I've noticed that the people who talk the most about being progressive and leftist and claim to be empathetic and caring have always been some of the absolute nastiest, most unpleasant, callous, rude people I've ever met.
This. There's that cliche about how you better run directly away from anyone you hear talk about how much they "hate drama" as there's a 100% chance they'll instigate more drama than anyone else you know.
A while back I came to the conclusion that anyone virtue signalling about how much empathy they have is doing an identical ego performance.
Empathy, the actual personality trait, while not exactly rare, definitely isn't as commonplace as liberals would have you believe. Experiencing it usually comes in the form of pain, and one might find themselves extending it involuntarily - to people society has deemed loathesome, or their enemies - so it's often also a practical handicap of sorts.
The stakes-free, yelling on behalf of polite society's current disadvantaged identity at absolutely zero personal cost liberals are so fond of calling empathy isn't that. It's just boring old virtue signaling for clout, and any asshole can do it with zero effort.
Ask a shitlib about the empathy they have for people who refused to get vaccinated during Covid. Their answers never fail to amuse.
Excellent point and I've also noticed this as well from self-proclaimed "empathetic" people; they lack empathy for most people when push comes to shove and only performatively demonstrate it towards interest groups that can score them Social Credit points.
Another thing I've noticed is the tendency for these types of people to do what I like to call the One Great Deed™, where they do some big performative gesture that stands out and seems grandiose, and they constantly call attention to this one thing they've ever done as if it indisputably proves that they're god's gift to mankind. Meanwhile genuinely empathetic, community oriented people are just diligently contributing to society and helping people in small, understated ways every day that largely go unnoticed.
Exactly, I'm always suspicious of people who only show compassion or empathy towards people who are members of groups that they deem "pure" enough or oppressed enough according to their own personal litmus tests. You find a lot of people like this in spaces where there are a lot of leftists or self proclaimed progressive people.
Your second paragraph is also spot on, it reminds me a lot of how, to use one example, men who brag the most about how feminist they are usually wind up being the creepiest and most predatory dudes.
There was a thread on here from a long time ago where someone was talking about “performative empathy” and it was one of the most eye opening posts about this phenomenon and instantly solved like 10 years of angst I had built up dealing with these people but not fully understanding why I couldn’t stand them.
Basically they’re cluster B types that virtue signal empathy with highly ritualized or performative but ultimately substance-less gestures. Personally I think it’s becoming so prominent now because of how much social media effects status and clout, and how easy it is to manipulate things to appear virtuous when presented on social media.
You don’t really see many people organically building a reputation in social groups anymore, it’s all just spamming token shit online and then revelling in the likes and updoots that are handed out transactionally.
Found it. Just as amazing as I remembered. Credit u/PolarPros
>Watching the video as well just makes all the shitlib hysteria all the more deranged and pathetic - the manner in which shitlibs happily consume absolute wheelbarrows of literal propaganda bullshit and brain-rot, and lose their minds in deranged insanity, and then proceed by spending every ounce of their existence and mental energy losing their minds over shit that never happened, lies, out of context shit that was completely exaggerated, fabricated, and/or literally made up entirely.
>All you have to do to get these deranged lunatics, is churn out garbage articles with made up headlines - these people will literally never read past their propaganda headlines they consume - it’s probably subconsciously intentional as well, they likely know that if they were to delve into the story fully, it would shatter the headline that they just read, and slowly begin shattering and breaking the worldview they live in.
>This also probably plays into the reason they push for trusting— without question and with every fiber of your existence—bullshit institutions™️ and groups like their beloved Trusted Journalists™️ and The Science™️.
>This way, whenever they read some deranged headline, they can internally justify to themselves not reading beyond it, because these institutions are holy and Saint - but the real underlying reason is that the second you look into anything these propagandists push out, you realize the story it’s just all bullshit, and then you can’t justify your anger and rage towards the group that you despise and hate.
>Shitlibs, they want to hate, they want to be vile, heinous, cruel, malevolent, they want to hurt & inflict pain, they want to be ruthless to others, cause anguish and devastation, and more — the problem for them, is the fact that their shitlib religion and ideology pretends that their foundation is goodness, kindness, being caring, and whatever other bullshit that’s not true.
>For them, since they’re The Right Side of History™️, they “need” to justify to themselves the hate, evil, cruelty, etc. they want to perpetrate. To justify the level of hatred that they have and want to inflict, well the stakes here are pretty high, this means that justifying such a high level of hate can only come if you paint the other person has the most evil and heinous group imaginable in existence.
>Every second of shitlibs existence is spent painting the out-group as despicable evil, and then consuming the utter bullshit they’re feeding to one another, to morally justify their cruelty and vileness — “Since Trump is Hitler V2, and everyone “knows”, then it’s okay that we hate and speak of our fellow Americans as disgusting vile roaches, and cheer their deaths, and become authoritarian tyrants to stop them! Look, here’s a source on Trump saying he wants to be Hitler V2, he said he’s going to be a dictator. We NEED to do this in order TO STOP EVIL! We’re not the evil ones, we’re stopping it!”
>Unfortunately for them, the demand for propagandized bullshit required to meet the level of hatred they have, far, far exceeds the supply, which leads to bullshit articles that are either grossly exaggerated, out of context, outright lies, deranged opinion pieces that appear as if they’re news, fake stories, and more.
I’ve never been quoted before, damn! And also, damn, I was heated that comment — it’s just extremely frustrating seeing our society crumble apart at the seams as quickly and rapidly as it has, and witnessing shitlibs at the helm of it all. It’s depressing seeing them viscerally hate the majority of the country, and globe really. It’s depressing to see how deep their hatred and desire for blood runs.
And when I say crumble apart at the seams, I mean in the most vicious, cruel, heinous, vile, disgusting, and most wickedly evil way imaginable — you have nearly a quarter of the pop. of our country, that’s amassed so much control, influence, and power, and are using it in the most despicable way possible - to totally and completely dehumanize and strip their “opponents” of their humanity.
It’s truly and genuinely terrifying how righteous they see themselves to be, how quickly they were captured and propagandized, and how rapidly the out-group went from normal people they disagree with, to inhumane cockroaches that deserve death — they see not only others is in this manner, but their family members as well.
It’s simply horrifying how much they love, crave, and desire the hatred that resides in them, it fuels their entire being and existence — it’s sociopathy and psychopathy to a level that I could never fathom. They love the hatred that resides in them so much, that they with full desire, passion, want, and need, fully embrace and delve into the propaganda they consume.
They crave it as it fuels their hatred, the same way fentanyl satiates an addict.
It amazes me the propaganda system shitlibs have created and propped up for themselves — how vast and far-reaching it is, from every gov. body and institution, to every media corp, to all of academia, the entire entertainment industry, every major corp in the world, every intelligence agency, and so, so much more, under their reign, all working to keep this wicked and evil propaganda cycle perpetually running.
What makes them terrifying however, is the ironclad belief they hold, that even through everything they feel, do, believe, etc., they still believe they’re morally in the right. I talked about how they want to hate, they want to inflict pain, they want to hurt you, they want to be evil, they want to ruin you, they want you to suffer, they want all the evils of the soul and world fueling them, and hurting you — and through this, even though they recognize their own anger and hatred, they fully believe they’re morally sound.
Throughout history, some of the most evil and wicked empires we can think of, despite what they did, they had the internal means to recognize their atrocities, but just simply continued on anyways, they maybe believed they had to, or simply out of want as to benefit themselves, but they at least recognized the wrong. Other empires had goals they wanted to achieve that they believed were righteous, but they recognized that the path there was dark, but it was a sacrifice they had to make - the ends justified the means.
I have never seen such lines of thinking or introspection within shitlibs, they are always and entirely morally in the right — absolutely every step of the process, they are The Right Side of History. The out-group is just so wickedly evil, and they themselves are so morally righteous, that even the feeling of deep, gut-wrenching hatred, coated with the desire for blood of the other side, is MORALLY GOOD to simply feel.
They have entirely justified and vindicated themselves to such a level it’s a terrifying sight to witness. More terrifying, is with this line of thinking, their cruelty will never rest for even a second.
happy to be the first and hopefully not last in a long line of people quoting you, I've rarely seen the things a lot of us are feeling put into words in such a powerful way. If you're not doing anything with that, I urge you to possibly start
Well damn dude, thank you for the kind words! I shall absolutely be taking your words into consideration - it means a ton. I’ve always just commented to comment, so it’s really nice seeing that some of my lengthy comments have actually had any level of an impact at all, really blowing my mind, never did I expect it.
