You probably don’t need a masters degree to debunk this one.

Probably, despite the fact that Hitler himself said they weren't socialists.

Or who conveniently forget about the Southern Strategy and the great party switch. Massive, massive mental gymnastics to put themselves on the 'right' side of history every time

While I agree with both of you, these two points kinda contradict each other.

I thought it was "I did Nazi that coming"

/S

Fascism : a way of organizing a society in which a government ruled by a dictator controls the lives of the people and in which people are not allowed to disagree with the government.

I mean, that's what most people imagine, when they think fascist and I think it's good enough.

Is every fascist government identical? No. But as near as makes no difference they are all the same type of asshole.

The rest of your points stand, however. People do not understand communism, socialism, nor Marxism.

Anti-fizz

Behind the Bastards - RSS

• 20230711 - Part One: How The Dilbert Guy Lost His Mind - 1h32m
• 20230713 - Part Two: How The Dilbert Guy Lost His Mind - 1h46m

Really good episodes too

Yep, he's completely lost it and was dropped by pretty much every newspaper after describing black people as a "hate group" (among other crazy stuff).

Hah yeah... It also wasn't until this post that I made that connection. For the past few years I've heard of "the Dilbert Guy going off the deep end" and seen random posts (like this) with this Scott character being an absolute moron

mind blown meme

Be fair to Conservativism, Kevin Sorbo's (Hercules's) brain was already damaged by the time he fell into its warm dark embrace.

What’s this about Wheel of Fortune?

Jesus. Just had a moment of empathy. I don't think I have ever had a first date with someone (yes I am a het cis male) where violence was a real possibility. The very worse I worried about was some sorta scam. Be safe everyone.

It's more dangerous to put it in your profile than saying it to someone in person?

You can swear on the internet fyi

Maybe she didn't want to though

Why do they all hate windmills so much?

I had an old family friend meltdown, unfriend me from facebook, and avoid me like the plague ever since I told him he was wrong when he claimed it takes more electricity to make a single windmill than a windmill can ever produce in it's usuable lifetime...

They weren't quite like this but there was still shitty conservatives in much the same way... The extremists weren't the core yet though. They were absolutely still there and voting for Bush, they just weren't allowed to be the face of the party... Yet.

Respectfully disagree. Since Reagan the right has been completely fine with utter hypocrisy in the service of - well, ultimately nothing though for awhile they would say it was in the service of national security, or Christianity or something like that. Reagan republicans actively worked to fool the working class into giving them more and more power by lying, using "morning in America" commercials, and otherwise laying the groundwork for what became the fox news nation we now know and love so well.

The fact that otherwise good people who would help others and meant for everyone to get a fair chance etc. would steadfastly give their votes to them every election became more of a house of mirrors and lots of analysis as to how that could possibly be when their policies are so obviously cruel / stupid / nonexistent.

TL;DR - Propaganda works. "The average person" is criminally under-informed in many ways.

take economics; many traditional conservative positions square pretty well with economic theories and practices

Like trickle down theory, corporate personhood, that tax breaks will result in tax revenue, and that government austerity is preferable to stimulus to move an economy from recession to expansion? They're zero for four in the most popular 20th century conservative economic theories. I'm not sure that economics is the best lens to view conservative theory in a positive light.

"conservative" is starting to feel like a meaningless label that assholes throughout history have tried to use to describe themselves because they didn't like the other words people were using to describe them.

And don't get me wrong, I'm sure there are "real" conservatives out there and in history, but it sure feels like they are outnumbered by the people that use the word as a mask, and that is weird.

No true Scotsman much?

Summary? I'm technically at work right now, so pulling out the headphones I left at home anyways isn't quite an option.

Fantastic! Didn't know they did an episode on him, I'll definitely check it out. Thanks for the recommendation!

"Who is this four chan?"

They really can't. Anonymous was something that corporate media simply couldn't explain.

I'm so happy I stopped paying attention to mainstream media.

How will the masses be good lil subordinates once they realise they hold the true power?

I don't think that is so surprising. Scott Adams spent most of his career as a manager, not a developer. He probably prided himself in not being the ignorant manager, but at this point I have to question if he was just deluding himself.

