Home | Community | Message Board

Kratom Eye
This site includes paid links. Please support our sponsors.


Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Shop: MagicBag.co Certified Organic All-In-One Grow Bags, Contam-Resistant All-In-One Grow Bags   Original Sensible Seeds Autoflowering Cannabis Seeds, Bulk Cannabis Seeds   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order

Jump to first unread post Pages: < First | | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 | 32 | 33 | 34 | 35 | 36 | 37 | 38 | 39 | 40 | 41 | 42 | 43 | | Last >
Re: Humans of the Alt-Left: A Compendium [Re: Morel Guy]
    #25585814 -

Morel Guy said:
Trump is on recorded for a lot of really stupid shit.

Dumbest leader for a long time and likely us history for a really dumb prez.




I don't think he's stupid. I think he just understands stupid people and how they think.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Humans of the Alt-Left: A Compendium [Re: Baby_Hitler]
    #25586108 -

the money in political campaigns pisses me off enough w/out there being campaign finance fraud, too (alleged).

if beto's people are guilty of violations then f them.  fraud sucks no matter what/when/who.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Humans of the Alt-Left: A Compendium [Re: relic]
    #25589183 -

Steve Bannon vs David Frum- Munk Debate: The Rise of Populism


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Humans of the Alt-Left: A Compendium [Re: qman]
    #25589401 -

Steve Bannon and David Frum. Which one represents the "alt-left" to you?


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Humans of the Alt-Left: A Compendium [Re: shivas.wisdom]
    #25589446 -

shivas.wisdom said:
Steve Bannon and David Frum. Which one represents the "alt-left" to you?



Frum

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Humans of the Alt-Left: A Compendium [Re: qman] * 2
    #25589475 -

Why do you consider him to be 'alt-left'?

In his own words,

Quote:
"I'm a conservative Republican, have been all my adult life. I volunteered for the Reagan campaign in 1980. I've attended every Republican convention since 1988. I was president of the Federalist Society chapter at my law school, worked on the editorial page of The Wall Street Journal and wrote speeches for President Bush—not the 'Read My Lips' Bush, the 'Axis of Evil' Bush. I served on the Giuliani campaign in 2008 and voted for John McCain in November. I supported the Iraq War and (although I feel kind of silly about it in retrospect) the impeachment of Bill Clinton. I could go on, but you get the idea."




--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Humans of the Alt-Left: A Compendium [Re: qman] * 2
    #25589610 -

qman said:
shivas.wisdom said:
Steve Bannon and David Frum. Which one represents the "alt-left" to you?



Frum



Lmao wow

Instant qman classic


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Humans of the Alt-Left: A Compendium [Re: shivas.wisdom]
    #25589621 -

shivas.wisdom said:
Why do you consider him to be 'alt-left'?

In his own words,

Quote:
"I'm a conservative Republican, have been all my adult life. I volunteered for the Reagan campaign in 1980. I've attended every Republican convention since 1988. I was president of the Federalist Society chapter at my law school, worked on the editorial page of The Wall Street Journal and wrote speeches for President Bush—not the 'Read My Lips' Bush, the 'Axis of Evil' Bush. I served on the Giuliani campaign in 2008 and voted for John McCain in November. I supported the Iraq War and (although I feel kind of silly about it in retrospect) the impeachment of Bill Clinton. I could go on, but you get the idea."





He's trying too hard to prove otherwise.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Humans of the Alt-Left: A Compendium [Re: qman] * 1
    #25589633 -

Why do you consider him to be 'alt-left'?


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Humans of the Alt-Left: A Compendium [Re: shivas.wisdom] * 1
    #25589648 -

He’s not a white supremacist


--------------------
NotSheekle said
“if I believed she was 16 I would become unattracted to her”

Edited by koods (11/03/18 07:15 PM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Humans of the Alt-Left: A Compendium [Re: shivas.wisdom]
    #25589714 -

shivas.wisdom said:
Why do you consider him to be 'alt-left'?




Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Humans of the Alt-Left: A Compendium [Re: qman] * 1
    #25590301 -

This Just In: Antifa Scientists have developed a weapon that can fry the electronics of a vehicle causing thousands of dollars worth of damage not covered by insurance using only an $80 dollar microwave, and some stovepipe.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Humans of the Alt-Left: A Compendium [Re: qman] * 3
    #25590915 -

I watched that entire video. If I'm to understand it, and you, correctly, the things that make David Frum "alt-left" are his criticism of Trump and that he calls out the racist and antisemitic dog whistles used by Bannon? There is not a single discussion in that video of Frum's policy otherwise.

