Brontoforumus

Mongrel wrote:

I never imagined phrenology would have economic applications. Or that anyone would imagine it did.

Like Incels, NFTs is probably cheating, but

I had muted NFTs on Twitter, but I actually removed that mute after I started following the @CoinersTakingLs account to document their follies

Related:

Wait, those guys aren't liberals?

I can't even parse what any of those people are talking about or what their points are. Or who they're replying to.

Actually, you know what? Someone please break it down. And I mean all the way down. Translate what they're saying into plaintext that doesn't have any sarcasm or "read between the lines" or subtlety, and then also denote what the replies are replying to, exactly.

I want to see if it's me, or the format that makes this kind of communication absolutely inscrutable.

The key point will be when after someone translates it as I asked, to see if anyone says "no, that's not at all what those people said/meant" and then does another translation, which itself is also objected to by someone else who has their own interpretation.

I'm fully willing to admit it may be entirely on my end, but I am genuinely curious.

I mean, Brentai's "Wait, those guys aren't liberals?" makes zero sense to me as a reply because I literally cannot understand anything those people were saying or meaning.

And yes, this is a problem I have all the goddamn time with modern twitter style posts.

Friday wrote:Actually, you know what? Someone please break it down. And I mean all the way down. Translate what they're saying into plaintext that doesn't have any sarcasm or "read between the lines" or subtlety, and then also denote what the replies are replying to, exactly.

I want to see if it's me, or the format that makes this kind of communication absolutely inscrutable.

The key point will be when after someone translates it as I asked, to see if anyone says "no, that's not at all what those people said/meant" and then does another translation, which itself is also objected to by someone else who has their own interpretation.

I'm fully willing to admit it may be entirely on my end, but I am genuinely curious.

I mean, Brentai's "Wait, those guys aren't liberals?" makes zero sense to me as a reply because I literally cannot understand anything those people were saying or meaning.

And yes, this is a problem I have all the goddamn time with modern twitter style posts.

They're Nazis.

"Friends is still popular because no one makes shows with an all-white cast anymore. [Aren't I clever?]"
"Three of them are Jews. [and Jews aren't white, duh]"
"Way to scare off the normal people, asshole [how are we gonna convert non-nazis if you go straight for the 'Jews aren't people' first thing?]"
And then the last line is just some typical USDA AAA choice prime total lack-of-self-awareness.

I read it the same way Mongrel did, and interpreted Brentai's comment to mean that liberals are white supremacists too, but they're just more in denial about it.

Are these internet famous screen names or just random nazi chatroom schlubs?

For context, the first poster's pinned profile Tweet is concerned about America becoming majority non-white, which he believes will turn it into a third-world country. His tweets are anti-mask, pro-Rittenhouse, and he describes the protagonist of Falling Down (the movie about an ordinary man who goes on a violent rampage) as his spirit animal. You don't necessarily need to be a white supremacist to argue that Friends' lack of diversity makes the show more popular due to pervasive racism among white Americans, but the first poster is very much on the side of the white supremacists here.

The second poster, who argues that Jewish people aren't white, recently retweeted posts about white genocide, news stories about black people committing violent crimes, and anti-vaccine propaganda, including a claim that COVID mandates are "To keep White people distracted while their country is stolen from them". He also retweeted the first guy's post.

The third poster appears to be right-wing (complains about people being called "Nazi", criticizes transgender hormone therapy as harmful, has an old 4chan meme as their title image), but is not so blatantly white supremacist on their Twitter account as the other two. He appears to be aware of how poor the optics are on blatant anti-Semitism due to its association with Naziism, whereas casual belief in the superiority of white people is much more palatable to white Americans.

I don't know if the fourth post is criticizing #2 in agreement with #3, or criticizing #3 for criticizing fellow white supremacist #2, or criticizing #3 thinking he's criticizing #1.

tl;dr

Post 1: "White America is racist, duh." (the guy who posted this turns out to be a white supremacist)
Post 2: "I agree, also Jewish people are not white."
Post 3: "Bro you aren't supposed to say the quiet part loud"
Post 4: "What the hell dude"

mharr wrote:Are these internet famous screen names or just random nazi chatroom schlubs?

Look like schlubs to me.

I mean, they're nazis. Even if they're famous they're probably still piece of shit nazi chatroom schlubs as well.

Caithness wrote:I read it the same way Mongrel did, and interpreted Brentai's comment to mean that liberals are white supremacists too, but they're just more in denial about it.

No, I was joking about the general Dogwhistle -> Performative Extremism -> Oh no we're scaring off the Normies/Centrists -> Team Blaming exchange. That's behavior I generally associate with the disorganized Left.

(Mainly because the third guy is a relative rarity on the Right and it's a wonder he hasn't been declared a RINO and browbeaten into either silence or full-throated conformity yet. Giving a shit about your optics is specifically what the modern Right is trying to avoid having to ever do.)

I think that might've been confusing because half the boards use 'liberal' as a pejorative now.

What?

Oh well Liberal and Centrist are synonyms to me now, so that would explain why I didn't get your meaning

What?

What the fuck are you then, an attack helicopter?

Brentai wrote:What?

I... you haven't observed this?

Liberal/Centrist have become bywords among the American left for people who pay lip service to leftist goals while doing nothing to enact them, or actively fighting them. Neoliberals.

I mean, missing this might seem incidental, but people here have been spitting when uttering the word for years now, so I'm at least a little surprised you hadn't noticed that shift?

Of course they have. Liberals blame all their problems on Liberals, as per the exact flow of conversation I laid out.

But I still haven't gotten an answer as to what else anybody identifies as.