Wow...I knew He was right wing but this here is already starting to sound psychotic.

Oh, I know this shit. It's like when Trump made a deal with Satan to convince Eve to eat the apple, because then Trump could try to date or just grab Eve when she got sent to Earth.

Since you've already volunteered yourself to venture into the den of awfulness formerly know as Twitter on our behalf; perhaps you could dig around to see if perhaps there's a recently trending, uh, txeet(?) That says something sensible using the same structure but different groups that this Scott idiot is attempting to parody?

Something like:

"I wonder if (some group this Scott guy would relate to?) know that (scumbag group who actually supported Hitler and the previously named group have recently shown support for) was allied with Hitler and helped him come to power..."

That's my most generous interpretation of what he's saying about someone critizing his original post just not understanding "what's going on here."

The beginnings of his exposure as being batshit crazy were there in Dilbert if you went back after he exposed himself. But the undeniable evidence that he's batshit crazy comes from his early books, long before he fell down into his "I'm a hypnotist so I know everything about persuasion" rabbit hole. He genuinely believed in affirmations as a hack code for the universe where writing down something and wishing for it hard enough will make the entire universe change to get it to you. His novels were so bad that he accomplished the impossible: he made me wish Ayn Rand had given him some writing tips. This is years before he fell down into the right wing grifter space he now occupies.

He was fucking crazy from his YOUTH. (Source: his own stories on his blog!)

This is a common problem. "I like this singer's music ... wait ... he said WHAT about black people!? But ... dude is BLACK!!!" "I like this painter's portraits. Wait, what did he do with children!?"

I presume that's pronounced "skeet"?

Tenet

But also like... In an entirely self-contained way the person who wrote the original post is crazy because they are claiming a group was part of events that ended decades before that group formed.

Yeah when stuff first came out I watched like half a dozen episodes of his coffee talks. I kept on trying to go with that hes joking or being sarcastic in some way but eventually its like nope. there is no way to spin this. biden turning into a werewolf. sort a joke or something. don't really get it. does not fit in as funny. come on bring this around to some sort of sarcasm. crap hes just lost it.

No. No it isn't. Scott is just a moron who happens to also be able to draw (badly) characters that corporate office drones relate to. He's absolutely trying to attack the current Anti-facist movement in the USA.

He was a very special boy who thought he was smarter than everyone else.

Now he's a dipshit racist alt-righter (redundant, I know) who thinks he's smarter than everyone else.

Siri, what does the words "main" and "allies" mean

The Soviets, as per the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact.

Fucking funny to say this in the "confidently incorrect" community. It is historical revisionism.

The soviets did absolutely everything they could to try and convince France and the UK to take action against Hitler but they were hoping Hitler would attack the USSR.

The ACTUAL historic timeline is like this:

1: The United States Bourgeoisie bankrolled the rise of fascism in Europe.

2: The bourgeois leaders of England, France, Poland, Finland and other Western European nations either ignored, enabled, or appeased Hitler's worst behavior in the buildup to WW2.

3: The bourgeois leaders of these countries, England in particular, pushed for disastrous bilateral security arrangements which created a domino effect leading to war, while ignoring the USSR's suggestion of collective, anti-fascist security arrangements.

4: The bourgeois leaders of these countries pursued a policy not of containing fascist aggression, but of diplomatically isolating the USSR, in the hopes that Hitler would go East and carry out an anti-communist genocide on their behalf.

5: The bourgeois leaders of these countries, having ignored or stalled collective security proposals from the USSR, actively made bilateral non-aggression pacts with Hitler before Molotov-Ribbentrop was signed, making the USSR the last in a long line of nations to sign non-aggression pacts with Hitler, after the USSR's collective security proposals fell through.

6: The USSR only signed Molotov-Ribbentrop to buy time. The USSR only invaded East Poland to prevent a German front from forming right at the Soviet border. This is because attempts to make mutual security arrangements with Poland fell through. The Soviets only moved into the region after the existing government had literally fled the country, leaving it ungoverned. 2 million jews in eastern poland were saved from the nazis by this action.