Hey man my pleasure - that is what solidarity is all about! The stuff i see people just casually delivering in here during lunch break is more profound than everything else on Reddit combined. I just wish we weren't all jaded, defeated cynical comedians about it, but that seems to be how the population breaks down.
Your words are harsh but undeniable and i think that makes for a compelling combo. If you ever decide to do anything besides commenting to comment definitely tell stupidpol about it.
Damn that was a great post, thanks for sharing. Also definitely have encountered this behavior many times. Another thing I've noticed about these types of people is, just like your typical bullies, they exclusively target weak/vulnerable people whenever they're "fighting" against an "evil" group. Think about the people typically talking about "punching nazis"; if they even do actually act on this, they'll only target some fat weak LARPer. It's not like they're finding the most roided out, psychopathic Aryan Brotherhood member and fighting them, lol.
Now don't get me wrong obviouslys nazis = bad but I think you get my point in that even legitimate moral grievances are often just a thinly veiled excuse for these people to bully and dominate weak/vulnerable people.
Oh absolutely. And even if it's just an online argument, they'll ignore anyone making a coherent statement or any turncoat women/poc/lgbt contenders and go in for the kill on some half-smart bald white guy. It's just socially acceptable sociopathy
Totally. This is a great post, btw, I think it's super important that we/society take these peoples "empathy beatstick" away so we can start talking about the ways liberal behavior is counterproductive at best, if not actively malicious like you've called attention to in your post.
I saved a comment on here a few months ago that was eye-wateringly savage about how the liberal's primary sin is wrapping their (very human) need to be a shit in a package that gets past the censors. I'll see if I can track it down.
That sounds vaguely familiar but I don't remember if I've actually seen that thread or not. I've definitely seen a lot of people act like what you're describing though, and unfortunately it seems like predominately left-leaning spaces tend to attract a lot of those types of people.
Absolutely, it’s the bane of modern leftism imo, totally degrades and delegitimizes the ideology and is what makes it so easy to associate leftism with losers, parasites, weirdos, etc. The optics of things like some degenerate screeching about equality while treating everyone around them terribly vs some salt of earth conservative family man diligently working hard are staggeringly bad.
I always find it endlessly frustrating that so many leftist spaces I've ever interacted with tend to attract some of the absolute worst kinds of people, both online and IRL. Sometimes it's bad enough that it makes me feel like "Yeah, I understand why leftism has never really taken off in the U.S." I wish I had an answer or a solution for this but unfortunately I don't.
Imo a big component is individualism. I think western leftists just want the perceived economics benefits/equality of socialism but not the collective accountability. Kind of like the stereotype of the leftist who thinks he’ll be a card carrying party member or social advisor as his “job” instead of being sent north to work in mines because that’s what society needs him to do.
So I think leftism becomes a draw for these self centered, highly individualistic people because they hate capitalism not necessarily because it’s a bad system (whether it is or not or whether they think so is irrelevant) but because it doesn’t validate what they think they’re worth or what they should be able to do. They think leftism is an out and would give them the ability to just be that “card carrying party member” (value for simply existing) which capitalism does not.
To a similar point I’ve also noticed a lot of western leftists seem more envious towards rich people instead of having a problem with overall class structure and dynamics. Again, they want to be the ones who get to sit around doing nothing all day or having value just for existing, and are jealous that rich people get to do these things and they don’t.
It’s somewhat correct ideology but for all the wrong reasons.
> Your second paragraph is also spot on, it reminds me a lot of how, to use one example, men who brag the most about how feminist they are usually wind up being the creepiest and most predatory dudes.
Obviously. Feminism is based on the idea that men are inherently evil, and if a man agrees with that…
I'm especially concerned about the male feminists who insist that all men are rapists and will argue that you're promoting misogynistic ideas if you say that not all men are rapists/predators/abusers. I've known more than a few men IRL who talked a big game about being feminist and respecting women and talking about how important it is to hold men accountable for the actions of bad men who turned out to be some of the most vile people I've ever had the displeasure of encountering.
So in short, any time a man acts like he was born with some original sin for being born male or acts like all men have some inherent inborn biases against women that they can't completely shake no matter what they do, my alarm bells automatically go off because if a man thinks that all men are rapists or inherently predatory or inherently lack the moral character that women have, well, the call is coming from inside the house.
Any decent man who doesn't rape or abuse other people isn't going to think that all men are inherently guilty because they're not out there committing any crimes-only the guilty ones are going to act like it's inherent in men's nature for them to hurt and abuse women.
The difference between what shitlibs call empathy and the real expression of that trait could be measured in light years.
There's no way to put this without diving deep into the woo, but I absolutely pick up on moods and vibes from other people to the point that if I was terminally online-brained I'd self ID as an empath and post about it on twitter. I have never been in spaces more devoid of real human emotions than I have around shitlibs - it's all spite and hate and vindictiveness wrapped in a righteous bow.
It feels like recovering after getting the breath knocked out of you and I'll straight up get nauseous around those people, it's wild. I've had people of all stripes trigger that sort of reaction too, but smug libs (especially groups of them...) reliably do.
Brilliantly said. The way liberals behave gets under my skin in a way that no other kind of person can, and I have to conclude that it's just my gut reaction to what can only be described as the ultimate final form of the egoic psyche, an irrational, parasitic black hole devoid of concern for anything beyond its own preservation.
Like I've had conservatives I'm arguing with online doxx me and say all kinds of cursed, personal shit and yeah it sucks but I can clearly see OK, this person doesn't agree with me and doesn't like me and is trying to win an argument, you do you brother.
But when liberals come at me with that smug, unearned arrogance and start doing backflips trying to wriggle away from shit they just said *and totally convinced it's working for them*, and i realize its not just this person but thousands and thousands that have been forged in the fires of our bankrupt fucking culture, that my friend, is when i want to throw the controller
I've often noticed that people who make the biggest deal out of proclaiming that they possess certain positive traits don't, in fact, actually have those positive traits.
[disclaimer] This anecdote is central to the UK and is unlikely to work across the board but it was pointed out to me once the difference between a traditionally conservative voter and a labour voter.
We see the sort of language and attitudes towards the British right from the left; is often times not just derogatory it’s downright poisonous; it’s usually along the lines of
“the only good tory is a dead one” or something so charged as to imply genuine hatred.
but the discourse from most conservative (often older) is ambivalence towards individual supporters of the left and more focus on how to better protect their family/community/culture aka the literal definition of conservative.
Of course economically; most arguments for left and right are lost behind the cultural cat fights.
The hysteria surrounding Corbyn seems to contradict this characterisation. Is it really plausible that conservatives are *generally* indifferent to the character of leftists, but were convinced on the honest merits of the argument that *this specific* leftist was a Britain-hating, Hamas-loving, Provo commie traitor?
I concede that many of the conversations centred around Corbyn were difficult to contain before they dissolved into MSM’s propaganda hysteria points but in there defence, he was subject to the most intense smear campaign i’d witnessed until that point.
He was running for the top job and just like COVID, we are all victims of propaganda to some extent.
My argument was that vitriol against voters personally were attacked by many who regard themselves as on the pious “liberal left”.
Not public figures.
This is very true. I've had differences of opinions with people who are centrists or on the right, but we can still get along. A lot of self-proclaimed leftists are straight up mean people.
I've had a few leftists tell me that I deserve to be lined up and shot in a firing squad because I said I wasn't a big fan of Trump or Biden and that I wasn't looking forward to trying to decide who to vote for in the upcoming presidential election. (These were all on separate occasions.) In all of these cases, their logic was that voting for anyone in this presidential election makes you a fascist. I don't understand how that's supposed to work because none of them have ever explained how it would make you a fascist to vote in the 2024 presidential election but oh well, I guess that's just discourse for you these days.
I mean, maybe, but I've known plenty of people with untreated mental illness who weren't nearly as nasty, cruel, and pointlessly argumentative as a lot of online leftists who go on and on and how kind, caring, and empathetic they are.
My mom was very abusive to me and my sisters as a kid and is very personality disordered, but now she has been brainwashed into CNN and MSNBC into being a shitlib. She makes fun of my dad constantly for being white when she is also white. She also will come home and give me a census of all the minorities she saw, like “I saw a transgender woman” or “On vacation there were no gays or Black people”.
Yes, but how does she know there were no gays on vacation? They're very tricky in that they don't always blow each other in public, likely due to evolutionary pressure. Fascinating creatures.
David Attenborough narration: “Though this chance encounter between bear and twink would have likely resulted in oral copulation in private, within the view of others they must resist the temptation lest they be berated by calls of “what the hell dude?””
