Justin Mohn, a 32-year-old Pennsylvania man, is in police custody after allegedly murdering and decapitating his father, claiming the latter was a “federal employee” and a “traitor.” Before his arrest, Mohn posted a 14-minute video to YouTube in which he displayed his father’s severed head, proclaiming: "This is the head of Mike Mohn, a federal
But Antifa is the real danger, right?
my most favorite game when i find a conservative is to ask them point blank:
are you a fascist or are you an anti-fascist? you only get to pick one.
and they squiiiiiiirm
I like asking to play a game of who can list more politically-motivated homicides for each ideology and conservatives strangely never want to play.
Removed by mod
I would answer anti-fascist, but if someone asked me “Are you communist or anti-communist? Pick one” I would answer “neither”
You could pick either. There’s no problem with having communist ideologies or being for capitalism.
There is a problem with fascism, it’s not comparable to communism. A closer example would be asking someone if they are a racist or not.
We should be taking a hard line at certain ideologies and anyone that hesitate is suspect imo.
Racist or anti-racist, really. Many people can answer “I’m not racist, but…(insert racist statement)”
I’m not racist, but sourdough is the best bread for a grilled cheese.
Ah, so you just have ill will toward the French!
I’m not racist, but have you tried substituting mayonnaise instead of butter on your grilled cheese sandwiches? It levels then up nicely.
deleted by creator
I’m not racist, but I prefer Formula1 over NASCAR.
Dammit if I’d just looked one centimeter down I’d have avoided making the same comment
Great minds think alike.
Alternatively: We are Borg
The point is that “neither” indicates someone who does not agree with an ideology but also does not see it as a threat.
You are of course free to treat that person accordingly.
Compulsory alliance is sort of a core feature of fascism so you really must be either fascist or anti-fascist.
If fascist government is in power, it will creat a system in which non-partisan participation furthers and advances the fascist state, so one cannot “opt out”. Since a fascist system won’t entertain neutral, the question “Are you fascist or anti-fascist? You can only pick one.” Is not inherently disingenuous.
Communism does not force people into supporting it, there “neither” is an acceptable answer to “Are you communist or anti-communist” in a way that cannot be applied to fascism.
Well, Communism doesn’t force participation as long as you don’t ask the tankiis, but fuck the tankies.
A great point well made.
If you live in a Communist state you won’t exactly have any way to “opt out” of it any more than you can just “opt out” of paying taxes.
That’s true for a culturally conservative Russian state that claims to be “communist” the way North Korea claims to be “democratic”.
The USSR sucked ass because it was made of the same kind of Russians that we’re still fighting against today. The label they wear as a disguise, communist, capitalist, kleptocracy, or whatever “the commies” are calling themselves these days is irrelevant.
Like I said, Fuck the tankies.
Leftist political theory can get very complex, and when people say communism they can mean a lot of things.
Technically, Communism as per Karl Marx in the Communist Manifesto, Communism isn’t a government. Communism is a state of anarchy in which people naturally share resources and the means of production communally and provide ownership does not exist as a cultural concept. So going by the original definitions “Communist Government” is an oxymoron. Explaining what the hell happened in Russia is a whole conversation.
When people talk about communism or communist elements in a government, they are probably talking about some form of socialism.
non-partisan participation furthers and advances the fascist state, so one cannot “opt out”
The same is true of the UK monarchy, yet plenty of Brits are neither for nor against it.
I’m not familiar with the British Monarchy so I can’t really comment on how appropriate your framing is.
What I can point out is that your statement is logically inconsistent on its face.
One can’t be neutral towards a fascist state because the fascist state won’t allow one neutral. In such a condition, anyone who claims to be neither for fascism or actively anti-fascism is pro-fascism because the condition of fascist power will direct all the labour and efforts of participants to the support of the fascist state. In such a condition, pro-fascist is the default condition, and anti-fascism can only be achieved through conscious effort and educated and effective praxis. There is no neutrality. One is not neutral in the face of fascism simply because one declares to be so.
So, if the same conditions essential to fascism are true of the British Monarchy, then the nature of the political situation is stopping Brits from being neither for or against Monarchy. If your assumption that fascism is like the British Monarchy is true, then one could only be pro-monarchy, or achieve anti-monarchy through conscious and intentional effort.
In such a condition, anyone who claims to be neither for fascism or actively anti-fascism is pro-fascism
You are not making any distinction between those who would want a fascist state to endure and those who would be indifferent to replacing it with something else. But I think that distinction gets to the heart of the question.
You are also assuming that fascists and anti-fascists are only concerned about their own condition. Suppose you asked an American their opinion of Mussolini and they responded “He was terrible”. That’s clearly anti-fascist. But what if they responded “Never heard of him”? That’s neither pro or anti fascist, yet the neutral response won’t advance a fascist regime.
You are not making any distinction between those who would want a fascist state to endure and those who would be indifferent to replacing it with something else. But I think that distinction gets to the heart of the question.
Um… Yes I’ve made that quite clear because both have the same effect on a fascist state. If you’re just going about your business, working your job, not being political, being a centrist, then you are furthering the fascist state, just as you were a foaming at the mouth supporter, because fascist states co-opt the labour and effort of their citizens towards the growth of the state so there is no neutral. In such a situation, you are helping the fascist state to grow unless you are very intentionally fighting it.
