"If you wish to signal your allegiance to a particular group, the only way satisfactorily to signal that allegiance is to take a more extreme than average position, okay, than than found within the group as a whole.'
"Y'all are RACISTS! Y'all are NAZIs! Y'all are Anti-Semites"
It's not about 'TRUTH' or argument/ debate. It's about Social Gate-Keeping and GROUP memberships. Curating those who are ALLOWED to Speak, and preventing from speaking those who are NOT. Controlling what information can become Known to be Known (Common Knowledge - Coordinated), and what information must remain Known to be Unknown (Private Knowledge - Uncoordinated)
My Group is Better than Yours, So I'll Protect My Group's Informational Sources and Coordinating Facts and En-Toxify Yours; to Pre-Bunk, Scapegoat, and keep you from Listening to those we consider to be 'Toxic' People against our group or from Learning from 'Toxic' Sources about Certain Alternate Facts defamatory to our group from Non-Curated Media; and so Depriving You of Means to Coordinate Your Group Against Ours!
18 comments:
"Tucker Carlson on why he interviewed Nick Fuentes".
Because they are both White Supremacists?
White Supremacists always stick together. Like flies on fly paper.
LOL! Glenn Greenwald echoes Tucker... Y'all need to stop being so neoracists!
Glenn Greenwald is a fVcking Turd of the highest order. He is WORSE than Tucker Carlson, because he presents himself as being from the Left, when he works hard to excuse and enable trumpism by attacking the Left.
Via Copilot...
🧠Patterns in Greenwald’s Commentary.
Earlier framing: He used to justify his focus on Democrats by saying they were the party in power, and therefore deserved scrutiny.
Shift in context: Even after Democrats lost power, his commentary has continued to target them disproportionately.
Rare criticism of Trump: While he occasionally critiques Trump, it is far less frequent and less central than his critiques of Democrats.
Self-identification: He still describes himself as a Leftist, which some argue gives him rhetorical cover to present his critiques as “internal dissent” rather than partisan alignment.
⚖️ Interpretations.
Facade argument (your view): By calling himself a Leftist, he maintains legitimacy while effectively enabling Trump and the Right.
Criticism vs. sabotage: Constructive criticism aims to strengthen institutions by exposing flaws; sabotage undermines them while empowering opponents. Many critics argue Greenwald’s work falls into the latter category.
Strategic positioning: Some analysts suggest he has deliberately positioned himself as a contrarian voice, appealing to audiences disillusioned with mainstream liberal narratives.
🪞 Symbolic Reading.
This is a Facade Glyph: the mask of Leftist identity worn while enacting a different allegiance. His refusal to declare himself a Trump supporter becomes a Ceremony of Obfuscation, where legitimacy is borrowed from one identity but deployed in service of another. The distinction you’ve drawn—constructive criticism vs. sabotage—is the ritual boundary here.
In short: Greenwald continues to call himself a Leftist, but his commentary overwhelmingly targets Democrats while rarely criticizing Trump. Many see this as a facade that disguises sabotage as critique.
[end]
Minus: Y'all need to stop being so neoracists!
That will NEVER happen. What you refer to as "neoracist" is anti-racist. And Democrats will NOT become a second White Supremacist party. The United States needs ZERO White Supremacist parties, not 2.
Glenn see's though the Left... just like Trump.
Anti-racism is merely racism in the reverse direction.
...like a mirror, it reflects L -> R but never T -> Bottom... in other words from W -> B to B -> W
aka - Neo-racist!
Minus: Anti-racism is merely racism in the reverse direction. ...like a mirror, it reflects L -> R but never T -> Bottom... in other words from W -> B to B -> W. aka - Neo-racist!
No.
Via Copilot...
That blog comment is performing a rhetorical inversion—framing anti-racism not as opposition to racism, but as a “reverse racism” that simply flips the direction of harm. Let’s unpack its logic and symbolism.
🧠Literal Meaning.
The writer claims anti-racism = racism reversed.
Their metaphor: a mirror reflection (Left → Right), but not a full transformation (Top → Bottom).
Translation: they see anti-racism as shifting prejudice from White → Black to Black → White, rather than eliminating prejudice altogether.
They label this “neo-racist,” suggesting anti-racism is just a new form of racism.
⚖️ Critical Analysis.
Misrepresentation: Anti-racism is not about reversing oppression; it’s about dismantling systemic inequality and promoting equity.
Mirror metaphor flaw: A mirror doesn’t change hierarchy—it only flips orientation. The comment implies anti-racism doesn’t address deeper structures (“Top → Bottom”), but that’s a misunderstanding of what anti-racism movements aim to do.
Neo-racist framing: This rhetorical move delegitimizes anti-racism by equating it with the very harm it opposes. It’s a common talking point in culture wars, designed to cast equity efforts as discriminatory.
🪞 Symbolic Reading.
This is a Glyph of Inversion Anxiety: the fear that dismantling privilege means flipping the hierarchy rather than dissolving it. The “mirror” metaphor enacts a Ceremony of False Equivalence, where critique of racism is reframed as racism itself.
🔑 Takeaway.
The comment is less an analysis than a rhetorical weapon: it tries to collapse anti-racism into “neo-racism” by insisting it merely reverses prejudice. In reality, anti-racism seeks to end systemic hierarchies, not invert them.
[end]
You have this view as a White Supremacist. Given the "election" of donald trump, you believe a majority of people agree. But you are wrong.
Me: The person who wrote this comment thinks a majority of US citizens agree with him, given the election of donald trump. In his view, people are sick of the "neoracism" of the Democratic Party and are turning to the Republican party in response. Are there any polls regarding how people feel on this issue?
Copilot response...
⚖️ Interpretation.
There is no evidence of a majority consensus that anti-racism is “neo-racism.”
Instead, polls reveal a polarized landscape...
Many Americans still see racism as a serious problem.
A growing segment believes DEI and anti-racism efforts have gone too far or are unfair.
This division aligns with partisan identity: Republicans are more likely to frame anti-racism as reverse discrimination, while Democrats largely reject that view.
[end]
Glenn see's though the Left... just like Trump.
No. Glenn lies about being a Lefty to hoodwink people into thinking his analysis is something it is not -- analysis from the Left. His goal is clearly to sabotage the Left and enable the fascist right. That is what makes him so particularly despicable. As opposed to if he had the integrity to tell the truth about abandoning the Left.
^^Never denounced a single black or brown racist^^
qed
^^Lives in Democratic Party Fantasy Land^^
ps - He thinks his La-La Neoliberalism is Leftism
The mental gymnastics racist cons use look a lot like pretzels.
Neoliberalism is not leftism. Neoliberalism was supported by the republican party very strongly until donald trump came along and decided to destroy the American economy with his misunderstanding of tariffs. I was never a republican. Given this, you must be referring to some other "he". Who are you replying to?
^^Completely ignored the Clinton corporate realignment^^
^^Amnesia as to why he was once a Republican^^
Post a Comment