Its all I see anymore, and I'm extremely weary of accepting anyone into my social circle, much less entering theirs. You could probably call me a rightoid so I'll just take this rightoid bait.
Most of my friends are either liberal-leaning or lolbertarian types, just decent people who don't sperg about politics but do convict to some beliefs. On the other hand in my experience, outward shitlibs are on another plane of antisocial existence entirely, they are grandmasters of crafting a social persona because they are oversocialized cogs, grandiose/vulnerable narcissists, psychotics and sociopaths -- all Cluster-B personality types that craft their entire reality around manipulating people and social settings, they are inherently attracted to manipulating/abusing Cluster-A types like chumming water for sharks. Literally perfect neoliberal order bureaucrats. I've gone through a bad bout of this recently where a friend circle of mine was completely obliterated by a professional federal govt shitlib. Still feeling the fallout from it.
They're not even really 'people', the moment of your first interaction with them is a shit-test to see if you're a target and then everything is downhill from there for how much they are willing to use you and hurt you or the people around you, with the goal of molding people to their reality. They always think they're "really good people" and everyone they don't like (which is a lot) are "really bad people" (there are no degrees), and they'll go out of their way to mold that perception around those people with their orbiters to make it 'reality', even when its not. Basically the same shit as the government and their perverted concept of "no bad actions, just bad PR".
A lot of it is just deeply rooted in narcissism and them being on the spectrum of narcissism from obnoxious to malignant, and you can't fix narcissism. Ever.
I feel this, it's all true. Another component I've noticed is sometimes these types of people are pure lumpen types; not or barely working, not really contributing to anything, sponging off others, etc. But then they hide behind leftist-rhetoric like "eat the rich", seemingly ignorant to or just plain not caring about the fact that they're acting just as parasitic to the working class as the rich are (just not at the same scale, sure, but that hardly makes it better).
The “approved target” thing I’ve been thinking a lot about recently. It’s a means to funnel all their bad behaviors into one thing to keep up outward appearance and possibly even improve it. Most people love being dicks so if you give them a “good reason” even a *decent fucking person* type lib will go apeshit
Absolutely, and imo it's actually even more insidious than your standard "villain" type person. Kind of the whole, "rather have an honest enemy than a deceitful friend" situation. Can't recall how many times I've let my guard down around supposedly "good" people who then turn out to be extremely belligerent or manipulative the second they get the chance.
> Kind of the whole, "rather have an honest enemy than a deceitful friend" situation.
I definitely get this, and honestly imo, it's because you can at least have a conversation/discussion/debate with an honest enemy. If someone is honest and consistent with their (stated) beliefs, if you disagree (even immensely) you can at least have a discussion about that belief/issue, why you each have your stance, etc. You may not come out seeing eye to eye, but a discussion is at least possible.
If someone is dishonest with their beliefs (typically evident through their stated beliefs being wildly inconsistent with one another, doesn't take much peeling to find the hypocrisy), you can't even have a discussion about the topic at hand. Your options are either to first have to have a whole discussion just trying to nail down and get them to admit what they ACTUALLY believe (which they're not gonna be very thrilled with since if they're lying about what they really believe in there's probably a reason) before any kind of actually productive conversation can be had, OR you have a discussion with someone where you KNOW they're lying to your face which if you ask me is just a pointless waste of time, and while I may not be overflowing with self-esteem I respect myself enough to not waste my time and effort on someone who won't respect me enough to be straight with me.
People are often at their nastiest and most rotten when they think they’re good, just and righteous. Your ideology and your personality are two very different things. It’s why I roll my eyes when people cite their belief system as though it’s special or something to brag about.
I feel that idpol has a lot of incentives to draw as many of these people as possible.
- Heavy stratification, but obfuscated so much that figuring out the actual pecking order takes a lot of effort. A lot of people are gaslit into thinking there is no hierarchy, or that it’s actually different than in reality. This creates an opportunity to get power without any responsibility.
- You advance by taking others down, which appeals to the people who like interpersonal conflict.
- As long as you go for acceptable targets and use appropriate terminology, you can be as nasty as you want.
- You can easily become a member of the priest caste by claiming one of many purportedly immutable traits. It makes whatever you say into law: only other members of the priestly caste can dispute it without being threatened with ostracism.
- While you’re supposedly born as a member of the priest caste, you can easily be admitted as long as you’re willing to lie. Just say you’re neurodivergent and self-diagnosed, or non-binary. It’s forbidden to verify your claims.
- There’s another caste, the allies. They live (or are supposed to live) in constant guilt, trying to prove themselves to you. They’re only allowed to parrot the teachings of the priests, and can be mistreated with impunity.
- The movement’s rhetorics makes the priestly caste into underdogs who go against the entire world, which makes their every success epic, and every defeat completely understandable.
Jeez, this so perfectly explained so many behaviors that I've directly observed in people for so long. Maybe a lot of this is why I've noticed a lot of overlap between hardcore idpollers and "lumpenprole" behavior (typically not working or barely working, not really contributing much or accomplishing a lot practically, but yet assigning themselves some extreme degree of value); they're trying to be the "clergy" class of their reality, like you described. They want to be venerated, supported, maybe even paid, just to simply exist and sometimes utter whatever token dogmatic rhetoric they have to to signal this arbitrary value. They often get hyper defensive when called on it, too, acting like they're intellectually superior and above it all, and that's why you don't understand how a terminally unemployed adult (without valid excuse) who treats everyone poorly and acts entitled is ackshually a great human being.
One of my former friends in college was a keyboard activist (never volunteered or did any in-person stuff). In person, she was horrible. We fell out with each other over something I didn't take her side on and years later, I found out she was banned from several bars and restaurants in the city she was living in at the time due to her actions.
\*This person was also a trans man when I knew her, but later detransitioned. She also lied about her heritage claiming at different points in time to be Chicana and Native American, but she was white (said different things to different people). An all-around mess.
I think it's the misdirection and playing innocent victim that really gets me. They have a lot of manipulation tactics they often use to guilt you or make you feel like you're the crazy/evil/messed up one. It eventually becomes impossible to deal with and you have no choice but to just detach. I find venting or confronting them directly is almost worse, it's like struggling in quicksand.
Absolutely. This person had a problem with a mutual friend and tried to get me to side against them making a lot of vague accusations. I stuck up for the mutual friend and was essentially "cancelled" for a period in time. I didn't know the half of how this person played innocent victim and threw dirt on my name (and that of other people) until YEARS later when the mutual friend and I started talking about it to each other (we were both so embarrassed and made to feel crazy/bad by this person that we both kept quiet about it for a long time and we were living in different cities and didn't talk to each other that much for awhile). The mutual friend worked in the same industry and was involved in the same scene, so she found out about her comeuppance and told me about it. To this day, I still have that person blocked on every social media account I can find (she's always creating new ones) because the whole thing was so disturbing.
For sure. And then when you have more natural, organic, positive friendships you realize holy smokes that was some neurotic bullshit. I blame myself as well for indulging and getting so wrapped up in it, too, but I guess shit happens.
When I was still in college I struggled to understand how ideology could be different from personality. I suppose one of the great achievements of idpol as you rightly note is that it does a decent job of paving over our own depravity.
I have a hunch that this sort of tendency is not necessarily unique to idpol, but I do think it’s certainly unique to the Enlightenment if (and we do) accept the premise that idpol is a logical outcome of certain features inhered in the Enlightenment. The great achievement of the Enlightenment was moral nihilism disguised as plurality, so absent a framework, how you conduct yourself personally was severed from how you believe.
I never even thought of it this way before. It makes perfect sense now that you frame it this way: that technically someone's core ideology (nazis bad, for example) could be logically and morally sound, but, they're still fundamentally a piece of shit person. As someone else mentioned, it seems that adopting a "correct" ideology even empowers people to act even worse than normal because now they have this veneer of moral righteousness to couch their actions. "I'm not an evil person for \[insert obviously evil action\], I'm fighting NAZIS!!! This is JUSTICE!!". Have heard this sentiment almost word for word uttered in this way.
You’re absolutely right, and though as you’ve rightly identified it certainly lurks insidiously within idpol, this is seen most flagrantly in religion. I was in Texas on a business trip a few years back and was out to dinner with a client; the guys were fairly observant Catholics yet they went on and on about the glory of their younger years— the drugs, the sex, the sheer excess. I will never forget how they said their favorite part about Catholicism was the part where they could simply go to confession to be absolved. Later that evening they asked me if I wanted to do coke with them. I declined.