You are also assuming that fascists and anti-fascists are only concerned about their own condition. Suppose you asked an American their opinion of Mussolini and they responded “He was terrible”. That’s clearly anti-fascist. But what if they responded “Never heard of him”? That’s neither pro or anti fascist, yet the neutral response won’t advance a fascist regime.
You have no idea what I’m talking about. I have no idea where you got the idea “ I’m assuming that fascists and anti-fascists are only concerned with their own condition.” What comment are you reading?
Your supposition about asking an American what he thinks of Mussolini seems entirely tangential to me. I was talking about one’s actions within a context of a fascist state, not regarding foreigners looking in, so what are you commenting on?
Also, having an opinion or talking crap isn’t an into-fascist in any sense of the word. Fascist states need to be combated with direct action, such as economically divesting in financial systems that benefit and fund a fascist state. It’s not germain to my previous comment, as I was talking about people living in a fascist system, but even as a foreigner to a fascist system, allowing a fascist system to function unchecked is effectively the same as supporting it, because fascist government aligned themselves with capital and will use economic output and trade to fund themselves.
So, once again, it doesn’t matter what you say or don’t say. It doesn’t matter what you think or don’t think. You have to take intentional and carefully considered actions to combat fascist states. In this way, thoughts, opinions and statements cannot be anti-fascist. Only actions can be anti-fascist.
The opposite would be authoritarian or anti-authoritarian, it’s possible to be conservative without being a fascist just like it’s possible to be a socialist/communist without being authoritarian.
I say “I’m personally a communist but understand that it isn’t right for most people.” I would have been awesome at communism. I’m a minimalist in a lot of ways and was good at science and math in school. I’d have probably been working at Roscosmos and then happily going home to my little apartment for my daily ration of vodka and potato bread.
Or maybe I’d have been an Olympian. I was small but athletic growing up so had no chance of playing after high school, really, but they were given athletes zoo animal growth hormones and the good steroids back then. I might have come out of the Yaroslavl Oblast Youth Olympic Reserve School the size of Arvydas Sabonis.
I saw a post recently - pretty sure it was in nottheonion - of a screencap of a Fox News segment, where they were interviewing someone that the caption described as an “anti-anti-fascist”.
Though to be fair, Fox News viewers aren’t likely to put two and two together. Or, for that matter, realize that an anti-anti-fascist is just a fascist.
I got it right here, old bean.
How do you convince them, that “neither” is not an option? What if they say they care about neither?
It’s an equivocation trick. Not all anti-fascists are associated with the movement that calls itself antifa.
Are you pro-life or anti-life? You only get to pick one.
Fuck outta here with this nonsense. Stop trying to score points and try to have conversations with people.
Antifa isn’t a movement, it’s a label.
There’s no organization, no overarching political goal - it’s literally just a term for people opposing facism through word or action.
There’s organizations that use that label in their name (like antifa of XYZ), but there’s no movement to associate with - fox news made that the fuck up
Take this example “antifa blocks off campaign event”. Fox news reports it as “members of a group called antifa has…”
A more accurate description would be “a group of people describing themselves as anti facists has…”
When people take on the term, they’re not describing their alignement to a movement - they’re describing their motivation
All the conversations have already been had, this is just prelude to war
Eh that’s like asking “Are you Pro Israel or Pro Hamas, you only get to pick one”
It’s really not, though. I am anti-Hamas and anti-Israeli government. I am pro-civilian - a group comprised mostly of Palestinians and Israelis in your thought experiment.
You see, neither Hamas nor the Israeli government have their people’s interest in mind. However, you can’t really cherry pick aspects of Fascism and anti-Fascism and say, “sEe? BoTh SiDeS!”
Nope. Israeli citizens are not all bombing Palestinians, and Palestinians are not all Hamas.
You’re so close to getting it
Are you saying antifa is equivalent to Hamas?
If the question is whether you’re pro/neutral/anti fascism, I think being anti-fascist is the only reasonable answer personally.
Anti-fascism is a political movement with a lot of political theory. Its not the same thing as saying you’re against fascism.
Anti-fascism is a political movement
Wrong.
with a lot of political theory
What?
Its not the same thing as saying you’re against fascism.
That’s exactly what it is.
No it’s not It only is to people on the right who want that to be the case, The only theory that goes into play into being anti-fascist is thinking fascism is bad.
No, it is not. I’m going to give you the benefit of the doubt and assume ignorance instead of malice. What you’re saying is literally verbatim right wing propaganda.
The only thing “anti-fascism” or even “antifa” means is “against fascism”. That’s it.
No.
What’s the opposite of fascism?
While I’ve seen many binary choice questions that are loaded questions, I think the above is a good example. A follow up (or two) if the person balks at the question itself is the following:
Do you know what fascism is and how to spot it?
Do you think antifa is a single entity and not a general ideology?
If it’s an entity, can you name or even lookup it’s leadership?
Do you believe everyone who espouses an anti fascist value system is a member of that org?
Good binary questions can help guide a discussion and expose biases and misunderstandings held by each side in the discussion. Seemingly paradoxically, nailing down specific stances using those types of questions, you can explore the nuance of certain positions.
Ex: on abortion
- Are you for or against the government mandated birth? (Seems loaded, right?)
- Are you for or against the government spending resources and citizen time investigating all miscarriages? 2a. Do you know how common miscarriages are? 2b. Do you know what the medical term is for a miscarriage?
