Mr. "if by rock you mean JESUS" doesn't go around doing that in real life, and is just virtue signalling here because it'll make people clap like seals, for an example. And if he does, nobody likes him for being cringe and annoying for shoehorning it in even if they agree with him.
People say things online because the anonymity provides them cover to say what they truly feel. That's why anonymity is precious when society becomes tyrannical and despotic toward rationality and truth. But, it also allows people to express their true feelings, regardless of context or circumstance.
Why was u/Joe_Shmo 's comment cringe? How is it virtue signaling? Why is to make people clap like seals? Do we not seek agreement and community with people who are like us, and espouse the truth to those that need to hear it? Does upvoting people you agree with count as "clapping like seals"? Why does nobody like him? What topic was he shoehorning into the conversation? I looked through his profile. He's not a single issue user, and his criticism of Trump and Palantir is legitimate.
You're the one that seems incredibly biased against that particular user, and it bleeds through in what you wrote. I'm not sure why anyone would disagree with his comment either, except if they were a Trump sycophant. If you're a Christian and view Trump with even a shred of critical thought, you should agree with him. Trump isn't perfect, and he's made tons of mistakes, and is in the midst of numerous mistakes. And I remember being in a debate with you previously about the release of the Epstein files (or lack thereof), and how it shines an incredibly negative light on Trump, and you actively defended him. You're not exactly unbiased here.
It is important and I wouldn't take it away from anyone. But, much like alcohol before it, saying "your truth without inhibitions" isn't always your actual truth. Its marred by factors, and is not always what you truly feel when you actually sit and think about it.
In simplest cases, the echo chamber. With it, you will say things you don't entirely believe out of fear of being against the grain, even if completely anonymous without any actual consequence. That's human nature. Same with the reversal where you say things to fit in better and get those precious dopamine hits from upvotes. Not to mention being surrounded by people gives immense social pressure in this regard regardless on if dissenting opinions are welcome, compared to simple 1v1 conversations.
That's without even getting into the murky waters that real life people actually are representing themselves, while online you can just say shit to say it for the fun of it or just to get it out of your system. Unless you think every person who ever said nigger on CoD was making a hard stance on racism.
Because it jammed a completely unrelated topic into a different one with the worst non-sequitur I've seen in a while, seemingly just to say "I BELIEVE IN JESUS."
Said nothing of the sort, said if he acted like that in public then nobody would. Because its an insufferable trait to have to simply throw Jesus into a conversation that isn't related to him. We've all met that person and if you haven't you should go to more churches.
I know nothing about him, his name or his history. This is the first time I even register reading his name. And by the weekend if I see him elsewhere I won't remember he said this to color my thoughts about him. Good try though.
I see why you see sycophants everywhere. You've lowered the bar so deep that its "doesn't agree with me" and "doesn't immediately doomer about him." I can disagree with his comment because I'm capable of the nuance necessary to support someone without worshiping them like a messiah.
He isn't even close to perfect. He is a Jew loving retard to a fault, somehow finds the most retarded people possible to appoint more than half the time, and isn't a quarter the draconian tyrant he needs to be to actually accomplish any of the goals people want.
Should I put that disclaimer before every comment about him lest I receive your swift judgement of sycophancy?