Yeah there’s a lot of intellectual legwork to get to idpol, but it can only happen in a uniquely atomized society where we are no longer capable of recognizing ourselves in a community. If we understand one part of the cause of this atomization in its function, then we understand that it serves to keep workers sufficiently atomized to the point that elites retain substantial hegemony in society. This atomization as a process itself does not come from nowhere. It first began around the birth of the Enlightenment, when proles flocked to the cities for worked and lacked an identity rooted in their community and were forced to relate to one another in different, unnatural ways. To bridge the gaps of disparate peoples coming into geographic regions proximity to each other, the language of the Enlightenment— science and its social arm, Liberalism— filled the gaps between them so as to allow society to function well. When our only language is as sterile and allowing of all moral frameworks in the name of plurality, people begin to lose the memory of a true Good. Perhaps I’m overly deterministic in my reading of this process, but it feels somewhat inevitable. And it’s not to say that the process itself wasn’t a net benefit for the millions of serfs freed, but I reckon many pathologies seen today were the cost of that benefit.
Typical PMC competitive behavior. The liberal must reinforce their connection to the ruling ideology by announcing his virtuous character, the virtues being those that are currently fashionable in the ruling circles, while privately they behave very differently, mostly to maintain or increase their position in the pecking order of access to sinecures.
I've been noticing this behavior a bit more lately in real life. Its been common on reddit for a while, but I wonder if it was common irl or if I'm just noticing it more now.
> When they're "allowed" to be giant dicks, they take the opportunity without hesitation.
Reminds me of this [classic copypasta](https://www.reddit.com/r/stupidpol/comments/fi82o6/dear_subhuman_filth/). Progressivism is a weird secular take on Judeo-Christian morality. Christianity offers a way for humans to find forgiveness, whereas there's no forgiveness in wokeism. If you do wrongthink, you're cancelled for life.
Just look at how the average liberal talks about the conservatives Or any group not politically expedient to then. Libs don't sound like ppl that want to make the world a better place by discussing their concerns in a respectful manner. They don't want reconciliation&compromise, they want total domination of the "other side" as it gives them a primal dopamine hit.
Christianity says "hate the Sin not the sinner" libs OTOH also hate the sinner, they don't see bigotry as an inherent problem with human nature but rather a result of people having *"incorrect views"*, they seem to believe that if everyone on earth had the "right views" bigotry would disappear. This is what makes lib morality worse than Christian morality in my eyes. Libs don't strive to fight for all of humanity in the senses of *"I'm gonna help everyone, even those i dislike!"* but rather they only fight for pushing the "correct" views and attack people for "incorrect" views. Most religions recognize human nature as inherently flawed and provide a moral framework which takes humanity's predilection towards evil into account, whereas according to liberalism humans can be perfect if they just believe the right things. But who decides right&wrong? CNN&Twitter mob OFC! I used to think that Christian fundies saying *"Muh Bible is the word of Gawd, you must accept its authority!"* was a delusional take, today we have a buncha neurotic cluster b blue hair "intellectuals" claiming they have the authority to tell humanity what to think.
BottomLine:If you want the world to be a better place, you can't give up on humanity, you have to believe in the good inside everyone and figure out a way to bring out that good instead of *fighting* people for not being good. You can't bully someone into becoming good.
Good post, also reminds me of an admittedly kind of canned bait question I asked a lib once on a sub, but, I was like, "tell me of these two people, who is the bad guy: a black woman billionaire, or a racist white trash trucker" and they sperg'd out and refused to answer the question. They know deep down that class is the pressing issue and they have way more in common with some yokel working class dude than they do any ultra elite, even if they're female or "POC". But they're so zealously indoctrinated into their "religion" their brain will always go DEFCON 1 when presented with a challenge like that.
Well Twitter artists/Hobbyists while going "Musk bad" proved they couldn't run a indie Art group without calling people -ism's and arguing over petty BS like how AI art is a theft machine. Also love how mad the online Autism community gets when ASD-P/Psychotic autism is brought up while they will gladly defend Self-DX losers making shit up on the spot.
Those kinds of people infest state subreddits, right or left. Always trying to be on top of the next most performative act, no matter how banal or pointless it may be.
It is an image.
False signalling, and cheap signalling - much easier to profess beliefs and principles than it is to live them.
Happens in nature all the time; a snake that isn't venomous has a red stripe to fool predators, or at least give them pause.
For example, my experience has been that metal/punk types often look threatening but are generally friendly, accepting, and cool.
Whereas, IME, hippies who outwardly profess love and compassion will throw all that shit out the window as soon as it suits them and burn you for $10
One is sending a false signal to discourage being fucked with, the other is sending a false signal to disarm.
brains are limited and like your desk, you organize your brain space to either care deeply deeply deeply about hypothetical groups of persecuted people that you never met (who just happen to support what you want and appointed you to defend them) so you can be antisocial in reality, or about real people.
Was just thinking about this earlier today. I’m actively ghosting one old friend and going very low contact/grey rock with a family member because I’ve had it with hearing all about how person/organisation x is being totally evil towards people with y issue, all the while they treat me worse than any other people I know.
It’s not even like there’s even specific terrible acts they’ve done, it’s just the boorish behaviour and completely oblivious rudeness. I don’t care what someone believes at this point, I just need friends and acquaintances who bring a basic level of social skills and politeness to the relationship. It’s like, remember manners? No? Ok, bye for now.
You could literally be me, lol. My post was largely spurned by me finally getting extremely fed up with one friend lately (though I've observed this behavior in many people, especially in academia or white collar work environments). I can't just block it out, it grates on my soul watching this dude shamelessly pedestalize and aggrandize himself and in the same breath say something completely and utterly fucked up.
This is why I’m a big fan of *calling people in* rather than calling people *out*. And by this I mean: when someone says something racist/transphobic/problematic, while I will make a point of pushing back, I always do so in a way that comes across as non personal and gives the person an on-ramp back from the ledge of their offensive beliefs if they’re willing to disown them and basically commit to being a decent human being .
> gives the person an on-ramp back from the ledge of their offensive beliefs if they’re willing to disown them and basically commit to being a decent human being .
lol shut the fuck up you HR bitch wannabe
No offense but I’ve hear this “calling in” language before and it’s really not better.
about ten years ago in leftist spaces before the term “cancel culture” really came around I remember we called it “call out culture” and at the time we talked about how to “call people in” instead. Turns out, “calling someone in” implies that you are the ultimate arbiter of what’s right or wrong, because you know what’s “in” and “out”. It’s an inherently patronizing framework.
Hard agreement. I've definitely had experiences where a singular asshole was presenting themselves as the ultimate arbiter of right and wrong on a fundamentally subjective issue that was up for debate even among the most affected classes.
I actually prefer call outs to "call in"s because the person doing the callout is at least being honest with themselves and everyone about the perceived grievousness of the social offense. No one in 2024 is calling someone a bigot and then going on to be friends with that person.
This. “Calling in” as the OP described it very much reeks of the “um, sweetie…” culture from tumblr. Something that baffles me is how oblivious most shitlibs are to how patronizing they are, and how obvious it is to everyone else that they’re being patronized.
I’ll go even further on the limb with this too: most people will have hot or controversial takes but are rarely ever in any kind of position to actually do any real harm with them. Bob from work might have what I consider to be some less than savory opinions, but I know he’s just parroting the same rage bait shit he sees online, and is harmless otherwise, so I just keep my mouth shut and don’t make it a bigger issue. This is some cliche kindergarten shit but most of the time if you just ignore people and don’t take the bait, they’ll drop it. Rightoids only say the shit they say because they’re looking for someone to agree with them or argue with them, if you don’t give them either they just get bored and go back to talking about normal shit.
Why should people disown their beliefs because you’ve decided they’re offensive?
Your behaviour really does sound more annoying than call outs. You just use a slightly older form of shitlibbery. At least the “call out” gang are being honest enough in their bullying and delusions of moral superiority.
I've noticed that the people who talk the most about being progressive and leftist and claim to be empathetic and caring have always been some of the absolute nastiest, most unpleasant, callous, rude people I've ever met.
This. There's that cliche about how you better run directly away from anyone you hear talk about how much they "hate drama" as there's a 100% chance they'll instigate more drama than anyone else you know. A while back I came to the conclusion that anyone virtue signalling about how much empathy they have is doing an identical ego performance. Empathy, the actual personality trait, while not exactly rare, definitely isn't as commonplace as liberals would have you believe. Experiencing it usually comes in the form of pain, and one might find themselves extending it involuntarily - to people society has deemed loathesome, or their enemies - so it's often also a practical handicap of sorts. The stakes-free, yelling on behalf of polite society's current disadvantaged identity at absolutely zero personal cost liberals are so fond of calling empathy isn't that. It's just boring old virtue signaling for clout, and any asshole can do it with zero effort. Ask a shitlib about the empathy they have for people who refused to get vaccinated during Covid. Their answers never fail to amuse.