- Are you in favor of the law punishing equally anybody who causes a spontaneous abortion or increases the likelihood of one? Even coal power plants?
- Are you for or against all abortions including those that are medically necessary to prevent undue suffering and/or injury to the mother? 4a. Do you believe an ectopic pregnancy is a condition that warrants an abortion?
- Are you for or against politicians making medical decisions on your behalf in the name of their ideology and/or gaining political points OR should the decision be left between the patient, their doctor, and the medical field’s understanding of the best standard of care?
- Are you in favor of all abortions at any time? 6a… Will a hospital in the states with the most liberal abortion laws perform an abortion on a woman with a healthy pregnancy at 8-9 months? 6b. If a fetus lacks a brain and no chance of survival, should the woman be denied the appropriate care?
Question 1 may just be a way to reframe the stances from “pro-life” / “anti-life”
Q2 helps bring the reality of what enforcement of that person’s stance may entail.
Q3 shows that big companies go unpunished for the same (or worse) violations of restrictive abortion laws and other laws that are used to punish women who miscarry.
Q4 helps bring focus on the fact that anti-abortion laws that are currently being passed and enforced are written so poorly that they are forcing doctors (through threat of imprisonment) to deny what would be routine procedures which would otherwise prevent suffering and permanent injury to women.
These are all excellent questions to lead into a good discussion. Assuming you have someone who is open to approaching in good faith and who trusts you to do the same. I have a friend who I try to have similar dialogs with.
I don’t suppose you have looked at street epistemology. Sort of the same vibe of exploring beliefs in a less/not confrontational way.
Just an anecdote about this: I once asked a pro-lifer question 4a and their response was that there’s no such thing as an ectopic pregnancy (said it was made up nonsense/propaganda) 🤷
At that point I stopped viewing them as a rational being… Forever (I still know them). Now when I think about them… “were they like this from birth or did some combination of events lead to this insanity?” And sometimes even, “should they be committed? There is definitely something wrong with this person.”
Then I remember that a great many humans have been like this for thousands of years. Rational thought and critical thinking are probably the outliers in our evolution and maybe rather than trying to somehow teach everyone how to research things and examine evidence properly we should instead focus on taking away sources of misinformation (by force, if necessary).
I’m in favor of the corporate death penalty for any media company that is caught intentionally lying or misleading their audience. For example, the day Fox News admitted under oath that they intentionally lied to and misled their audience should have resulted in that entire organization being shuttered forever.
“But that would eventually take down many news organizations!” To that I say, “yep.” Let new ones into the market that can keep their shit together and tell the truth.
Then the question could have simply have been phrased as “are you for pr against fascism.” Everyone know that Anti Fascism is a political ideology that goes beyond just simply being against fascism. And that’s why people don’t want to identify with that term
yeah if i was sitting in gaza. which were not.
i dont think its crazy to expect the electorate to know the definition of fascism. its also a bit hyperbolic to compare full on genocide with electing a fascist.
its also a bit hyperbolic to compare full on genocide with electing a fascist.
Did you fall asleep in history class or something? How do you think genocides happen?
Tbf, particular nations elect fascists, said nations commit genocide.
What I’m saying is that if you are asking a question that pigeonholes people into two categories sometimes they pick the worst one out of spite. It’s not really am indicator of what that person believes. Kinda like saying if you don’t support BLM you’re a racist, and guess what happened? A bunch of people started saying “well I guess I’m a racist now”
Kinda like saying if you don’t support BLM you’re a racist
No it’s not the same. A better equivalent would be are you racist or anti-racist. Are you pro or anti rape. Are you pro or anti slavery.
Facism is defined as a violently oppressive form of government. It shouldn’t be a hard question if you’re not a piece of shit
If you read Ibram X Kendi’s treatise on anti-racism you’d know that example is not helping your argument
and guess what happened? A bunch of people started saying “well I guess I’m a racist now”
They were always racists. They just decided it was okay to admit it.
“Whoopsie I got caught guess I’ll quit hiding it.”
The reason I brought up the Palestine Israel example was because it was a real question in a survey (NYT I think?), more that 50% of the people under 30 responded they support Hamas and under 20 years old it was as high as 70%. By your logic, all of these people are terrorist, and always have been.
Please show how that is my logic. Do those people all call themselves racists?
BLM is a specific organization. Fascism is an ideology. It’s more like saying if you’re not for civil rights you’re a racist.
But really, you’re spending a lot of time and energy trying to explain why you’re, at best, neutral on fascism.
No, I’m spending energy trying to explain to an echo chamber that forcing people to take binary extreme positions forces neutral people to take extreme positions. It’s a matter of politics and getting policy passed, if you call a neutral person a fascist, the will not vote with you. Calling people names is not a way to get their support. I can tell that people really have not learned anything these past 8 years. A lot of Trump support in 2016 came from exactly this type of rhetorical mechanisms. You want to keep on going this way? Go ahead, but you will not get the support you need, but at the end of the day you can just say those people were fascists and racists anyways, right? Extremely convenient
You think being against fascism is extreme? That should be a baseline position.
And I’m not going to coddle Trump supporters just because they act like contrarian children when they get called out.
If some anonymous nobody on the Internet is making you support Trump or embrace hate because they said something you didn’t like or called you a mean name and you want to pwn them, you were just looking for a reason to support it anyway and need to grow the fuck up.
