The Political Satire/Meme Thread

[Sander 001]

 

[ScottPuss20]

Reaching into legal briefs and whipping out subpoenas is genius.

It gave me a good laugh

 

[VolkswagenX]

Fake fact checks. This is pretty low, even for them.

You red that and saw it as an attempt to fool anyone?

 

[McLaren]

You red that and saw it as an attempt to fool anyone?

Did you not read Famine's link that details multiple examples? Because that's exactly why someone created that image you shared, to cast doubt on Snopes & other fact-checkers.

 

[Liquid]

Don't let pesky facts get in the way of the truth.

 

[VolkswagenX]

Did you not read Famine's link that details multiple examples? Because that's exactly why someone created that image you shared, to cast doubt on Snopes & other fact-checkers.

I did, but this red like an obvious fake and a joke. It's why I posted it here and not in the election thread...

 

[McLaren]

I did, but this red like an obvious fake and a joke. It's why I posted it here and not in the election thread...

I believe you. But, we know a lot of people instantly believe things easily falsified/manipulated.

 

[UKMikey]

You red that and saw it as an attempt to fool anyone?

I "red" @Famine's article about "red-pilling the normies". So yeah, I saw what 4chan were doing as an attempt to fool boomers. That's why I replied to his post and not yours.

Perhaps you should be asking him why he posted the article in response to your post.

 

[Rage Racer]

 

[Joey D]

Do you know who's to blame for this? Carole 🤬 Baskin!

 

[Adamgp]

 

[Famine]

I "red" @Famine's article about "red-pilling the normies". So yeah, I saw what 4chan were doing as an attempt to fool boomers. That's why I replied to his post and not yours.

Perhaps you should be asking him why he posted the article in response to your post.

The thing is, from my limited reading on - and massive eye-rolling at - the concept of Red Pillers, I don't see how this fits into their perception of themselves.

Red Pillers appear to believe that they are the only people who perceive the world as it is. It's that whole red pill/blue pill thing from The Matrix; they took the red pill, so their eyes are open to reality, but everyone else (and usually that means anyone with socially liberal values, or the "woke") is still living in the fake world as created by the machines (uhhh... possibly the "Deep State" in that analogy).

Creating fake Snopes articles, referencing an intensely far fetched story, in order to fool people doesn't appear to be "Red Pill" behaviour; it's fakery, not reality (or their interpretation of reality).

 

[McLaren]

The thing is, from my limited reading on - and massive eye-rolling at - the concept of Red Pillers, I don't see how this fits into their perception of themselves

You're not supposed to b/c you're a rational person who doesn't conform to a hive mind mentality based in hypocrisy to push their beliefs.

 

[Joey D]

 

[Danoff]

Right, let's make sure we don't defend any people who happen to have high net worth. Exactly how much money does someone have to make before it is not ok to defend them?

 

[Liquid]

It's not how rich someone is that matters, it's what you're defending them against.

 

[JKgo]

Right, let's make sure we don't defend any people who happen to have high net worth. Exactly how much money does someone have to make before it is not ok to defend them?

Let me take a shot with this one. How about those individuals with... say, enough wealth to hire good PR people or a very robust team of lawyers? Or even both?

 

[TexRex]

It's crazy that most of those seem like actual Qanon theories. It's crazier that some of those are more cogent than actual Qanon theories.

"Bronze goblin."

Also, as much as I'm loath to agree with Biden...penguin meat is best meat.

Don't let pesky facts get in the way of the truth.

*five-year-old boy gets shot in head by black man*

*right-wing message board post that claims five-year-old boy was instead lynched by black man is shown*

"WhAt ArE yOu SaYiNg? A 5 yEaR oLd BoY wAs MuRdErEd."

The thing is, from my limited reading on - and massive eye-rolling at - the concept of Red Pillers, I don't see how this fits into their perception of themselves.

Red Pillers appear to believe that they are the only people who perceive the world as it is. It's that whole red pill/blue pill thing from The Matrix; they took the red pill, so their eyes are open to reality, but everyone else (and usually that means anyone with socially liberal values, or the "woke") is still living in the fake world as created by the machines (uhhh... possibly the "Deep State" in that analogy).

Creating fake Snopes articles, referencing an intensely far fetched story, in order to fool people doesn't appear to be "Red Pill" behaviour; it's fakery, not reality (or their interpretation of reality).

I like RationalWiki's take (it's RationalWiki, so language warning) on it:

Taking the red pill is synonymous with converting to alt-right views. A red pill is something — news, text, or meme — that justifies alt-right views. A red-piller is someone who has converted to alt-right views or someone who converts others to alt-right views. Red-pilling or dropping red pills is the act of recruiting people to the alt-right cause. Someone who has taken the red pill is based. Someone who has not taken the red pill is bluepilled or cucked. A hard red pill is an argument that they think is really convincing.