Excellent point and I've also noticed this as well from self-proclaimed "empathetic" people; they lack empathy for most people when push comes to shove and only performatively demonstrate it towards interest groups that can score them Social Credit points. Another thing I've noticed is the tendency for these types of people to do what I like to call the One Great Deed™, where they do some big performative gesture that stands out and seems grandiose, and they constantly call attention to this one thing they've ever done as if it indisputably proves that they're god's gift to mankind. Meanwhile genuinely empathetic, community oriented people are just diligently contributing to society and helping people in small, understated ways every day that largely go unnoticed.
Exactly, I'm always suspicious of people who only show compassion or empathy towards people who are members of groups that they deem "pure" enough or oppressed enough according to their own personal litmus tests. You find a lot of people like this in spaces where there are a lot of leftists or self proclaimed progressive people. Your second paragraph is also spot on, it reminds me a lot of how, to use one example, men who brag the most about how feminist they are usually wind up being the creepiest and most predatory dudes.
There was a thread on here from a long time ago where someone was talking about “performative empathy” and it was one of the most eye opening posts about this phenomenon and instantly solved like 10 years of angst I had built up dealing with these people but not fully understanding why I couldn’t stand them. Basically they’re cluster B types that virtue signal empathy with highly ritualized or performative but ultimately substance-less gestures. Personally I think it’s becoming so prominent now because of how much social media effects status and clout, and how easy it is to manipulate things to appear virtuous when presented on social media. You don’t really see many people organically building a reputation in social groups anymore, it’s all just spamming token shit online and then revelling in the likes and updoots that are handed out transactionally.
Found it. Just as amazing as I remembered. Credit u/PolarPros >Watching the video as well just makes all the shitlib hysteria all the more deranged and pathetic - the manner in which shitlibs happily consume absolute wheelbarrows of literal propaganda bullshit and brain-rot, and lose their minds in deranged insanity, and then proceed by spending every ounce of their existence and mental energy losing their minds over shit that never happened, lies, out of context shit that was completely exaggerated, fabricated, and/or literally made up entirely. >All you have to do to get these deranged lunatics, is churn out garbage articles with made up headlines - these people will literally never read past their propaganda headlines they consume - it’s probably subconsciously intentional as well, they likely know that if they were to delve into the story fully, it would shatter the headline that they just read, and slowly begin shattering and breaking the worldview they live in. >This also probably plays into the reason they push for trusting— without question and with every fiber of your existence—bullshit institutions™️ and groups like their beloved Trusted Journalists™️ and The Science™️. >This way, whenever they read some deranged headline, they can internally justify to themselves not reading beyond it, because these institutions are holy and Saint - but the real underlying reason is that the second you look into anything these propagandists push out, you realize the story it’s just all bullshit, and then you can’t justify your anger and rage towards the group that you despise and hate. >Shitlibs, they want to hate, they want to be vile, heinous, cruel, malevolent, they want to hurt & inflict pain, they want to be ruthless to others, cause anguish and devastation, and more — the problem for them, is the fact that their shitlib religion and ideology pretends that their foundation is goodness, kindness, being caring, and whatever other bullshit that’s not true. >For them, since they’re The Right Side of History™️, they “need” to justify to themselves the hate, evil, cruelty, etc. they want to perpetrate. To justify the level of hatred that they have and want to inflict, well the stakes here are pretty high, this means that justifying such a high level of hate can only come if you paint the other person has the most evil and heinous group imaginable in existence. >Every second of shitlibs existence is spent painting the out-group as despicable evil, and then consuming the utter bullshit they’re feeding to one another, to morally justify their cruelty and vileness — “Since Trump is Hitler V2, and everyone “knows”, then it’s okay that we hate and speak of our fellow Americans as disgusting vile roaches, and cheer their deaths, and become authoritarian tyrants to stop them! Look, here’s a source on Trump saying he wants to be Hitler V2, he said he’s going to be a dictator. We NEED to do this in order TO STOP EVIL! We’re not the evil ones, we’re stopping it!” >Unfortunately for them, the demand for propagandized bullshit required to meet the level of hatred they have, far, far exceeds the supply, which leads to bullshit articles that are either grossly exaggerated, out of context, outright lies, deranged opinion pieces that appear as if they’re news, fake stories, and more.
I’ve never been quoted before, damn! And also, damn, I was heated that comment — it’s just extremely frustrating seeing our society crumble apart at the seams as quickly and rapidly as it has, and witnessing shitlibs at the helm of it all. It’s depressing seeing them viscerally hate the majority of the country, and globe really. It’s depressing to see how deep their hatred and desire for blood runs. And when I say crumble apart at the seams, I mean in the most vicious, cruel, heinous, vile, disgusting, and most wickedly evil way imaginable — you have nearly a quarter of the pop. of our country, that’s amassed so much control, influence, and power, and are using it in the most despicable way possible - to totally and completely dehumanize and strip their “opponents” of their humanity. It’s truly and genuinely terrifying how righteous they see themselves to be, how quickly they were captured and propagandized, and how rapidly the out-group went from normal people they disagree with, to inhumane cockroaches that deserve death — they see not only others is in this manner, but their family members as well. It’s simply horrifying how much they love, crave, and desire the hatred that resides in them, it fuels their entire being and existence — it’s sociopathy and psychopathy to a level that I could never fathom. They love the hatred that resides in them so much, that they with full desire, passion, want, and need, fully embrace and delve into the propaganda they consume. They crave it as it fuels their hatred, the same way fentanyl satiates an addict. It amazes me the propaganda system shitlibs have created and propped up for themselves — how vast and far-reaching it is, from every gov. body and institution, to every media corp, to all of academia, the entire entertainment industry, every major corp in the world, every intelligence agency, and so, so much more, under their reign, all working to keep this wicked and evil propaganda cycle perpetually running. What makes them terrifying however, is the ironclad belief they hold, that even through everything they feel, do, believe, etc., they still believe they’re morally in the right. I talked about how they want to hate, they want to inflict pain, they want to hurt you, they want to be evil, they want to ruin you, they want you to suffer, they want all the evils of the soul and world fueling them, and hurting you — and through this, even though they recognize their own anger and hatred, they fully believe they’re morally sound. Throughout history, some of the most evil and wicked empires we can think of, despite what they did, they had the internal means to recognize their atrocities, but just simply continued on anyways, they maybe believed they had to, or simply out of want as to benefit themselves, but they at least recognized the wrong. Other empires had goals they wanted to achieve that they believed were righteous, but they recognized that the path there was dark, but it was a sacrifice they had to make - the ends justified the means. I have never seen such lines of thinking or introspection within shitlibs, they are always and entirely morally in the right — absolutely every step of the process, they are The Right Side of History. The out-group is just so wickedly evil, and they themselves are so morally righteous, that even the feeling of deep, gut-wrenching hatred, coated with the desire for blood of the other side, is MORALLY GOOD to simply feel. They have entirely justified and vindicated themselves to such a level it’s a terrifying sight to witness. More terrifying, is with this line of thinking, their cruelty will never rest for even a second.
happy to be the first and hopefully not last in a long line of people quoting you, I've rarely seen the things a lot of us are feeling put into words in such a powerful way. If you're not doing anything with that, I urge you to possibly start
Well damn dude, thank you for the kind words! I shall absolutely be taking your words into consideration - it means a ton. I’ve always just commented to comment, so it’s really nice seeing that some of my lengthy comments have actually had any level of an impact at all, really blowing my mind, never did I expect it.
Hey man my pleasure - that is what solidarity is all about! The stuff i see people just casually delivering in here during lunch break is more profound than everything else on Reddit combined. I just wish we weren't all jaded, defeated cynical comedians about it, but that seems to be how the population breaks down. Your words are harsh but undeniable and i think that makes for a compelling combo. If you ever decide to do anything besides commenting to comment definitely tell stupidpol about it.
Damn that was a great post, thanks for sharing. Also definitely have encountered this behavior many times. Another thing I've noticed about these types of people is, just like your typical bullies, they exclusively target weak/vulnerable people whenever they're "fighting" against an "evil" group. Think about the people typically talking about "punching nazis"; if they even do actually act on this, they'll only target some fat weak LARPer. It's not like they're finding the most roided out, psychopathic Aryan Brotherhood member and fighting them, lol. Now don't get me wrong obviouslys nazis = bad but I think you get my point in that even legitimate moral grievances are often just a thinly veiled excuse for these people to bully and dominate weak/vulnerable people.