If they pick fascist ‘to spite’ me they’re very clearly in that camp. Not because the question was asked but because of their intent in answering.
“they were forced” lmao what a gaggle of shit
the two are not logically exclusive. a correct comparison is
“are you Pro-Isreal, or Anti-Israel” and “are you Pro-Hamas or Anti-Hamas”.
You are also so close to getting it.
And you, clearly, are in another postal code entirely.
“are you a fascist or are you an anti-fascist?” is exclusionary, you can only be one. You cant both be fascist and anti-fascist, nor can it be 1 and not 1, they are logically exclusionary.
“is the number of gumballs odd, or not odd” “you are so close to getting it” “yea… that’s not an answer”
"“Are you Pro Israel or Pro Hamas” is not, and proposing that as an example shows a complete lack of understanding on basic syllogism.
NVM, just saw you said this multiple times to everyone who raised a point you cant refute.
Worst made up genocidal criminal thieving country
deleted by creator
Easy choice.
To the fascist movement? Yes.
Republicans are literally CUTTING OFF PEOPLE’S HEADS because of Ideological Disagreements but they are NOT Terrorists! ISIS are Terrorists because THEY cut off people’s heads because of Ideological Disagreements!
Not even just people…his own dad. Who seems to have worked hard to give this douchebag what he has in life. And all it took was the scum fanning the flames of his hatred for ad money and airtime.
Don’t forget that “bOtH sIdEs ArE tHe SaMe!”
Republicans are literally CUTTING OFF PEOPLE’S HEADS because of Ideological Disagreements but they are NOT Terrorists!
They also get a pass because they aren’t brown people.
Another “lone wolf” that has nothing at all to do with the bog standard violent demagoguery of every single right wing talking head grifter I’m sure
What are you saying? This has nothing to do with the current republican party or their talking points!
Mohn also calls for the end of “all woke and gender ideology propaganda in schools and other public places
I’m sure it’s a coincidence…
Mohn spouts several far-right talking points, including:
“America is rotting from the inside out as far-left woke mobs rampage our once prosperous cities, turning them into lawless zones.”
" A fifth column army of illegal immigrants infiltrates our border"
Oh…
Decapitating a family member because there are men in your imagination wearing women’s clothes.
Yikes on bikes. I’m guessing this is yet another person that probably should’ve been in a mental institution instead of alone, ignored, and getting suckered into the alt right pipeline. Surely the level of violence he exhibited is pathological.
Sadly, there’s a chance that he wasn’t alone and ignored but was getting as much help and support from his family as they could give on their own. The thought of which makes it even more heart-breaking.
Could be. Oof. :(
I know this a very serious discussion, but I just wanted to say the phrase “yikes on bikes” is a good one.
Is this stuff even far-right anymore? Feels like it’s fully adopted by pretty much all self proclaimed Republicans at this point.
Why is it always republicans?
Because conservatives have hyperactive fear and disgust centers compared to liberals. They really do feel these emotions in a way that non-conservatives do not. I have concluded that it is a mental disorder to be conservative–it’s always projected insecurity.
If hexbear was here, they’d tell you liberals are just as bad lol. I agree that to an extent, but in reality I do seem them to be much better. Crazies just so happen to line up with conservative ideals, which essentially just boils down to just bigotry at the end of the day.
The day my instance updated to support instance blocking in the user config my Lemmy experience improved significantly
Lemmy.world doesn’t support blocking of instances and I can’t read new without being spammed by lemmynsfw.
Have you had a poke through the user settings? This was like 2 major versions ago so that’s extremely weird if you still can’t instance block (I have to go to the blocks tab in settings, and below blocked users is blocked instances)
It also seems like a lot of it is surprisingly few people so just blocking a few key posters from Hexbear greatly reduced the hexbear nonsense in my feed and comments sections.
I’ll have a look again, I know that this is in constant development. I migrated from another instance that had that enabled, hoping we get updated here soon enough.
You’re generally correct as studies corroborated the feeling of disgust to be stronger on those on the right. But I wouldn’t necessarily put that to every single conservatives. I met many conservatives who are still sane. The term RINO is a thing after all, and the only conservative party I agree with is the German CdU.
Yeah… I dunno if the “sane” Conservatives are actual Conservatives. Like, hear me out, I know people who totally understand me as a trans person are perfectly supportive and totally grock leftist talking points and even support fairly socialist economic theory … But they still carry their identities as “Conservatives” because it’s a brilliant bit of branding. For all purposes of actual ideology they are actually progressive, but that word “conservative” strokes the ego in a very particular way.
People think “conservative” as basically just meaning “Not prone to extremes” or “careful and measured” or maybe even “liking change to be slow and incremental” or “fiscally moderate” … None of this actually describes modern Conservative party ideology but they definitely borrow off the synonyms for votes. Because everyone is primed to think of their veiw as carefully reasoned and non-volitile these “conservative at heart” types really don’t realize that they are being tricked they just like the pretty label and are willing to let themselves be hoodwinked.
That’s a damn good point. Also throw in 2A rights and I think you have the right mix. Someone who is genuinely “fiscally conservative” as in desiring a close the balanced budget, believes that 2A is just as important and deserving of defending as 1A and 4A (the main ones everyone knows), and who believes in plenty of legal immigration but thinks national borders are required to have a nation is basically in no man’s land.