The term is a reference to The Matrix, in which taking the red pill means learning the truth about society to which most others remain happily oblivious, while taking the blue pill means remaining part of the sheeple and believing that nothing is wrong. Alt-righters use this terminology as a means of advocating for (ironically enough) a more traditional way of life; in most cases, this requires the belief that progressiveness and social equality are the oppressive status quo and that the authoritarian bigotry upheld by the alt-right is subversive and revolutionary. That way, you can act like a fascist and still feel like you're speaking truth to power.

For humor: the term references the pill provided by a black man in The Matrix, which enlightens one about the flaws in the system in a movie made by two transgender women, and is an allegory for the coming out process of transgender people, with the pill itself representing HRT medication. Or: alt-righters can't even watch The Matrix right.

 

[Danoff]

Let me take a shot with this one. How about those individuals with... say, enough wealth to hire good PR people or a very robust team of lawyers? Or even both?

It's not ok to defend people with PR specialists and lawyers?

 

[JKgo]

It's not ok to defend people with PR specialists and lawyers?

...My opinion? Since they don't require our defence attempts in the first place, the debate regarding it being ok or not is a bit pointless.

 

[Biggles]

Right, let's make sure we don't defend any people who happen to have high net worth. Exactly how much money does someone have to make before it is not ok to defend them?

Don't be that online weirdo Danoff. I think when people have billions, they don't need defending ... at least not in a (moderately) capitalist, democratic society. It remains a mystery to me why, with all the extremes of social & economic injustice in the world you would waste time worrying about billionaires.

 

[Danoff]

Don't be that online weirdo Danoff.

I'm not. I'm specifically poking at the logic of saying that when someone has money you should turn off your brain and accept all criticism.

I think when people have billions, they don't need defending

Nobody needs defending. But how much money they have shouldn't be a factor. Edit: Exactly how much money should someone have before they stop "needing" defending?

It remains a mystery to me why, with all the extremes of social & economic injustice in the world you would waste time worrying about billionaires.

"Worrying about" is not exactly what I'm talking about.

 

[Sander 001]

 

[Biggles]

I'm not. I'm specifically poking at the logic of saying that when someone has money you should turn off your brain and accept all criticism.



Nobody needs defending. But how much money they have shouldn't be a factor. Edit: Exactly how much money should someone have before they stop "needing" defending?



"Worrying about" is not exactly what I'm talking about.

It seems like a throw back to your youthful infatuation with Ayn Rand. I already pointed out that the modern billionaire behemoths, people like Bill Gates, Jeff Bezos, Mark Zuckerberg & Elon Musk are the prefect embodiment of Rand's imaginary heroes. Not only are they fantastically wealthy, they wield an enormous amount of power & influence as a result. I have no idea why you think they need defending at all.

 

[Famine]

It seems like a throw back to your youthful infatuation with Ayn Rand. I already pointed out that the modern billionaire behemoths, people like Bill Gates, Jeff Bezos, Mark Zuckerberg & Elon Musk are the prefect embodiment of Rand's imaginary heroes. Not only are they fantastically wealthy, they wield an enormous amount of power & influence as a result. I have no idea why you think they need defending at all.

They'd need defending from invalid (or spurious) attacks or criticism. Do you not believe that a society should treat all those within it equally? Surely that would include the very (very, very) wealthy, along with the poor?


Warren Buffett is among those "modern billionaire behemoths" - and has increased his own personal fortune by roughly a third this year. I often see him lionised by those who would, in the same breath, condemn Bezos.

 

[GranTurNismo]

 

[Chrunch Houston]

 

[McLaren]

It seems like a throw back to your youthful infatuation with Ayn Rand. I already pointed out that the modern billionaire behemoths, people like Bill Gates, Jeff Bezos, Mark Zuckerberg & Elon Musk are the prefect embodiment of Rand's imaginary heroes. Not only are they fantastically wealthy, they wield an enormous amount of power & influence as a result. I have no idea why you think they need defending at all.

I think Gates is someone everyone should speak up for given the events of this year and the religious extremists concocting this asinine idea he’s the anti-Christ. The man has donated huge sums of wealth in the name of bettering the human race.

 

[Joey D]

 

[Biggles]

They'd need defending from invalid (or spurious) attacks or criticism. Do you not believe that a society should treat all those within it equally? Surely that would include the very (very, very) wealthy, along with the poor?


Warren Buffett is among those "modern billionaire behemoths" - and has increased his own personal fortune by roughly a third this year. I often see him lionised by those who would, in the same breath, condemn Bezos.

Buffet is from a different generation from the four I mentioned & made his fortune in a very different way. I don't attack any of them, but don't see that they need defending either. They're going to be alright.