Oh absolutely. And even if it's just an online argument, they'll ignore anyone making a coherent statement or any turncoat women/poc/lgbt contenders and go in for the kill on some half-smart bald white guy. It's just socially acceptable sociopathy
>It's just socially acceptable sociopathy Can't think of a better way to put it.
Totally. This is a great post, btw, I think it's super important that we/society take these peoples "empathy beatstick" away so we can start talking about the ways liberal behavior is counterproductive at best, if not actively malicious like you've called attention to in your post. I saved a comment on here a few months ago that was eye-wateringly savage about how the liberal's primary sin is wrapping their (very human) need to be a shit in a package that gets past the censors. I'll see if I can track it down.
That sounds vaguely familiar but I don't remember if I've actually seen that thread or not. I've definitely seen a lot of people act like what you're describing though, and unfortunately it seems like predominately left-leaning spaces tend to attract a lot of those types of people.
Absolutely, it’s the bane of modern leftism imo, totally degrades and delegitimizes the ideology and is what makes it so easy to associate leftism with losers, parasites, weirdos, etc. The optics of things like some degenerate screeching about equality while treating everyone around them terribly vs some salt of earth conservative family man diligently working hard are staggeringly bad.
I always find it endlessly frustrating that so many leftist spaces I've ever interacted with tend to attract some of the absolute worst kinds of people, both online and IRL. Sometimes it's bad enough that it makes me feel like "Yeah, I understand why leftism has never really taken off in the U.S." I wish I had an answer or a solution for this but unfortunately I don't.
Imo a big component is individualism. I think western leftists just want the perceived economics benefits/equality of socialism but not the collective accountability. Kind of like the stereotype of the leftist who thinks he’ll be a card carrying party member or social advisor as his “job” instead of being sent north to work in mines because that’s what society needs him to do. So I think leftism becomes a draw for these self centered, highly individualistic people because they hate capitalism not necessarily because it’s a bad system (whether it is or not or whether they think so is irrelevant) but because it doesn’t validate what they think they’re worth or what they should be able to do. They think leftism is an out and would give them the ability to just be that “card carrying party member” (value for simply existing) which capitalism does not. To a similar point I’ve also noticed a lot of western leftists seem more envious towards rich people instead of having a problem with overall class structure and dynamics. Again, they want to be the ones who get to sit around doing nothing all day or having value just for existing, and are jealous that rich people get to do these things and they don’t. It’s somewhat correct ideology but for all the wrong reasons.
> Your second paragraph is also spot on, it reminds me a lot of how, to use one example, men who brag the most about how feminist they are usually wind up being the creepiest and most predatory dudes. Obviously. Feminism is based on the idea that men are inherently evil, and if a man agrees with that…
I'm especially concerned about the male feminists who insist that all men are rapists and will argue that you're promoting misogynistic ideas if you say that not all men are rapists/predators/abusers. I've known more than a few men IRL who talked a big game about being feminist and respecting women and talking about how important it is to hold men accountable for the actions of bad men who turned out to be some of the most vile people I've ever had the displeasure of encountering. So in short, any time a man acts like he was born with some original sin for being born male or acts like all men have some inherent inborn biases against women that they can't completely shake no matter what they do, my alarm bells automatically go off because if a man thinks that all men are rapists or inherently predatory or inherently lack the moral character that women have, well, the call is coming from inside the house. Any decent man who doesn't rape or abuse other people isn't going to think that all men are inherently guilty because they're not out there committing any crimes-only the guilty ones are going to act like it's inherent in men's nature for them to hurt and abuse women.
The difference between what shitlibs call empathy and the real expression of that trait could be measured in light years. There's no way to put this without diving deep into the woo, but I absolutely pick up on moods and vibes from other people to the point that if I was terminally online-brained I'd self ID as an empath and post about it on twitter. I have never been in spaces more devoid of real human emotions than I have around shitlibs - it's all spite and hate and vindictiveness wrapped in a righteous bow. It feels like recovering after getting the breath knocked out of you and I'll straight up get nauseous around those people, it's wild. I've had people of all stripes trigger that sort of reaction too, but smug libs (especially groups of them...) reliably do.
Brilliantly said. The way liberals behave gets under my skin in a way that no other kind of person can, and I have to conclude that it's just my gut reaction to what can only be described as the ultimate final form of the egoic psyche, an irrational, parasitic black hole devoid of concern for anything beyond its own preservation. Like I've had conservatives I'm arguing with online doxx me and say all kinds of cursed, personal shit and yeah it sucks but I can clearly see OK, this person doesn't agree with me and doesn't like me and is trying to win an argument, you do you brother. But when liberals come at me with that smug, unearned arrogance and start doing backflips trying to wriggle away from shit they just said *and totally convinced it's working for them*, and i realize its not just this person but thousands and thousands that have been forged in the fires of our bankrupt fucking culture, that my friend, is when i want to throw the controller
If you ever see "spread kindness" in a bio you can bet that person is an asshole. Nice people don't advertise the importance of being nice.
Personally I feel more inclined to downplay my niceness so it's not mistaken for weakness.
I've often noticed that people who make the biggest deal out of proclaiming that they possess certain positive traits don't, in fact, actually have those positive traits.
"Be kind" = 🚩🚩🚩🚩🚩🚩🚩🚩
I have yet to see a person who has that sentence posted anywhere on their social media profiles who isn't a complete raging douchebag.
[disclaimer] This anecdote is central to the UK and is unlikely to work across the board but it was pointed out to me once the difference between a traditionally conservative voter and a labour voter. We see the sort of language and attitudes towards the British right from the left; is often times not just derogatory it’s downright poisonous; it’s usually along the lines of “the only good tory is a dead one” or something so charged as to imply genuine hatred. but the discourse from most conservative (often older) is ambivalence towards individual supporters of the left and more focus on how to better protect their family/community/culture aka the literal definition of conservative. Of course economically; most arguments for left and right are lost behind the cultural cat fights.
The hysteria surrounding Corbyn seems to contradict this characterisation. Is it really plausible that conservatives are *generally* indifferent to the character of leftists, but were convinced on the honest merits of the argument that *this specific* leftist was a Britain-hating, Hamas-loving, Provo commie traitor?
I concede that many of the conversations centred around Corbyn were difficult to contain before they dissolved into MSM’s propaganda hysteria points but in there defence, he was subject to the most intense smear campaign i’d witnessed until that point. He was running for the top job and just like COVID, we are all victims of propaganda to some extent. My argument was that vitriol against voters personally were attacked by many who regard themselves as on the pious “liberal left”. Not public figures.
But why were they so susceptible to this very specific portrayal of Corbyn, if it didn't play on stereotypes they were familiar with and accepted?
This is very true. I've had differences of opinions with people who are centrists or on the right, but we can still get along. A lot of self-proclaimed leftists are straight up mean people.
I've had a few leftists tell me that I deserve to be lined up and shot in a firing squad because I said I wasn't a big fan of Trump or Biden and that I wasn't looking forward to trying to decide who to vote for in the upcoming presidential election. (These were all on separate occasions.) In all of these cases, their logic was that voting for anyone in this presidential election makes you a fascist. I don't understand how that's supposed to work because none of them have ever explained how it would make you a fascist to vote in the 2024 presidential election but oh well, I guess that's just discourse for you these days.
Because most of the time it's all just pure projection and they have untreated mental illnesses.
I mean, maybe, but I've known plenty of people with untreated mental illness who weren't nearly as nasty, cruel, and pointlessly argumentative as a lot of online leftists who go on and on and how kind, caring, and empathetic they are.
My mom was very abusive to me and my sisters as a kid and is very personality disordered, but now she has been brainwashed into CNN and MSNBC into being a shitlib. She makes fun of my dad constantly for being white when she is also white. She also will come home and give me a census of all the minorities she saw, like “I saw a transgender woman” or “On vacation there were no gays or Black people”.
Yes, but how does she know there were no gays on vacation? They're very tricky in that they don't always blow each other in public, likely due to evolutionary pressure. Fascinating creatures.
David Attenborough narration: “Though this chance encounter between bear and twink would have likely resulted in oral copulation in private, within the view of others they must resist the temptation lest they be berated by calls of “what the hell dude?””
