conservatives (who are actually liberals)
Wow, they finally realized it.
No, it's a conservative wiping the scales from their eyes (albeit momentarily) and realizing liberals and conservatives are just two sides of the capitalism party, which is liberalism.
I don't think they realized that at all, even momentarily. They're just calling themself the one true conservative for not seeing the Barbie movie lol.
Guy posting on raebxeh.com: This place is full of libs, I'm the only real rightist on this site.
In that case I salute them! Truly they are atlas holding up the conservative movement by their sacrifice
I don't know if they got that far but they might be in the process of realizing their friends are conservative libs and they're more like a fascist. But they just see it as being "conservative"
We had basically won the culture war but dropped Oppenheimer and Barbie on them anyway
I say we take off and Barbie the entire site from orbit. it's the only way to be sure.
Historical events are designed, by the woke left, to make Americans feel bad about their country.
Historical events
Nolan conveniently omitted a lot of the scientific contributions of the sad booba waifu that makes the Great Man feel like a god while fucking her, so there was some creative license taken that
gaters should actually appreciate for being in their favor if they weren't ignorant.EDIT: And the movie also omits a lot of other women involved with the project, because Nolan.
https://www.pitt.edu/pittwire/features-articles/oppenheimer-female-physicist-representation-film
https://www.businessinsider.com/women-manhattan-project-christopher-nolan-oppenheimer-completely-ignored-2023-7?op=1
how do you expect anyone to connect "booba waifu" to Katherine Oppenheimer
By seeing the booba waifu in the movie, or the "having sexy sex gives me godlike hallucinations" Nolanesque embellishments.
Treat criticism is an elaborate conspiracy from BMF. There is no other explanation for why anyone would criticize St. Nolan's auteur V I S I O N.
So to summarize, as usual you really don't like my posting and especially don't like when I criticize something.
That's nothing new, is wandering further and further off topic, and most importantly, it's wasting your time because I'm not going to stop posting no matter how petty and personal you make your issues with me.
"Idk dude," the way women's stories and contributions to the Manhattan Project were minimized in favor of Nolan's lowkey misogynistic priorities was weird enough for me to describe it that way.
EDIT: This song and dance you're doing right now is nothing new to me. It's wandering further and further off topic and it can be summarized with "I don't like your posts, especially when you criticize my treats."
If that's all you have left to say and you're just going to keep doing that here, don't bother.
As usual the "I'm not actually a fan of (thing) buuuuuuuuuuuuut" preface for being really petty and wandering further and further off topic to be mad at me.
Just stop. You're going nowhere.
What do you think my actually disagreement is
By your own claims you had nothing to contribute here because supposedly you didn't have any interest in talking about the movie except to express over and over again some "AH HA!" flaw you perceived in what I posted about it.
Since you're not letting that go, I'll just call out your ongoing petty grudge with me for what it is: an ongoing petty grudge.
It's tiresome. Stop it.
You have ongoing petty grudges with like half the website.
No. I just take issue with your habitual reactively rage post at me, along with a few other people with the same habit.
You're either lying/exaggerating or you've convinced yourself of something quite false all because of whatever treat inspired your ongoing "not a fan of (treat) but here I am again to be mad at you" posting at me for months now.
EDIT: I don't follow your posts around to rage at you. That's the difference here. You come to me, just like a handful of other people of similar and, at this point, predictable "I'm totally not a fan of X but I'm here to be mad at you for criticizing X" grudge posting habits.
I'm not obligated to do shit
How mature of you. At the very least you can try not to abuse the disengagement rules in a last word game.
Even his "conservative friends" are clearly put off by his culture war bullshit lol. They just want to be normal and watch normal movies.
In retrospect the line "conservatism is the new punk rock" was incredibly funny coming from the guys who got into conservative politics through children's toys.
I lean right. I have no clue how Barbie was woke.
It's a depiction of reverse-patriarchy as critique of patriarchy in our existing society. The Barbies hold the social status of men in our existing society, while the Kens occupy the social status of women.
I mean yes, Ken has always been an accessory to Barbie. But failing to understand how this was platformed in the movie as a centrepoint of the feminist critique it makes is just willful stupidity on your or anyone else's part. It's a dumbass "the curtains are blue" kind of take intended to terminate all deeper thought that might result in anybody learning anything or demonstrating growth as a person.