The Republican party pays lip service to those and other “Conservative” ideals, but by actions has abandoned them and are the furthest down the oligarch rabbit hole. The Democrats by action actually tend to do more of these traditionally Conservative things in modern times, but pay lip service to the opposite (gun control, open borders, etc) because many of the the actual far leftists remained more attached to the party instead of splintering off like the Sov Cits and various flavors of libertarians did from the conservative side.
Since we have a first past the post voting system and thus only 2 viable parties, those “conservative at heart” folks know they are getting grifted by the Republicans, but feel slightly more aligned with Republicans than with Democrats because they feel there is no actual place for them.
The “Liberal at heart” have a similar problem because the Old Guard corporatist Democrats are also in the Oligarch rabbit hole, just not as deep in many cases. That’s why we get lip service about legalizing marijuana, decriminalization, debt relief, etc, but see very little actual or sustainable progress.
Very interested to see what happens whenever the government drops below an average age of 65. Maybe under millennial and Zoomer majorities we can get graduated voting methods and multiple viable parties.
Do you have a Background in Psychology or did you pull this Conlusion out of your Ass?
Fortunately for those of us who don’t have a background in psychology: the folks who are experts tend to publish their findings!
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3092984/
Highlights:
Political liberalism and conservatism were correlated with brain structure
Liberalism was associated with the gray matter volume of anterior cingulate cortex
Conservatism was associated with increased right amygdala size
So what do those parts do…
Anterior cingulate cortex: error detection, anticipation of tasks, attention, motivation, and modulation of emotional responses
Amygdala: formation and storage of memories associated with emotional events / emotional learning; fear conditioning.
…so, yeah conservatives are literally, physiologically hypersensitive to fear, and more prone to acting on emotion. WHO’DA THUNK?!?
I love a well sourced smackdown
Although these results suggest a link between political attitudes and brain structure, it is important to note that the neural processes implicated are likely to reflect complex processes of the formation of political attitudes rather than a direct representation of political opinions per se. The conceptualizing and reasoning associated with the expression of political opinions is not necessarily limited to structures or functions of the regions we identified but will require the involvement of more widespread brain regions implicated in abstract thoughts and reasoning.
Were you wanting to build some kind of argument or hypothesis with that segment, or did you just want to leave it to your reader to assume whatever it is you’re thinking? Cuz the knee-jerk reaction your post evokes is that you’re attempting to dismiss an entire study based on a disclaimer about brains being complicated… but such an attack to your critical thinking skills would ofc be a hasty and unfair conclusion considering you haven’t contributed a single word of your own yet. So by all means, state your case.
Least chill comment I’ve seen on lemmy lol I thought I was on reddit for a second… It’s a quote from the study you posted not everyone online is trying to debate you.
I’m a bit worked up. RL shit, not you - forgive my tone.
Meat of the last comment stands though: what’s your point? I know it’s a quote from the study, but that’s how studies work: they provide supporting or detracting evidence to whatever it is they’re evaluating. Even if that disclaimer wasn’t there at all, it’d still be implied bc no one study proves or disproves anything, they just contribute to a broader pool of knowledge that eventually leans toward something being accepted as truth.
And right now that lean is toward conservatives being driven by fear and emotion.
LOL he’s been going on the attack around here. This concept has broken his brain and he’s just lost it.
conservatives are literally, physiologically hypersensitive to fear
I don’t have a background in psychology either, but the prefix hyper- in medical contexts usually means something is abnormally and dangerously excessive in size, amount, etc. Yet from your quote there’s no reason to conclude the on-average increased amydagla is necessarily abnormally increased. It isn’t, it’s just bigger, it’s not automatically pathological.
‘hyper’ doesn’t have a qualifier in scale; it’s just an increase. Your arm muscles will hypertrophy after a single pushup… not by a significant amount, but by a higher than zero amount.
My understanding of the amygdala situation is that it follows basically the same model: conservatives aren’t born with a massive amygdala that leaves them extra susceptible to fear and emotion; they do fear work-outs throughout their life by over-consuming shit like Fox News telling us the scary immigrants are here to out-breed us, or some preecher explaining how Jesus won’t let you into heaven if he sees you masturbating… over time they become the fear/emotional equivalent to a body builder; but when you start to look at the other parts of their brain, you might find they didn’t just skip leg day; but that the very concept of leg day is something they find offensive and actively oppose.
You don’t have to have a background in psychology to read studies. It has been a topic increasingly researched lately, and the first part of their post is demonstrated by evidence in the studies.
The conclusion about it being a mental illness is up for debate. It might be seen more as part of the human spectrum, like being gay or trans.
The first part was actual results of studies. The second part was me being editorial.
It’s a good thing that I was able to read articles that professional psychologists wrote on the subject. But go ahead, be angry.
Then how about
- You link them when asked about your sources (or actually just link them when making such a Statement)
- You don’t present it as your own Opinion
And yes, I am angry. Angry about all these self-proclaimed Experts these days who think they know everything and know more than Experts who studied this Subject for years.
All those People who are Climatechange Experts but couldn’t even really tell you, what the Ozone-Layer exactly is.
Or all those People who proclaim a Genocide in Gaza, but couldn’t even tell you where or how a Genocide is defined.
If you’re not qualified, you’re allowed to just not say anything and not spew disinformation.
This is common knowledge. Your ignorance is not my responsibility. You could easily have looked it up yourself but decided to project your ignorance on us instead.