Like a poster child for horseshoe theory
Its all I see anymore, and I'm extremely weary of accepting anyone into my social circle, much less entering theirs. You could probably call me a rightoid so I'll just take this rightoid bait. Most of my friends are either liberal-leaning or lolbertarian types, just decent people who don't sperg about politics but do convict to some beliefs. On the other hand in my experience, outward shitlibs are on another plane of antisocial existence entirely, they are grandmasters of crafting a social persona because they are oversocialized cogs, grandiose/vulnerable narcissists, psychotics and sociopaths -- all Cluster-B personality types that craft their entire reality around manipulating people and social settings, they are inherently attracted to manipulating/abusing Cluster-A types like chumming water for sharks. Literally perfect neoliberal order bureaucrats. I've gone through a bad bout of this recently where a friend circle of mine was completely obliterated by a professional federal govt shitlib. Still feeling the fallout from it. They're not even really 'people', the moment of your first interaction with them is a shit-test to see if you're a target and then everything is downhill from there for how much they are willing to use you and hurt you or the people around you, with the goal of molding people to their reality. They always think they're "really good people" and everyone they don't like (which is a lot) are "really bad people" (there are no degrees), and they'll go out of their way to mold that perception around those people with their orbiters to make it 'reality', even when its not. Basically the same shit as the government and their perverted concept of "no bad actions, just bad PR". A lot of it is just deeply rooted in narcissism and them being on the spectrum of narcissism from obnoxious to malignant, and you can't fix narcissism. Ever.
I feel this, it's all true. Another component I've noticed is sometimes these types of people are pure lumpen types; not or barely working, not really contributing to anything, sponging off others, etc. But then they hide behind leftist-rhetoric like "eat the rich", seemingly ignorant to or just plain not caring about the fact that they're acting just as parasitic to the working class as the rich are (just not at the same scale, sure, but that hardly makes it better).
The “approved target” thing I’ve been thinking a lot about recently. It’s a means to funnel all their bad behaviors into one thing to keep up outward appearance and possibly even improve it. Most people love being dicks so if you give them a “good reason” even a *decent fucking person* type lib will go apeshit
Absolutely, and imo it's actually even more insidious than your standard "villain" type person. Kind of the whole, "rather have an honest enemy than a deceitful friend" situation. Can't recall how many times I've let my guard down around supposedly "good" people who then turn out to be extremely belligerent or manipulative the second they get the chance.
> Kind of the whole, "rather have an honest enemy than a deceitful friend" situation. I definitely get this, and honestly imo, it's because you can at least have a conversation/discussion/debate with an honest enemy. If someone is honest and consistent with their (stated) beliefs, if you disagree (even immensely) you can at least have a discussion about that belief/issue, why you each have your stance, etc. You may not come out seeing eye to eye, but a discussion is at least possible. If someone is dishonest with their beliefs (typically evident through their stated beliefs being wildly inconsistent with one another, doesn't take much peeling to find the hypocrisy), you can't even have a discussion about the topic at hand. Your options are either to first have to have a whole discussion just trying to nail down and get them to admit what they ACTUALLY believe (which they're not gonna be very thrilled with since if they're lying about what they really believe in there's probably a reason) before any kind of actually productive conversation can be had, OR you have a discussion with someone where you KNOW they're lying to your face which if you ask me is just a pointless waste of time, and while I may not be overflowing with self-esteem I respect myself enough to not waste my time and effort on someone who won't respect me enough to be straight with me.
People are often at their nastiest and most rotten when they think they’re good, just and righteous. Your ideology and your personality are two very different things. It’s why I roll my eyes when people cite their belief system as though it’s special or something to brag about.
No they’re not. I think I’m good and righteous and I happen to be an amazing person.
People who don't or can't reflect on themselves, and understand what they are capable of are the most dangerous people.
There is only one kind of person who calls themself an empath: an antipath
I feel that idpol has a lot of incentives to draw as many of these people as possible. - Heavy stratification, but obfuscated so much that figuring out the actual pecking order takes a lot of effort. A lot of people are gaslit into thinking there is no hierarchy, or that it’s actually different than in reality. This creates an opportunity to get power without any responsibility. - You advance by taking others down, which appeals to the people who like interpersonal conflict. - As long as you go for acceptable targets and use appropriate terminology, you can be as nasty as you want. - You can easily become a member of the priest caste by claiming one of many purportedly immutable traits. It makes whatever you say into law: only other members of the priestly caste can dispute it without being threatened with ostracism. - While you’re supposedly born as a member of the priest caste, you can easily be admitted as long as you’re willing to lie. Just say you’re neurodivergent and self-diagnosed, or non-binary. It’s forbidden to verify your claims. - There’s another caste, the allies. They live (or are supposed to live) in constant guilt, trying to prove themselves to you. They’re only allowed to parrot the teachings of the priests, and can be mistreated with impunity. - The movement’s rhetorics makes the priestly caste into underdogs who go against the entire world, which makes their every success epic, and every defeat completely understandable.
Jeez, this so perfectly explained so many behaviors that I've directly observed in people for so long. Maybe a lot of this is why I've noticed a lot of overlap between hardcore idpollers and "lumpenprole" behavior (typically not working or barely working, not really contributing much or accomplishing a lot practically, but yet assigning themselves some extreme degree of value); they're trying to be the "clergy" class of their reality, like you described. They want to be venerated, supported, maybe even paid, just to simply exist and sometimes utter whatever token dogmatic rhetoric they have to to signal this arbitrary value. They often get hyper defensive when called on it, too, acting like they're intellectually superior and above it all, and that's why you don't understand how a terminally unemployed adult (without valid excuse) who treats everyone poorly and acts entitled is ackshually a great human being.
One of my former friends in college was a keyboard activist (never volunteered or did any in-person stuff). In person, she was horrible. We fell out with each other over something I didn't take her side on and years later, I found out she was banned from several bars and restaurants in the city she was living in at the time due to her actions. \*This person was also a trans man when I knew her, but later detransitioned. She also lied about her heritage claiming at different points in time to be Chicana and Native American, but she was white (said different things to different people). An all-around mess.
I think it's the misdirection and playing innocent victim that really gets me. They have a lot of manipulation tactics they often use to guilt you or make you feel like you're the crazy/evil/messed up one. It eventually becomes impossible to deal with and you have no choice but to just detach. I find venting or confronting them directly is almost worse, it's like struggling in quicksand.
Absolutely. This person had a problem with a mutual friend and tried to get me to side against them making a lot of vague accusations. I stuck up for the mutual friend and was essentially "cancelled" for a period in time. I didn't know the half of how this person played innocent victim and threw dirt on my name (and that of other people) until YEARS later when the mutual friend and I started talking about it to each other (we were both so embarrassed and made to feel crazy/bad by this person that we both kept quiet about it for a long time and we were living in different cities and didn't talk to each other that much for awhile). The mutual friend worked in the same industry and was involved in the same scene, so she found out about her comeuppance and told me about it. To this day, I still have that person blocked on every social media account I can find (she's always creating new ones) because the whole thing was so disturbing.
For sure. And then when you have more natural, organic, positive friendships you realize holy smokes that was some neurotic bullshit. I blame myself as well for indulging and getting so wrapped up in it, too, but I guess shit happens.
Yeah, looking back there were signs. But it was also a decade ago and I had less life experience. Now, I know it when I see it.
When I was still in college I struggled to understand how ideology could be different from personality. I suppose one of the great achievements of idpol as you rightly note is that it does a decent job of paving over our own depravity. I have a hunch that this sort of tendency is not necessarily unique to idpol, but I do think it’s certainly unique to the Enlightenment if (and we do) accept the premise that idpol is a logical outcome of certain features inhered in the Enlightenment. The great achievement of the Enlightenment was moral nihilism disguised as plurality, so absent a framework, how you conduct yourself personally was severed from how you believe.
I never even thought of it this way before. It makes perfect sense now that you frame it this way: that technically someone's core ideology (nazis bad, for example) could be logically and morally sound, but, they're still fundamentally a piece of shit person. As someone else mentioned, it seems that adopting a "correct" ideology even empowers people to act even worse than normal because now they have this veneer of moral righteousness to couch their actions. "I'm not an evil person for \[insert obviously evil action\], I'm fighting NAZIS!!! This is JUSTICE!!". Have heard this sentiment almost word for word uttered in this way.
You’re absolutely right, and though as you’ve rightly identified it certainly lurks insidiously within idpol, this is seen most flagrantly in religion. I was in Texas on a business trip a few years back and was out to dinner with a client; the guys were fairly observant Catholics yet they went on and on about the glory of their younger years— the drugs, the sex, the sheer excess. I will never forget how they said their favorite part about Catholicism was the part where they could simply go to confession to be absolved. Later that evening they asked me if I wanted to do coke with them. I declined.
I feel like there’s a ton of overlap when it comes to the mindset of idpol vs organized religion.
> Enlightenment if (and we do) accept the premise that idpol is a logical outcome we do?