Charitably to our new fediverse friends, I'd be willing to believe that it's not willful, just that liberal ideology makes the characteristics of a product seem more center stage than feminist politics
mods you can't remove every random rightoid that wanders in here - where are we going to get food to play with
(For real, it's because right/left is not the issue. Extremes are)
You say on the socialist instance like a dumbass lmao.
I'll give you that.
After reading it over and over, I really should have worded it differently. I just wanted to address the idea of equating leaning right and some extreme moron on the right. Just for that person I was replying to though.
The issue is "extremes" (plural).
What do we on the furthest left want? We want a different economic system, bringing true equity to all people. We believe that no matter what happens we will be forced into violence to achieve this because under absolutely no circumstances will the ruling class give up their power willingly, they will kill us all to stop it, forcing the inevitable violent clash to occur as we've seen several times now.
What do those on the furthest right want? The 14 words and a hierarchical patriarchal hell that enslaves everyone outside of straight white males to the benefit of them, and even among them it will be the ruling group only rather than all.
Liberals on the other hand want to maintain the status quo, despite knowing that it is going to destroy the entire planet, and despite knowing that outside of the imperial core life is a living hell under capitalism, where 70% of the world's population is exploited for the benefit of the cluster of privileged predominantly white global-north countries, typically euphemised in the media as the "international community".
Socialists are the least extreme of these 3.
Leaning right in 2023 is, in fact, an extremely moronic position.
I’m a lemmygrad user it’s a pain to have to go to hexbear, type up point to look through them all, then copy paste back to the other tab
Unless thats something hexbear devs are working on, I think it’s pretty much done, I don’t think it’s on the list for dess or nutomic
Absolutely crying that i am exposed to this kind of posting on hexbear
define "extremes"
edit: awwww this one too I wanted to bat them around for a while
What do you think of fact that the political center is different at different times and places? Are all of those respective centers correct, is it merely a matter of coincidence that our current center is the Truth, or is this golden mean thinking a load of horseshit?
I did attempt to explain in another post, but I'll also reply here.
I'm not saying the center is the ideal. I'm not saying people at the edges of the political compass are "extreme". Being in the center would be like trying to serve the same plate to two different patrons at a restaurant. I personally think you should pick a side and stand up for your ideals.
However, issues that arise should be resolved with critical thinking in mind. Bad faith arguments in an attempt to hold your position is extreme. Ignoring evidence supporting other conclusions is extreme.
That kinda shit, you know?
I think the words that more accurately make your point are "dishonest" or "cynical "
That's much better than the way I put it. Kinda feel like a fucking dumbass
good self crit, stick around and dunk on the libs that come after you
Can't do the grade school level difficulty job of defining your terms huh
I view extremes, in the context of political leanings, as being positions that do not allow for new or competing information. Holding on to a position at any cost, despite evidence of the contrary.
I can "define my terms" for you, but would that really change anything?
I just thought it was a bit funny to see so many replies to such a one-off and throwaway comment.
I do want to know though... is it that everyone thinks I'm a troll? I'm not familiar with this particular instance overall, but I'm not a stranger to general socialist content. I figured it would be understood that "extremes" would refer to political ideology that involves sticking with a party at any cost, without ever thinking critically about the ideology and their positions.
I hope this clears it up for you.
I can "define my terms" for you, but would that really change anything?
why are fascists so unwilling to just define their terms? do you know your terms are explicitly fascist, or have you just never examined the terms some youtubers or whatever handed to you?
What in the fuck are you on about lol
I defined the term, and asked if it mattered to you.
You never answered that question either.
"positions that do not allow for competing information" is just hand-waving, you didn't define shit and you know it
I won't answer any questions until you answer my simple one. I'm a communist, I'm not afraid to define what I believe in because it's not horrible, disgusting shit. Fascists have trouble with this because they know their beliefs are repugnant, irrational trash.
I totally understand what you're saying, and why you want me to define the terms. I really should have worded it differently.
My point was just that someone who has a more right leaning opinion is not the same as the cretin in the OP.
Again, after spending a lot of time re-reading my comment, I just feel like an idiot for not being specific.
My point was just that someone who has a more right leaning opinion is not the same as the cretin in the OP.
So what? A conservative is not the same as a fascist? What real fucking difference does that separation make? Both are cretins with abhorrent views at the end of the day. Are you a conservative?
No, I'm not.
Having a lean on a particular opinion at an individual level doesn't mean shit. That's nuance for you.