Your anger is yours, it has nothing to do with reality. It is something you should deal with through therapy, not by going on tirades against random people on Lemmy simply because you don’t have the experience and education to understand the things that they are talking about. We do not deserve to suffer your insecurity.
Every single example you gave has a great deal of evidence behind it. You do not like that, and this causes you pain. This is all about you.
Also references to Mao are probably not going to help you here.
I don’t even know where to start
You made an imaginary picture of me based off of two comments. Then you used that nonexistent, imaginary version of me to make up your opinon and write this Comment in which you call me “ignorant”, “insecure”, “inexperienced”, “uneducated”, and just all-round talk me down.
So do you now understand why i didn’t believe you?
Your Comment here is nothing more that baseless Slander and i have no Reason to assume you did any more “Research” for your previous Comment than you did for this one.
As such i do not see the Point in continuing this Conversation with you and will stop here.
This is so tedious that I am going to go ahead and block you. Take your fake outrage and go somewhere else.
There are a number of studies about the psychology of conservatives
This is a legit question, albeit unfortunately phrased with fear with disgust.
I’ve fucking had it with unqualified people talking about stuff they don’t know anything about. If you don’t know anything about a Topic, you’re allowed to not say anything without spewing misinformation.
I mean, there’s a Reason i don’t give my Opinion on Climatechange. Because i know that i am not qualified to talk about it. I know from personal experience how much university teaches you and how much you miss if you didn’t study that Subject, so i’m not giving my Opinion on a topic i didn’t study. And i expect others to do the same.
Removed by mod
Removed, rule 3:
“Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (perjorative, perjorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (perjorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect!”
Hey, “technically correct” is how the fascists win, but who wants to change the world, amirite? 🤣🤘🏼
It’s the empathy differentiator. People with empathy self select towards one end. People without select towards the other.
This is an almost perfect description of what’s going on. I was unlucky enough to be raised in one of their conservative homeschool cults… 8 kids. 2 girls, were uneasy about the doctrine for a bit but were taught by parents to be submissive so they just accepted it. 4 other boys, no empathy or feelings whatsoever, became three hateful people and one neo-nazis. The third girl, fought against it with moderate ideas, advocating for women’s rights, etc. Was verbally abused and taunted by them and her parents to the point of extreme depression, self harm, possibly suicidal thoughts idk. Hasn’t left Christianity, but graduated early to get away from them. Then me, enby (assigned male). Not even open about it, but different from the other guys bc I actually have empathy and feelings. Depression, self-harm, suicidal thoughts (the usual), survived bc of outside friends I had in secret, became a pagan liberal but still really mentally screwed up…
I do wonder if the enlargement of the parts of the brain dealing with fear conditioning, self-deception and emotional learning but lack of emotional regulation are because most if not all extreme conservatives (at least in my campus “dataset” of about 50) have survived extreme cases of abuse and either a) became numb to it and started convincing themselves to do it to others because it’s “right” or b) became extremely depressed, suicidal, learned heightened empathy and critical thinking by surviving that and ended up in the “liberal” dataset.
Lookup “Generational Trauma.”
Families of all different walks of life, from generation to generation are just stuck in cycles of perpetual trauma that they act out and pass down to their children.
With therapy you start to learn about and recognize your subconscious responses and triggers to this trauma and how to break out of that pattern.
This ensures that what they say and do no longer holds power over you, that you stop acting on or acting out your own trauma response, and most importantly you break the cycle and stop passing it down to your kids.
There’s a lot to be said about the trauma response and a need for control. So I could see a) pretty easily. B) takes a strong person, but it’s certainly possible.
Raven, hang in there and great job so far! The best revenge is a long, fulfilling life. Gets ‘em every time. 🤘🏼🥰 Let’s fuckin’ go! 🔥🥳
I’m so glad you eventually escaped that, Internet Stranger. I hope you continue to get the help you need. Good wishes to you.
To still be republican you’d certainly have to be a sociopath.
deleted by creator
Because their extremist speech is normalized. Go on any xitter thread with a political tone and it’s basically red flag after red flag of tweets that will be on the “what we know about the shooter” graphics in the future.
Same reason why every time someone is murdered it turns out it was done by a murderer.
Democrats know how to bury the body
/S
“We are all donestic terrorists”. The GOP had never been more honest, and probably never will be again.
Something something Dunning Kruger skews right something something
The funny thing about Dunning & Kruger, their study was based on faulty science. They believed their own bullshit and loudly proclaimed their findings that “felt right”. And it became a meme, when a bunch of people believed their headline without checking their study first, including me. There is no significant correlation.
So, stupid people overestimating their abilities? Let’s start with examining Dunning & Kruger.
It’s Krugers all the way Dunning!
It’s ironic that if you proclaim to be communist or anarchist, they’ll basically blacklist you, yet one of our political parties is also the largest organized hate group in the nation, and we just accept that as normal.
This dude LITERALLY pulled an ISIS beheading his father while basically giving the same talking points AS FUCKING ISIS.
Swatting, bomb threats, planting bombs, death threats, murder, mass shootings, election tampering, sedition, attacking government institutions. Let’s call a spade a spade. They’re a terrorist organization
This is not an edited photo. CPAC literally created and wore that banner of their own volition.
On one hand this is the internet so you shouldn’t believe everything you’re told/see. On the other hand I can see Republicans being stupid and tone deaf enough to actually do this…
It’s pretty easy to verify.
https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/cpac-banner-domestic-terrorists/
goddamn. I’d have felt better with it being a photoshop.