I can't believe I wasted twenty minutes of my life watching that severely biased analysis of the debate. The speaker in the video you provided, immediately after criticizing Frum for calling the anti-Soros campaign antisemitic, then spends several minutes going off on a tangent about how Soros was a nazi collaborator and other conspiracy peddling falsehoods. It's that ridiculous. It seriously looks like koods was right, and the fact that Frum is not racist enough is all that is required for you to consider him alt-left.

I don't know if your own perspective is so skewed that you honestly consider David Frum, key propagandist for the Iraq War and warhawk of the neoconservative movement, to be "alt-left" or if you think you are being clever in trying to redefine your opposition into meaninglessness and obscurity. I literally can't tell if your claim is the result of idiocy or malice.


I'll ask again, since no one attempted to answer the last time, will any of our members here obsessively worried about the threat of the "alt-left" provide us with a definition for what they consider to be alt-left?


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Humans of the Alt-Left: A Compendium [Re: shivas.wisdom]
    #25590957 -

David Frum literally helped GWB march us into Iraq. The man is as conservative and right wing as Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Rove, and the rest of that bunch.


Let me guess, Bill Krystol is alt left now because he criticized Trump. So is John Brennan probably, and John McCain.


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Humans of the Alt-Left: A Compendium [Re: Baby_Hitler] * 1
    #25590961 -

Baby_Hitler said:
This Just In: Antifa Scientists have developed a weapon that can fry the electronics of a vehicle causing thousands of dollars worth of damage not covered by insurance using only an $80 dollar microwave, and some stovepipe.



If shroomery ever creates a 'best of shroomery' subforum similar to 'best of craigslist', I nominate this post.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Humans of the Alt-Left: A Compendium [Re: MycoMinded] * 3
    #25600820 -

Just dropping in to help illuminate a common tactic used by qman and company.

First, qman makes the incredibly stupid claim the David Frum is alt-left, in what I can only assume was an attempt to shift the overton window further right by redefining neoconservatives as left-wing.

Then, when this claim of his is immediately criticized for its ridiculousness, he does not even bother to defend the position. Qman simply falls silent.

This quote by Sartre once again comes to mind:

Quote:
Never believe that anti‐ Semites are completely unaware of the absurdity of their replies. They know that their remarks are frivolous, open to challenge. But they are amusing themselves, for it is their adversary who is obliged to use words responsibly, since he believes in words. The anti‐Semites have the right to play. They even like to play with discourse for, by giving ridiculous reasons, they discredit the seriousness of their interlocutors. They delight in acting in bad faith, since they seek not to persuade by sound argument but to intimidate and disconcert. If you press them too closely, they will abruptly fall silent, loftily indicating by some phrase that the time for argument is past. It is not that they are afraid of being convinced. They fear only to appear ridiculous or to prejudice by their embarrassment their hope of winning over some third person to their side.






He is not here to actually debate. He is not putting forth arguments in good faith. The idea is to cultivate an air of respectability, and use this to spread seeds of bullshit to the unwitting.

Unfortunately, it takes less time to post bullshit than to debunk it, and this is something they are aware of. Don't let yourself burn out and let this shit fly uncontested, but also avoid getting drawn into energy draining and time wasting arguments with this type of person.

In the streets you embarass fascists by physically overpowering them. In the online chat realm, you embarass them by clearly showing how truly stupid their ideas are, and refusing to engage them further.

I also remember reading once (I'll try and find the source) about a psychological effect. Basically, you put forth an argument and I respond with criticism, but then you never respond to my criticism. Even if my criticism is sound and your argument was invalid, there is a tendency for humans to perceive things as you, as the initiator, being dominant; and me, as the responder, being submissive - which influences how people will view the arguments. From the region of emotion, rather than logic, but that's how bad faith debate goes.