The comment I replied to implied they felt bad for having any right leaning opinion at all simply because of other people with right leaning opinions being more extreme. I merely said it didn't make them the same. Maybe the person will reconsider their positions after seeing the true nature of the conservative party. Maybe they have been blind to it.
I don't really know. It was just a one-off comment.
Saying that someone with "right leaning opinions" and an outright ideologically committed fascist are "not the same" is a redundant comment due to both categorically being different positions in the sphere of right wing thought. Both positions are delusional, and the former should be at least slightly embarrassed for choosing to occupy the same ignorant, anti-human ideological tendency as the latter in any capacity, especially in the context of this post. There is absolutely no nuance, when a person actively recognizes that they "lean" rightwards ideologically on any issue, other than the nuance of their individual opinions inevitably changing as time progresses.
You aren't on
anymore, and running any form of asinine one-off apologetics for right wing positions will rightfully get you flamed. Your kind isn't welcome here.Fair enough.
For the record, I was scrolling my Lemmy feed and saw the OP. Was reading the comments and simply replied to it. I'm not here to run apologetics for right wing positions.
As I said in other comments, doing everything possible to stifle progress and maintain the status quo is the extreme position I'm referring to in my original reply. That has nothing to do with left/right. There are plenty of people all over the spectrum that refuse to allow humanity to move forward (or push to reverse progress). Anyone that is against moving us forward is fucking wrong.
If even after I clarify this you still think I'm some fucking piece of shit stormfront facist, then I'm sorry. Either you have dealt with so many trolls it's now expected from every new person, or you've made up your mind and it doesn't matter what I say anymore.
I don't think you are a fascist. All I know from the information provided so far is that you are a very lost redditor (look at the logo closely) who speaks with authority on subject matter he understands little about due to a lack of political education. That is always something quite annoying.
Like the implication that there is a (mythical) reasonable right wing ideological position in a thread where we're mocking some internet fascist for being an anti-human scumbag, is a wrong statement, unwelcome on this site, and functionally apologetics for the tendency at large. However, I believe that it was not your personal intention to do so.
That was also some interesting stuff about the fervent defense of the status quo being separate from ideology but idk man at the end of the day your heart seems to be in the right place, I admire your open mindedness and genuine acknowledgement of a bigger picture for humanity, thats what matters. If you have the time, I would implore you to check out the works of modern alternative thinkers like Noam Chomsky, Mark Fisher, Micheal Parenti, and David Graeber, as reading their works is an exploration of novel perspectives about the current situation and the ways in which our progress as a species is stifled by bad actors.
But be careful about what people tell you online though, you should never go to gen.lib.rus.ec and search for books to download using their extensive database because its illegal to violate intellectual property rights. People even use that site to circumvent paying for outrageously expensive college textbooks, very bad.
I appreciate the response. However, I never intended for my comment to come off with any authority. I'm just a random fucking netizen. I thought it might be a good opportunity to show someone that is experiencing that break in delusion that there is light on the other side. Not that their right leaning opinion was reasonable (it's not). Of course, it's possible I misread the situation and context. I really didn't notice where I was in terms of community. I'm happy I fell into this though, I immediately subscribed when I explored a little more.
Addressing the status quo thing, I don't mean to say the status quo is separate from ideology. Only that progress as a whole cannot happen when people want to maintain the status quo so badly that they are willing to throw away any and all morality. This is something that both sides of the political spectrum do (in terms of the US political left/right) as evidenced by democrat and republican voting records. Missed opportunities to move forward alongside bills straight up intended to be cruel to marginalized communities.
Anyway, thank you for continuing to reply. I for sure will steer clear of the linked resource, as the thought of breaking copyright laws makes me shake in my boots. I would never download or access copies of obscenely overpriced reading materials.
By your deffinition of not allowing new competing information, libs fit that definition even more eo than the cretin in the op. And you know? I agree thats the escence of being a reactionary someone who oposes progress.
And by that logic any backward class that oposes progres are extremists and should be removed by force if necesary.
I agree.
Yes. Regardless of political leaning, disregarding new or competing information on its face is bad. People should be more willing to accept that they can be wrong, or misinformed.
Progress is the goal, and we can't get there if we aren't willing to accept the errors we make and correct them.
thank you for coming to the dunk tank for us. it saves us the effort
You saying "say it louder for the people in the back" gives me everything i need to generalize you thanks
define "extremes"
edit: awwwww i wanted to play with this one
I agree extremes are bad. I lean right on some issues. I lean left on others. I’m just not into extreme views in general.