Rating:

Correct Attribution
About this rating
Fact Check
The 2022 Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) took place in Dallas, Texas, from Aug. 4-7, featuring Republican notables such as former U.S. President Donald Trump and U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz, as well as an assortment of panel discussions.
It’s very true, their mask slipped and they admitted what they are. The GOP are domestic terrorists intent on installing a theocratic Christian fascist regime in complete disregard of any freedoms or ideas you may hold. They do not engage in good faith discussions, the only thing they’re interested in is power.
They’re terrorists, and should be dealt with as such.
This isn’t a mask slipping, this is not wearing it at all.
This is far beyond stupid and tone deaf.
Here’s a phrase I wish I took more seriously when I was younger: “When someone tells you who they are, believe them.”
“We are who we pretend to be, so we must be careful about who we pretend to be.”
And they have the gall to say liberalism is a mental disorder.
Say it with me now, “P-R-O-J-E-C-T-I-O-N”
…and even taking that BS at face value, an actual mental disorder is infinitely preferable to sober and calculated malice.
“No -your- brain is broken! I’m just plain ol’ evil.”
Their brains are broken. Depending on age, it the condition has a chance to be arrested, if not corrected. Until a significant amount of “not right leaning” people understand that at a core level, nothing will change.
Well said. We as a nation need to snap the fuck out of it and realize how insane this all is. How utterly abnormal all this should be.
It’s astonishing they’re even given a platform, much less being one of the most influential political parties in the nation
They aren’t all that organized to be fair
US doing a bang up job of curbing that far right terrorism problem. At least this one wasn’t part of the armed forces.
This is a major argument for anti-fascist action. Liberal mainstream society has always been very bad at combating fascism because they desire calm and order and lawfulness which fascists can exploit. So besides “liberal anti-fa” using legal means like suing the KKK out of existence you also need autonomous anti-fa to prevent fascists from recruiting. That is why it’s legitimate to prevent fascists from speaking using “impolite” means, because fascists speech using clever lies creates fascist thinking. The right to free speech has to exclude hate speech.
PS: A very good book on this topic: Fascism Today: What It Is and How to End It (link)
Going to read that article, but first an aside… Look at all those fucking rich white people in that photo.
How could anyone ever think that the Republicans actually represent anyone besides rich white people? And mostly men at that.
Liberal mainstream society has always been very bad at combating fascism because they desire calm and order and lawfulness which fascists can exploit.
Somehow the most calm and vegetarian liberal mainstream societies are also the least fascist, and fascism doesn’t grow there. So maybe it just works and your fixes are not required.
So besides “liberal anti-fa” using legal means like suing the KKK out of existence you also need autonomous anti-fa to prevent fascists from recruiting.
Why would you attack their visibility if the problem is their existence and visibility is a feedback allowing to measure it?
because fascists speech using clever lies creates fascist thinking.
Only if fascists use clever lies, how does one tell between “liberals” and fascists?
And also that fascist thinking is exactly …
The right to free speech has to exclude hate speech.
… this. Exclusion of rights given as a dogma.
You don’t need that, you can just allow people to not communicate with carriers of views they consider inhumane, but you still choose the most fascist way of countering fascism.
Also:
You allow you child to do everything, they might get wounded in one way or another, they might become somebody whom you wouldn’t want them to be, they might make mistakes, but they might also be happy.
You keep them locked (figuratively), and they won’t become anyone at all.
You make your own choices in between and they become closer to the latter, but conscious of what they could have been.
Somehow the most calm and vegetarian liberal mainstream societies are also the least fascist, and fascism doesn’t grow there. So maybe it just works and your fixes are not required.
Yes absolutely true. Fascism needs specific circumstances to grow. My thinking is that democracy needs prosperity, security and education.
Property: I mean a modest prosperity instead of precarious living like having a job and being able to afford a home and to raise children without working yourself to death and also without both parents having to work full time (or 2-3 jobs) and neglecting the children. Security: Not being at war and not in constant fear about terrorists and evils that besets society on all sides pumped through the media. Education: Media that doesn’t constantly deceive, obscure and manipulate you
Why would you attack their visibility if the problem is their existence and visibility is a feedback allowing to measure it?
I’m not interested in measuring it that way.You can measure it differently. But every time you let crypto fascists speak with their dogwhistles and whatnot they recruit people - depending on the overall material conditions of society too of course. But it is a naive view to think that people are pure or immune to recruitment by fascists. History tells us.
Only if fascists use clever lies, how does one tell between “liberals” and fascists?
Yeah good point. I’d argue that the current spade of fascists are mostly interested in grabbing power. Trump and the new GOP isn’t an ideological fascist party, they just use the mechanisms of fascism to gain power and serve their masters interests. Liberals use other mechanisms to gain power - which are shit too but they do not base inequality
But this explains why e.g. climate activists or pacifists view the current "leftist"parties in the US and EU as kind of right wing extremists. It’s not fascism, but… well.
And also that fascist thinking is exactly … … this. Exclusion of rights given as a dogma.
No, fascist thinking is a belief that inequality based on mythological identity is not just acceptable but morally correct.
What I said is that specific actions do not serve the underlying goal of free speech but the opposite. And it’s not dogma because we have strong psychological and historic evidence for this. It’s also law in many EU countries since fascism last rise.