Here are some other common tactics you may find in use on Internet forums:

Quote:
Technique #1 - 'FORUM SLIDING'

If a very sensitive posting of a critical nature has been posted on a forum - it can be quickly removed from public view by 'forum sliding.' In this technique a number of unrelated posts are quietly prepositioned on the forum and allowed to 'age.' Each of these misdirectional forum postings can then be called upon at will to trigger a 'forum slide.' The second requirement is that several fake accounts exist, which can be called upon, to ensure that this technique is not exposed to the public. To trigger a 'forum slide' and 'flush' the critical post out of public view it is simply a matter of logging into each account both real and fake and then 'replying' to prepositined postings with a simple 1 or 2 line comment. This brings the unrelated postings to the top of the forum list, and the critical posting 'slides' down the front page, and quickly out of public view. Although it is difficult or impossible to censor the posting it is now lost in a sea of unrelated and unuseful postings. By this means it becomes effective to 
keep the readers of the forum reading unrelated and non-issue items.

Technique #2 - 'CONSENSUS CRACKING'

A second highly effective technique is 'consensus cracking.' To develop a consensus crack, the following technique is used. Under the guise of a fake account a posting is made which looks legitimate and is towards the truth is made - but the critical point is that it has a VERY WEAK PREMISE without substantive proof to back the posting. Once this is done then under alternative fake accounts a very strong position in your favour is slowly introduced over the life of the posting. It is IMPERATIVE that both sides are initially presented, so the uninformed reader cannot determine which side is the truth. As postings and replies are made the stronger 'evidence' or disinformation in your favour is slowly 'seeded in.' Thus the uninformed reader will most like develop the same position as you, and if their position is against you their opposition to your posting will be most likely dropped. However in some cases where the forum members are highly educated and can counter your disinformation with real facts and linked postings, you can then 'abort' the consensus cracking by initiating a 'forum slide.'

Technique #3 - 'TOPIC DILUTION'

Topic dilution is not only effective in forum sliding it is also very useful in keeping the forum readers on unrelated and non-productive issues. This is a critical and useful technique to cause a 'RESOURCE BURN.' By implementing continual and non-related postings that distract and disrupt (trolling ) the forum readers they are more effectively stopped from anything of any real productivity. If the intensity of gradual dilution is intense enough, the readers will effectively stop researching and simply slip into a 'gossip mode.' In this state they can be more easily misdirected away from facts towards uninformed conjecture and opinion. The less informed they are the more effective and easy it becomes to control the entire group in the direction that you would desire the group to go in. It must be stressed that a proper assessment of the psychological capabilities and levels of education is first determined of the group to determine at what level to 'drive in the wedge.' By being too far off topic too quickly it may trigger censorship by a forum moderator.

Technique #4 - 'INFORMATION COLLECTION'

Information collection is also a very effective method to determine the psychological level of the forum members, and to gather intelligence that can be used against them. In this technique in a light and positive environment a 'show you mine so me yours' posting is initiated. From the number of replies and the answers that are provided much statistical information can be gathered. An example is to post your 'favourite weapon' and then encourage other members of the forum to showcase what they have. In this matter it can be determined by reverse proration what percentage of the forum community owns a firearm, and or a illegal weapon. This same method can be used by posing as one of the form members and posting your favourite 'technique of operation.' From the replies various methods that the group utilizes can be studied and effective methods developed to stop them from their activities.

Technique #5 - 'ANGER TROLLING'

Statistically, there is always a percentage of the forum posters who are more inclined to violence. In order to determine who these individuals are, it is a requirement to present a image to the forum to deliberately incite a strong psychological reaction. From this the most violent in the group can be effectively singled out for reverse IP location and possibly local enforcement tracking. To accomplish this only requires posting a link to a video depicting a local police officer massively abusing his power against a very innocent individual. Statistically of the million or so police officers in America there is always one or two being caught abusing there powers and the taping of the activity can be then used for intelligence gathering purposes - without the requirement to 'stage' a fake abuse video. This method is extremely effective, and the more so the more abusive the video can be made to look. Sometimes it is useful to 'lead' the forum by replying to your own posting with your own statement of violent intent, and that you 'do not care what the authorities think!!' inflammation. By doing this and showing no fear it may be more effective in getting the more silent and self-disciplined violent intent members of the forum to slip and post their real intentions. This can be used later in a court of law during prosecution.