I want to know what issues they lean to the right on. Like, if it's guns, then they might just be ignorant, maybe.
I just wanted to surprise them with an extreme given the lack of awareness of where they are.
Even the wealthiest countries in the world have human beings sleeping in the streets, despite also having more than enough resources to guarantee housing for every single person. As far as the law is concerned, the only thing that matters is that these desperate people must not be allowed to break into empty abandoned houses for shelter, as this violates the infinitely more important private property rights of the homeowner to own an empty abandoned house.
"Centrism" is pretty extreme, it just doesn't feel that way because the horrors are so normalized
This is an excellent way to put it, and another great example of an extreme.
There are people, like in the OP, that hold delusional views on the right. That doesn't mean everyone is, which was my way of addressing the comment I was replying to.
Refusing to pick a side when there are clear reasons to not be on the right is fucking extreme. I should have included it in my reply, but it was meant to be a quick little one-off and not a deep discussion on extreme politics.
okay but why equivocate between the left and right? you're painting an equality between people who want to make the world a better place and people who want to be the boot stomping down on faces forever.
I should have been more clear on what I meant. Just that having slightly right leaning opinions is not the same as the OP's insanity.
I really didn't mean for it to come off that way, so I apologize.
in my experience, speaking as a trans person, someone with slightly right leaning opinions wants me and mine to not exist in public and deny that we even exist. that's a "centrist" position these days. so sorry for being touchy but I think salvaging people like that can only happen by the people close to them pushing them to be a better person. see my comment on civility, point 4, here.
2016: lmao leftists are such joyless scolds, everything is "problematic" to them
2023: the Barbie movie is woke
30 years ago these "left hates fun" dorks would have been telling everyone that pokemon is teaching kids witchcraft
- 2016: "We are nonpolitical and we just want to play good games."
2023: "Conservatives are not fascist enough!" 
You know they've lost the culture war when stuff like this starts popping up
Show
Leftists: Capitalism plunged my family into poverty and is a dark entity destroying the world for no real reason beyond the need to sustain itself
Chuds: Movie had woman
Chud: movie had woman and i complained about it online and all my peers called me a pathetic little man baby
I almost feel bad shitting on this person because you can tell they have a completely miserable life. But also link the post so I can go bully people in the comments.
https://www.reddit.com/r/KotakuInAction/comments/15km27r/weve_lost_the_culture_war/
Imagine if you will, a world where men cry in the corner for fear of the complete unraveling of civilization... All because two mid pop culture movies became popular...
You have entered the BudLite Zone.
Reenacting the Alamo where the heroic all female joint Barbie-Mexican army takes back a pillow fort from slavers
Imagine getting "black-pilled" over the "anti-american agenda" of the scientist equivalent of another shoot-and-cry movie.
It even had some right wing style omissions like turning a contributing scientist into sad booba waifu that causes le sex god power hallucination during sexy sex.
gaters should be more grateful to Nolan for that.An omission is something omitted, i.e. left out. That sounds like a revision. (Also obligatory jfc, that's like a Male Novelist Jokes entry)
Fine, fine. It still sucks and it's part of why I don't like Nolan movies.
EDIT: I called it an omission because her actual relevance to the story was omitted outside of
and Sad Nuke Boy Sad.Do you know the post I referenced? I think you would love it.
https://the-toast.net/2013/11/04/male-novelist-jokes/
There is some Reddit shit in the comments but also (from other users) some of the funniest writing I have ever read.
He straightened his tie. He had lost, but in a romantic way, which meant that he had won. “I’m going to do a pushup,” he announced to his tie. His tie respected him for it, and secretly wished that it could have sex with him
of course you have stupid, that was the point of the culture war. you wanted to feel like you were being oppressed so you chose to see the presence of other people as an act of aggression. there was never any winning for you.
Oppenheimer is anti-American and pro-communist
Wait fr? Should I go watch it?
anything short of “the nuke was awesome and should have been used in every war since and against the USSR and China” is communist propaganda to these ppl
Not really. It was a lot more intelligent about nuclear politics than I expected from a hollywood movie, but it hews closely to Oppenheimer's viewpoint, so first we're shown all the forces that impelled them to build the bomb, then we're hit with the sense of foreboding and regret after it's been built. There's an insightful line from the villain where he accuses Oppenheimer of wanting to have it both ways, wanting the accolades for winning the war and the moral absolution of opposing proliferation. I don't think the median American moviegoer would absorb its thesis as an anti-nuclear one (and the Barbenheimer meme is probably a good indication of that). I'd still say go see it if the subject interests you.
