-32
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 22 May 2024
-32 points (23.3% liked)
Conservative
385 readers
60 users here now
A place to discuss pro-conservative stuff
-
Be excellent to each other. Civility, No Racism, No Bigotry, No Slurs, No calls to violences, No namecalling, All that good stuff, follow lemm.ee's rules, follow the rules of your instance, etc.
-
We are a Pro-Conservative forum. Posts must have a clear pro-conservative, or anti left-wing bias. We are interested in promoting conservatism and discussing things that might get ignored elsewhere. All sources are acceptable, however reputable sources with a reputation for factual reporting are preferred.
-
Dissent is allowed in the comments, but try to be constructive; if you do not agree, then provide a reason which is backed up by references or a reasonable alternative interpretation of the provided facts. That means the left wing is welcome to state their opinions, but please keep it in good faith.
A polite request, not a rule, if you feel the need to report a comment, please don't reply to it.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
I'm not parroting shit. Like I said, I've been following Trump's shady dealings for 20 years. Clearly you haven't.
He's well-liked among two groups: the ultrarich because he makes them money with his schemes and the wannabe rich because they are willing to do anything to get ahead. He was never well-liked by other groups.
@glimse
> He’s well-liked among two groups: the ultrarich because he makes them money with his schemes and the wannabe rich because they are willing to do anything to get ahead. He was never well-liked by other groups.
Do you have a source for this?
A source for what exactly? Public opinion?
You don't have to @ me every time.
@glimse Yes. If it was public, you should be able to find, say three instances of that opinion being espoused.
Unless it was like a super secret public opinion that nobody said out loud?
@amerika @glimse Pretty sure that was pretty popular in #Russia, and served as the origins for the modern antisemitic conspiracy theories we see today.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Protocols_of_the_Elders_of_Zion
You're talking to a white supremicist.
Their site makes it clear.
That's the reason they're citing a racist conspiracy theory.
The mods won't ban him though, because that's the kind of user they wish to court.
@LookBehindYouNowAndThen I'm not sure if he's a supremacist, more likely a racial separatist/"race realist". Wouldn't be shocked if he's racist, but yeah #TheProtocolsOfTheEldersOfZion is quite the deep cut, and his alt-right views are probably the only way he even knows what that is (I only know what that is when I started researching the origins of the #Israel v. #Palestine conflict and it came up as I was skimming #Wikipedia)
I don't make excuses for white supremicists.
Guess you do.
How the fuck is a "racial separatist" not a racist?
Gotta love how this community puts the full depravity of conservatism on display for everyone.
@LookBehindYouNowAndThen
In any case, his alt right views don't exactly map to this conversation, so I'll allow it for now.
If lemmy.world wants to ban him, they probably can, but he's on annihilation.social, which is a different instance entirely.
The mods have the power to ban anyone.
Notably, they don't ban the guy who hosts a blog with articles titled things like Being White: The Gradual Epiphany of a True Believer and thinks the Protocols of the Elders of Zion is a true conspiracy.
I've been banned for some pretty stupid shit, but this guy is welcome. That should tell you everything you need to know about this community.
@LookBehindYouNowAndThen Report it to the mods. I'm on #Mastodon and I think he's on #Pleroma, so there's nothing I can do.
But I'm a freedom of speech homie so I wouldn't complain about it too much; if the speech offends you, you should be able to block or mute him yourself on your end.
I have reported them.
The mods only care about banning people who make conservatives face reality.
They're not going to ban this chode because they want him for a user.
@LookBehindYouNowAndThen I guess we'll see. It's very possible that it's a free speech community and they won't ban him, which is fine. He doesn't need to be banned.
@realcaseyrollins @glimse
Exactly.
@realcaseyrollins @glimse
As far as I can tell, Trump is popular among a range of social classes but also captured the college-educated conservative vote.
That's been the case ever since Milo's "Feminism is Cancer" tour.
Milo is one seriously vile man but his tour was brilliant and served as one of the main catalysts for blowing up the campus narrative about the left being tolerant and peaceful. Everyone else followed his lead. Shapiro, Kirk, Owens...All road Milo's coattails to fame. But really, it was all Steve Bannon. He produced that whole tour. Pure brilliance.
Also, Milo's probably an intel asset.
@amerika @glimse @realcaseyrollins
@truthbait @glimse @realcaseyrollins
Milo is hysterical but he did write one of my favorite editorials:
https://www.breitbart.com/europe/2015/04/20/tax-the-poor-the-moral-and-economic-case-for-regressive-taxation/
I can promise you he very likely didn't write a word of that, or anything else penned under his name at Breitbart. For that you probably want to thank Allum Bokhari.
https://www.breitbart.com/author/allum-bokhari/
@amerika @glimse @realcaseyrollins
@truthbait @glimse @realcaseyrollins
Quite possibly true; I have enjoyed Mr Bokhari's writings on other topics so that would fit.
Milo was a brilliant performer with only one real act. He became a reductive version of himself after the F.I.C. tour. As far as writing goes, he could best be described as a lazy dysfunctional drug addict and fame whore who crashed out owing numerous people outstanding debts, allegedly.
@amerika @glimse @realcaseyrollins
@amerika @glimse I would have loved to see him try to find one source corroborating his claim lol
@realcaseyrollins @glimse
I socialize with a lot of Leftists. At this point, Right and Left exist in different worlds.
Choice of media, choice of story of the day (the thing everyone talks about), vocabulary... it's all different.
So there are things that are not strictly "true" which are taken as fact because they are needed to keep up these political tribal identities.
It's odd and unnerving but I think only when the two sides are BOTH extremist do we get actual options.
@amerika@annihilatieon.social @glimse @realcaseyrollins
That's not how I see it. I used to be a leftist and I know for a fact that all their argumentation is based on ideologies, where an idea is more important than reality.
While Conservative ideas are based on experience and tradition rather than wishful thinking.
Also conservatives understand that if someone else is paying, they are not free.
I will never agree to any similarity between left and right. it's children's minds compared to grown ups.
@amerika @glimse
> I socialize with a lot of Leftists. At this point, Right and Left exist in different worlds.
You'd be surprised. #HorseshoeTheory is a thing, but I think there's also a sort of inverse #HorseshoeTheory where people on the left and right converge on what ordinarily would be centrism or liberalism, but is now considered right wing due to the shifting #OvertonWindow. #Destiny and #BillMaher are two really good examples of this.
@realcaseyrollins @glimse
I think that's probably accurate. JFK would be seen as an extreme Right-winger now!