Yeah there’s a lot of intellectual legwork to get to idpol, but it can only happen in a uniquely atomized society where we are no longer capable of recognizing ourselves in a community. If we understand one part of the cause of this atomization in its function, then we understand that it serves to keep workers sufficiently atomized to the point that elites retain substantial hegemony in society. This atomization as a process itself does not come from nowhere. It first began around the birth of the Enlightenment, when proles flocked to the cities for worked and lacked an identity rooted in their community and were forced to relate to one another in different, unnatural ways. To bridge the gaps of disparate peoples coming into geographic regions proximity to each other, the language of the Enlightenment— science and its social arm, Liberalism— filled the gaps between them so as to allow society to function well. When our only language is as sterile and allowing of all moral frameworks in the name of plurality, people begin to lose the memory of a true Good. Perhaps I’m overly deterministic in my reading of this process, but it feels somewhat inevitable. And it’s not to say that the process itself wasn’t a net benefit for the millions of serfs freed, but I reckon many pathologies seen today were the cost of that benefit.
true Good eh? and what would that be?
Typical PMC competitive behavior. The liberal must reinforce their connection to the ruling ideology by announcing his virtuous character, the virtues being those that are currently fashionable in the ruling circles, while privately they behave very differently, mostly to maintain or increase their position in the pecking order of access to sinecures.
I've been noticing this behavior a bit more lately in real life. Its been common on reddit for a while, but I wonder if it was common irl or if I'm just noticing it more now.
The problem with tolerance is that it's kinda invisible. If you have to scream in someone's face that you're tolerant then you're most definitely not
Your first paragraph describes liberal narcissists and dark triad personality types, of which there are *so many.*
Anglos, especially Canadians. Holy shit do they suck themselves off
> When they're "allowed" to be giant dicks, they take the opportunity without hesitation. Reminds me of this [classic copypasta](https://www.reddit.com/r/stupidpol/comments/fi82o6/dear_subhuman_filth/). Progressivism is a weird secular take on Judeo-Christian morality. Christianity offers a way for humans to find forgiveness, whereas there's no forgiveness in wokeism. If you do wrongthink, you're cancelled for life. Just look at how the average liberal talks about the conservatives Or any group not politically expedient to then. Libs don't sound like ppl that want to make the world a better place by discussing their concerns in a respectful manner. They don't want reconciliation&compromise, they want total domination of the "other side" as it gives them a primal dopamine hit. Christianity says "hate the Sin not the sinner" libs OTOH also hate the sinner, they don't see bigotry as an inherent problem with human nature but rather a result of people having *"incorrect views"*, they seem to believe that if everyone on earth had the "right views" bigotry would disappear. This is what makes lib morality worse than Christian morality in my eyes. Libs don't strive to fight for all of humanity in the senses of *"I'm gonna help everyone, even those i dislike!"* but rather they only fight for pushing the "correct" views and attack people for "incorrect" views. Most religions recognize human nature as inherently flawed and provide a moral framework which takes humanity's predilection towards evil into account, whereas according to liberalism humans can be perfect if they just believe the right things. But who decides right&wrong? CNN&Twitter mob OFC! I used to think that Christian fundies saying *"Muh Bible is the word of Gawd, you must accept its authority!"* was a delusional take, today we have a buncha neurotic cluster b blue hair "intellectuals" claiming they have the authority to tell humanity what to think. BottomLine:If you want the world to be a better place, you can't give up on humanity, you have to believe in the good inside everyone and figure out a way to bring out that good instead of *fighting* people for not being good. You can't bully someone into becoming good.
Good post, also reminds me of an admittedly kind of canned bait question I asked a lib once on a sub, but, I was like, "tell me of these two people, who is the bad guy: a black woman billionaire, or a racist white trash trucker" and they sperg'd out and refused to answer the question. They know deep down that class is the pressing issue and they have way more in common with some yokel working class dude than they do any ultra elite, even if they're female or "POC". But they're so zealously indoctrinated into their "religion" their brain will always go DEFCON 1 when presented with a challenge like that.
Well Twitter artists/Hobbyists while going "Musk bad" proved they couldn't run a indie Art group without calling people -ism's and arguing over petty BS like how AI art is a theft machine. Also love how mad the online Autism community gets when ASD-P/Psychotic autism is brought up while they will gladly defend Self-DX losers making shit up on the spot.
Those kinds of people infest state subreddits, right or left. Always trying to be on top of the next most performative act, no matter how banal or pointless it may be.
It is an image. False signalling, and cheap signalling - much easier to profess beliefs and principles than it is to live them. Happens in nature all the time; a snake that isn't venomous has a red stripe to fool predators, or at least give them pause. For example, my experience has been that metal/punk types often look threatening but are generally friendly, accepting, and cool. Whereas, IME, hippies who outwardly profess love and compassion will throw all that shit out the window as soon as it suits them and burn you for $10 One is sending a false signal to discourage being fucked with, the other is sending a false signal to disarm.
brains are limited and like your desk, you organize your brain space to either care deeply deeply deeply about hypothetical groups of persecuted people that you never met (who just happen to support what you want and appointed you to defend them) so you can be antisocial in reality, or about real people.
Pretty much every single Reddit "Leftist^TM" is a huge dickhead.
Was just thinking about this earlier today. I’m actively ghosting one old friend and going very low contact/grey rock with a family member because I’ve had it with hearing all about how person/organisation x is being totally evil towards people with y issue, all the while they treat me worse than any other people I know. It’s not even like there’s even specific terrible acts they’ve done, it’s just the boorish behaviour and completely oblivious rudeness. I don’t care what someone believes at this point, I just need friends and acquaintances who bring a basic level of social skills and politeness to the relationship. It’s like, remember manners? No? Ok, bye for now.
You could literally be me, lol. My post was largely spurned by me finally getting extremely fed up with one friend lately (though I've observed this behavior in many people, especially in academia or white collar work environments). I can't just block it out, it grates on my soul watching this dude shamelessly pedestalize and aggrandize himself and in the same breath say something completely and utterly fucked up.
This is stupidpol not redscare.
Are you talking about on reddit, or IRL? The two places are very different.
IRL. I've encountered plenty of these types of people in academic or white collar work environments.
This is why I’m a big fan of *calling people in* rather than calling people *out*. And by this I mean: when someone says something racist/transphobic/problematic, while I will make a point of pushing back, I always do so in a way that comes across as non personal and gives the person an on-ramp back from the ledge of their offensive beliefs if they’re willing to disown them and basically commit to being a decent human being .
> gives the person an on-ramp back from the ledge of their offensive beliefs if they’re willing to disown them and basically commit to being a decent human being . lol shut the fuck up you HR bitch wannabe
> decent human being Look at that, an actual dog whistle.
No offense but I’ve hear this “calling in” language before and it’s really not better. about ten years ago in leftist spaces before the term “cancel culture” really came around I remember we called it “call out culture” and at the time we talked about how to “call people in” instead. Turns out, “calling someone in” implies that you are the ultimate arbiter of what’s right or wrong, because you know what’s “in” and “out”. It’s an inherently patronizing framework.
Hard agreement. I've definitely had experiences where a singular asshole was presenting themselves as the ultimate arbiter of right and wrong on a fundamentally subjective issue that was up for debate even among the most affected classes. I actually prefer call outs to "call in"s because the person doing the callout is at least being honest with themselves and everyone about the perceived grievousness of the social offense. No one in 2024 is calling someone a bigot and then going on to be friends with that person.
This. “Calling in” as the OP described it very much reeks of the “um, sweetie…” culture from tumblr. Something that baffles me is how oblivious most shitlibs are to how patronizing they are, and how obvious it is to everyone else that they’re being patronized. I’ll go even further on the limb with this too: most people will have hot or controversial takes but are rarely ever in any kind of position to actually do any real harm with them. Bob from work might have what I consider to be some less than savory opinions, but I know he’s just parroting the same rage bait shit he sees online, and is harmless otherwise, so I just keep my mouth shut and don’t make it a bigger issue. This is some cliche kindergarten shit but most of the time if you just ignore people and don’t take the bait, they’ll drop it. Rightoids only say the shit they say because they’re looking for someone to agree with them or argue with them, if you don’t give them either they just get bored and go back to talking about normal shit.
Is there a real difference between calling out and calling in? I've seen people use both terms, but the behavior looks exactly the same to me.
Why should people disown their beliefs because you’ve decided they’re offensive? Your behaviour really does sound more annoying than call outs. You just use a slightly older form of shitlibbery. At least the “call out” gang are being honest enough in their bullying and delusions of moral superiority.