It's pretty neutral on communism, which is probably for the best given that it doesn't understand it at all. Its one attempt to dip a pinky into theory has them quibbling over the translation into English of 'property is theft' from Kapital, which is extremely not where that line comes from and Marx disagreed with it.
Labour organizing and attending CPUSA meetings are shown as broadly good things, but ones which Oppie needs to set aside for the greater good (since they need him to have the best chance of beating the Nazis to the bomb, and the FBI won't give him a security clearance to join Manhattan if he keeps that stuff up). The USSR is even more off-screen than Japan.
IDK American leftists squabbling about theory they clearly haven’t actually read sounds pretty on point to me.
I liked it and would recommend it, if youre into or want to get into nuclear politics. It is a really well made film even if it lasts a little long.
Most of the replies are assuming it's bait because the op doesn't use the right buzzwords.
What are they even talking about? They have done NOTHING BUT win culture wars ever since 2012. If you're all doom and gloom over Barbie, I hope someone forces you to watch Idiocracy where morons like you are even more viciously pointed out.
THE ENEMY IS BOTH TOO STRONG AND TOO WEAK
They have to always feel persecuted while also believing their enemies are pathetic and easily crushed.
Okay how the hell did you post a picture? I haven't figured that one out yet
Press the smiley face button and look at the full list, including Hexbear custom stuff.
Or, to get your own image, press the button just to the right of the smiley face if you have one on your drive.
Press the smiley face button and look at the full list
holy shit, this whole time I was just typing a colon and then trying to remember the names of each individual one. Is this a new feature from the update or have I been doing this wrong for the last three years?
Is this a new feature from the update or have I been doing this wrong for the last three years?
The latter.
I've known all along and refuse to do it. No I will not touch the smiley face and you can't make me
it's always been there, but now the list also allows you to search by tags/keywords not just the designated name of the emote which is neat. This does require the admins to actually tag the emotes tho, which I think is only partially done judging by my difficulty finding some lately
I was legitimately making this mistake and using the old emoji reference website to look the names up for two years
i can feel the pain of this post
I've been able to just paste an image into the reply box as well.
Hexbear developed an emote feature on their Lemmy fork years ago, and then converged back to Lemmy's mainline code in order to federate, so they have a selection menu that adds a little image. Anyone can add images with the picture feature (there's a button, or you can copy-paste and image), Hexbear just made a convenient list of hundreds of small images.
Show
You can also click the View Source button on a comment in the [more] options, if someone does something funky and you want to learn how they formatted it. Like
inline code.Hexbear has an emote feature, you can add images on any instance with ctrl+v in chat though. Not sure if you're on mobile.
Idiocracy is a fascist movie about how stupid poor people are having too many babies.
Culture war victories are always temporary - there's nothing to build off of, cus there hasn't actually been any accomplishments. You do a great big whinge, feel a fleeting moment of catharsis. Then, what the hell, see a movie. Yesterday was yesterday, today the kids want to see Barbie.
Idk man that movie felt like some lib shit. Sure, it's making fun of chuds, but there was so much winking to its lib audience ('you'd be one of the few looking up, right? Right? At least YOU are one of the smart ones' ) without ever exploring what lead to people not looking up, no systemic critique or analysis. A typical lib circlejerk about how they're better than anyone else.
Idiocracy does the same. Although it sure is funny at times, it's premise comes pretty close to eugenics if you ask me.
it's premise comes pretty close to eugenics if you ask me.
Its premise IS eugenics. Not enough of the right people are breeding is pretty damn explicit.
it's premise comes pretty close to eugenics if you ask me
its premise is literally eugenics
I'd argue that the systemic critiques of Don't Look Up include folks simply listening to who they want to without regard to facts, the snowball effect that social media has when it comes to misinformation, and the gap of perception and reality are exploited for someone's gain (even if it's a detriment to everyone).
The premise of idiocracy is literally "what if everyone in there future were idiots and there's one average person from the past added to the mix?" and how they got there is the opposite of eugenics.
how they got there is the opposite of eugenics
lol. lmao even
I think a lot of chuds thought thngs would change when Trump got in.