7: The USSR tried to purchase a strategic corridor of land from Finland that the nazis could easily use to invade the USSR. The USSR not only wanted to legally purchase this land from Finland, but to trade Finland more acres of land in exchange. i.e. an asymmetrical trade that would have ultimately benefited Finland. Finland refused because the fascist leadership of Finland wanted to see Germany invade the USSR through this strategic corridor. This led directly to the Winter War. The Finnish lost the winter war but used their intelligence that they gathered during it to collaborate with the nazis.

8: When the North Atlantic allies finally teamed up with USSR after their strategy of appeasing Hitler backfired, they immediately attempted to make asymmetrical security arrangements that would have obligated the USSR to commit far more troops and resources to the war than any other ally, essentially using the USSR as a shield against the very fascist powers they had spent the better part of a decade appeasing. The British in particular kept stalling on arrangements and pretending to be confused.

9: When the war was over the North Atlantic allies, led by the USA, who came out of the war richer than any other country on Earth, immediately committed to rehabilitating nazis, blaming the USSR, who was decimated by the war, for causing the war, and created NATO to begin encircling the USSR, 6 years before the creation of the Warsaw pact.

10: The North Atlantic allies immediately set to using the Marshall plan to rebuild the fascist German, Italian, and Japanese economies, indebting them to the United States, and orienting them towards anti-communist policy.

11: The North Atlantic allies to tried to use the Marshall plan as a proto-IMF to privatize and deregulate the economy of the war-torn USSR, and open it up to foreign capital. That the USSR rejected this was framed as aggression and used as a justification for beginning the cold war.

But hey, don't just take my word for it, or this rough outline of what is contained in well regarded books (I implore you to read some). How about we read Albert Einstein's words spoken at the time these events actually occurred?

A lot to unpack in this speech but the basics of what Einstein says are:

1. The USSR made all efforts to stop the war happening.

2. The western powers(UK, France, US, etc) shut the USSR out of European discussions and betrayed Czechoslovakia.

3. Molotov-Ribbentrop was an unhappy last resort that they were driven to, that the western powers were attempting to drive the nazis into attacking the USSR and that's why they would not help the USSR stop them.

4. The USSR supported everyone while the other powers (UK, France, US, etc) strengthened the nazis and Japanese.

The appointment of Hitler as Germany’s chancellor general, as well as the rising threat from Japan, led to important changes in Soviet foreign policy. Oriented toward Germany since the treaty of Locarno (1925) and the treaty of Special Relations with Berlin (1926), the Kremlin now moved in the opposite direction by trying to establish closer ties with France and Britain to isolate the growing Nazi threat. This policy became known as “collective security” and was associated with Maxim Litvinov, the Soviet foreign minister at the time. The pursuit of collective security lasted approximately as long as he held that position. Japan’s war with China took some pressure off of Russia by allowing it to focus its diplomatic efforts on relations with Europe.

I guess not, but I'm gonna stand by my suggestion of not using Twitter anymore regardless.

“One side wants a fascist autocratic regime and the other wants universal healthcare but has some moderate members backed by corporations. Both sides, am I right?”

In my mind, the Democrats don't go far enough to the Left (just look at the recent Railworker's strike), granted they are head and shoulders above anything the Republicans are doing and about the only choice we have at the polls anymore, but pretending like they're perfect is just as bad as pretending like there's no difference between Democrats and Republicans ("both sides").

Case in point the democrats are actively working to pass bills that they know their opposition is going to use against lgbt people.

If the democrats actually use any of their power to protect trans people federally from the ongoing attack in red states causing an internal refugee crisis then sure.

They're doing an ok job of protecting trans people in blue states though sure, but they are sitting on their laurels when it comes to trans people outside of the states they control and allowing a "states rights" mindset to trans discrimination to normalise.

Ah yes, the Middle Easterners getting bombed clearly have so much privilege over transgenders

It's because there's something cult-like about many Democrats as much as many Republicans. And yes, I do mean as much as as in equal amounts.

One of my most downvoted Lemmy comments was me saying I would never vote for the Dems again because the Dems aren't actually leftist

Bro I literally linked a PHd thesis

I guess what they say about learning something new everyday is true.

Eh now that I think about it, Hitler was one of the best Anti Fascist advocates whoever lived. I mean he did end his career by killing the Fuhrer of Nazi Germany....