We are in a war. The main fight in this war is currently for the hearts and minds of the normies. They need to be led to understand what is happening and persuaded to stop it.
Let's be serious here. Nothing discussed here will make a big difference in the culture war. Nobody here is winning the minds of normies. This is an echo chamber like every other online community. If you want to make a difference, you need to engage with people IRL.
The enemy doesn't care what we do, they'll target anyone who doesn't actively support their cause. The AI modification of a movie is interesting and funny, but won't make any difference either way. The enemy will accuse their opposition of being racists no matter what they do.
Women on Instagram, TikTok and OnlyFans depend on male viewers for their income, so it makes sense that they'd go where the money is.
On the other hand, our institutions consider masculinity toxic (because men are naturally less gullible, more independent and more skeptical of authority) so they do everything in their power to marginalize men. One way they do this is by promoting beauty standards that do not appeal to men.
Yet another example of how the Left is in denial of reality.
the democrats have completely failed their most devoted followers. It's sad really.
I think it's almost certainly intentional at this point. The Democratic Party needs victims to exploit for political purposes, and black Americans have been a key constituency group of the Democratic Party since the 1960's. The prior effects of the New Deal on the black family were terrible. They likely learned from this and used the lessons of the New Deal to make black Americans dependent "slaves" of the party. Just look at how they try to destroy any black American who votes Republican or sides with conservatives? They do their best to destroy any slaves that leave the reservation, lest the others get any ideas.
The fashion industry is run by women and homosexuals and their target audience is women and homosexuals. As such, their marketing is designed to appeal to female insecurity and woke trends, and since most modern woke women are average looking at best and in many cases downright ugly, this marketing works by appealing to their vanity and making them feel better about themselves.
Nobody in the fashion industry actually cares about what men find attractive. If they did, the covers would look very different and they wouldn't use fashion models that are either malnourished stick figures or obese slobs.
As a Christian, it breaks my heart to see so many Christian denominations engaging in wokeness and degeneracy. On the up-side, it's really is separating the wheat from the chaff and forcing Christians to pick a side... their faith or this rapidly degenerating culture.
What you’re seeing is their fundamental belief that subversion is a virtue.
At their core they resent reality. Reality is harsh and unforgiving and unfair, and they resent having to live by reality’s rules. This is why they love subverting everything so much… it’s a stick in the eye of reality.
They’re just doing what they always do: accuse their enemy of doing the things they’re actually doing.
“How horrible! Trump is engaging in quid-pro-quo with a foreign government!”
Meanwhile Biden is engaging in quid-pro-quo with a foreign government.
“Oh, no! Christians want a theocracy! The horror!”
Meanwhile the Left is setting up a woke theocracy.
You're still not answering any of my questions.
Oh well, I give up. It's clear you have a one-track mind. This exchange has been a good example of how this type of thinking is irrational, so you're more or less making my point anyways.
You still aren't answering any of my questions.
You seem to think the value of a person is directly related to their net-income over a lifetime... an absolutely terrible metric that would put movie stars and politicians near the top of the value pyramid despite contributing the most to cultural and political corruption and decay.
As with all groups, the vast majority of crimes are committed by a relatively small percentage of the population. That doesn't seem to enter into your consideration at all. You concede there have been contributions by black people to our society but you disregard them because of the actions of a minority of violent blacks today.
Prior to the 1930's, blacks were on average as successful as whites and even exceeded (as well as dropped below) them in some areas. This was even with segregation and legalized racism being commonplace in certain parts of the country. In the 1930's Democrats conspired to exploit blacks just as they do with all minority groups and since then blacks have been on a steady decline. The Democrat Party at the time was entirely white, by the way, and continues to be majority white even up to today.
Name one country that "became better" by having more Irish? Italians? Germans? Russians? How are you even defining "better"? You still won't answer that question, or any of my other questions.
They've been raised to believe everything is racism so it's impossible for them to tell what real racism is anymore.
They've been told that using racial slurs themselves is fine but if white people do it, it's racist. It's ridiculous and contradictory, but that's what happens when words don't mean anything anymore and you just go by what everyone else tells you to believe.
Being offended is something that is in your power to control. I'm not saying it's easy, and it's never a good feeling to have hate and vitriol spewed at you, but at the end of the day it's within your power to decide whether to let it offend you or not.
This used to be taught by parents, "sticks and stones" and all that. It's a shame this seems not to be the case any more.
Across the board the overall bot numbers are probably over 20% easily, and while 20% might not seem massive, those 20% are probably used in a focused manner for maximum impact.
For example, for politically charged topics like abortion, it wouldn't surprise me if the bot influence is over 90% simply because that's where the largest portion of the 20% are focused. Topics that are important to the Left and to their establishment allies probably get special attention, e.g. the Rings of Power release, Ukraine-related news stories or the latest "exploitable" mass shooting.
20% can have a massively oversized impact if used effectively.
The Left always represents their own positions as the "norm", and are shocked when people say they are biased.
In their mind, whatever they belief is the default for humanity and anyone who diverges is a bigot. Never mind that their beliefs are continually evolving and changing from year-to-year or even month-to-month as the political situation dictates.
Those spreading this ideology are primarily white. Women, the LGBTQAIP+ movement, crony capitalist corporations and politicians in their ivory towers have done FAR more harm than the relatively small number of black politicians and race grifters. The vast majority of damage done by blacks is done to themselves, murdering other blacks, burning down their own towns, and electing black politicians who only exploit them and make things worse.
When you dive into the numbers, basically only straight, white, middle-class Christian males are consistently on the right side of political issues.
Women, blacks, LGBT, Latinos, Jews, Asians, atheists, the ultra-poor, the ultra-rich... no matter how you slice it, almost every group leans Left at least slightly.
So do you support removing anyone who doesn't benefit society, or just black people? What about Jews? Latinos? Do you support removing individuals or just racial groups? How do you measure benefit to society? Do you only consider scientific contribution, or do you include food, music, art and culture? Is anyone who doesn't contribute worthy of hatred and expulsion? What about the weak, disabled and disadvantaged?
Let me repeat, racial hatred is stupid and irrational. I could almost certainly make the same argument that some group that you're a member of isn't "worth the hassle". You have no idea where that path leads and how it would inevitably bite you in the back.
The use of violence is a popular topic but I've yet to hear anyone describe the framework under which violence would be employed.
It seems like most people think we should be picking up our guns and walking down to the school board meeting and demanding changes at gun point. This would end in absolute disaster for everyone involved, and whose to say the new changes, even if implemented successfully, could even be considered legitimate?
The sad truth is, when the country is filled with corrupt and degenerate people, we get a corrupt and degenerate government. A tiny number of armed individuals storming into local government offices and demanding changes is the epitome of illegitimate government.
No, in order for violence to be employed justly with the goal of creating something better than what we have now, there needs to be a very clear framework and justification that is morally and logically sound. I've yet to hear anyone bring forward such a framework.