Technique #6 - 'GAINING FULL CONTROL'

It is important to also be harvesting and continually maneuvering for a forum moderator position. Once this position is obtained, the forum can then be effectively and quietly controlled by deleting unfavourable postings - and one can eventually steer the forum into complete failure and lack of interest by the general public. This is the 'ultimate victory' as the forum is no longer participated with by the general public and no longer useful in maintaining their freedoms. Depending on the level of control you can obtain, you can deliberately steer a forum into defeat by censoring postings, deleting memberships, flooding, and or accidentally taking the forum offline. By this method the forum can be quickly killed. However it is not always in the interest to kill a forum as it can be converted into a 'honey pot' gathering center to collect and misdirect newcomers and from this point be completely used for your control for your agenda purposes.

CONCLUSION

Remember these techniques are only effective if the forum participants DO NOT KNOW ABOUT THEM. Once they are aware of these techniques the operation can completely fail, and the forum can become uncontrolled. At this point other avenues must be considered such as initiating a false legal precidence to simply have the forum shut down and taken offline. This is not desirable as it then leaves the enforcement agencies unable to track the percentage of those in the population who always resist attempts for control against them. Many other techniques can be utilized and developed by the individual and as you develop further techniques of infiltration and control it is imperative to share then with HQ.



Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Humans of the Alt-Left: A Compendium [Re: shivas.wisdom]
    #25601157 -

That Sartre quote increases in relevancy day by day it seems.


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Humans of the Alt-Left: A Compendium [Re: shivas.wisdom]
    #25608345 -

shivas.wisdom said:
In the streets you embarass fascists by physically overpowering them.



Not quite sure what you meant by that.  Are you implying that it is OK to use violence against people, as long as you think they are evil?

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Humans of the Alt-Left: A Compendium [Re: TinyBee]
    #25608679 -

The meaning of what I wrote is quite clear. I don't think I have to repeat myself.

Another brand new account come here to equate militant antifascism with 'using violence against people you disagree with'.

How surprising.

I bet you also describe yourself as a centrist, yea?


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Humans of the Alt-Left: A Compendium [Re: TinyBee] * 1
    #25608700 -

TinyBee said:
shivas.wisdom said:
In the streets you embarass fascists by physically overpowering them.



Not quite sure what you meant by that.  Are you implying that it is OK to use violence against people, as long as you think they are evil?



This.

In interviews and discussions, like this and one with Carlson, the ANTIFA member or apologist cannot answer yes or no questions for fear of an admission to violence.


--------------------
TRUMP 2020

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Jump to top Pages: < First | | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 | 32 | 33 | 34 | 35 | 36 | 37 | 38 | 39 | 40 | 41 | 42 | 43 | | Last >

Shop: MagicBag.co Certified Organic All-In-One Grow Bags, Contam-Resistant All-In-One Grow Bags   Original Sensible Seeds Autoflowering Cannabis Seeds, Bulk Cannabis Seeds   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order


Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* Humans of the Right Wing: A Compendium
( 1 2 3 4 ... 524 525 )
The Ecstatic 189,876 10,487 06/03/26 04:09 PM
by durian_2008
* Free speech falls prey to 'human rights'
( 1 2 all )
wingnutx 2,980 35 08/19/03 07:18 AM
by shakta
* An Open Letter to GIs in Iraq: Hold on to your Humanity
( 1 2 all )
FrenchSocialist 1,981 20 08/14/06 05:01 AM
by beatnicknick
* Animal-Human Hybrids Spark Controversy
( 1 2 3 all )
Baby_Hitler 6,403 41 01/30/05 05:51 PM
by el_duderino
* Human Test Subjects
( 1 2 3 4 5 all )
cateyes 3,971 93 11/17/05 06:13 PM
by Ekstaza
* Humans Rights watch Slams US. The_Red_Crayon 552 1 01/14/05 03:35 PM
by Redstorm
* Humans Are Replaced?
( 1 2 all )
SirTripAlot 2,568 24 11/17/05 05:09 PM
by kilgore_trout
* The War on Drugs is Forcing Human Evolution icesickill 978 14 02/27/03 05:00 AM
by Azmodeus

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Enlil, ballsalsa
64,096 topic views. 2 members, 24 guests and 30 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Show Images Only | Sort by Score | Print Topic ]
Search this thread:

Copyright 1997-2026 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.033 seconds spending 0.007 seconds on 16 queries.