But I agree that it’s far from ideal. And autonomous anti-fa action against fascist speech shouldn’t be legal either, but it has good arguments going for it. Ideally we do not have the socioeconomic conditions that creates fertile ground for it. You can see I again blame the mainstream establishment for trump even though the act shocked, just shocked and bewildered by all this. This is the core of why liberal societies are bad at combating extreme fascism.
You don’t need that, you can just allow people to not communicate with carriers of views they consider inhumane
I don’t quite understand what you mean here. But like I said, laws like that are not fascist, you could call them authoritarian or statism. But autonomous anti-fa is grass roots not authoritarian / statism.
On an unrelated note: The goal of free speech / that amendment is to allow accountability of those in power and dissenting voices to be heard. So that people can say what is wrong with the country and have a chance to be heard.
The current monopolization of news and social media under the control of a tiny minority of ultra-rich goes completely against the idea of free speech - at best they treat speech as a commodity and bias everything in favor of the most profitable speech (clickbait that leads to endless circular arguments and more ad sales). At worst someone like Elon Musk pushes his own personal uneducated beliefs about society. Quasi-Monopolization violates the 1st amendment imho.
So about your “let your child do some stupid things so they can learn”. That would require at least that they see the consequences of their action, and in this case it’s unimaginable suffering. And how couldl the learn if the media is captured by corporations? So I disagree, they should learn from history or from science. But corporate interest also launched massive anit-science PR campaigns because of climate change.
PS: Oops I wrote way too much lol
In short, my opinion on this exchange:
It’s a complex subject. I think there’s a bit of bias in the direction of wealth inequality in your view, and a bit of bias in the direction of skepticism of managing society by laws (I don’t trust a person to make the right decision for another person) in my view.
I think this guy is just fucknut crazy, not a terrorist per se. Either way though, it’s not a great look.
It’s not a coincidence that a batshit crazy person is spewing right wing insanity and not singing kumbaya with the lefties. Just saying.
Terrorism is “fucknut crazy”. Killing others in the name of a belief system that controls and represses others, for political or theological reasons, is fucking nuts. This isn’t the control of “don’t shit on LGBTQ people” that conservatives whine about and claim is liberal tyranny, this is the control that physically harms people because they don’t conform to their fucked-up belief system. Which is what this guy did.
Another person driven to hate and violence by the republican party when all he needed was solutions from the left.
He sued the feds 4 times, including one time when:
Mohn “alleged that the obligation to make payments on his student loan led to mental anguish, emotional distress, financial strain, lack of savings, and debt, all of which allegedly impacted his quality of life.”
-https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/other/justin-mohn-was-angry-he-couldn-t-get-job-as-overeducated-white-man/ar-BB1hyebPFucking hell, and he thought the Republicans were going to be the ones to help him?
Biden literally tried to forgive a bunch of student loan debt last year, but was blocked by Republicans.
I know there’s no explaining mental illness, but our country is failing people when they’re this misinformed.
From another source, decapitation aside, this guy does sound severely mentally ill.
"The video, reviewed by this news organization, includes a manifesto-style rant in which Mohn calls on his followers to take action against federal employees. It is titled “Call to Arms for American Patriots.”
After holding up what appears to be his father’s severed head, he says he now controls and commands “America’s police and military,” and calls for the execution of federal employees, and puts bounties on the FBI director, the Attorney General and the Chief Supreme Court Justice.
He rails against the LGBTQ community, the Black Lives Matters and “terrorist organizations such as anti-fa.” He calls for the seizure of federal buildings and says federal employees should be “publicly executed for betraying their country.”
This is how stochastic terrorism works. Fox news pumps out a constant stream of crazy shit that they can plausibly say are opinions or entertainment, then vulnerable people who are exposed to it intertwine it with their own delusions and carry out acts of violence. Fox and others keep upping their rhetoric to keep their people hooked, their viewers keep escalating their rhetoric, and their viewers become more and more radicalized. It starts with mentally ill people who’ve been poisoned by this taking action, and eventually the terrorism gets normalized.
IMHO, this will continue to happen more regularly until there are red hat mobs going door to door executing everyone with a pride flag or black lives matter sign in their window. The cops will be there to make sure no one resists the mob, just like they did with white riots in the past.
BRB - Need to make sure my pride and BLM flags are clearly visible. :)
This is what right wing talking points do to a motherfucker. These people are not well to begin with, and when they mainline toxic propoganda 24/7 they go absolutely insane.
Again…. NOT a cross-dresser.
I’m sure the far-right is desperately searching for something “leftist” to pin on him while simultaneously applauding him in their seedy little Nazi chat rooms.
Not a drag queen.
Not LGBTQ+.
🤔
Not a minority.
Not non-white
Not female
In fact, he was adamantly anti-LGBTQ+.
Come to think of it, a lot of other terrorists are anti-LGBTQ+ as well.
I’m sure there’s no connection tho.
How much would fox news cover this if this was an Antifa / BLM person?
Oops, that doesn’t happen because Antifa / BLM aren’t remotely a concern to the FBI, unlike right-wing extremists responsible for the vast majority of political violence and murder.
Political violence has been perpetrated by the right wing extremists far, far more often than the left, yes. Totally agree with your point.
But I have to speak up: The FBI has tracked and harassed leftists and black activists in the past and I don’t want anyone to think otherwise.
True, but it wasn’t always true. In the 1960s and 70s the far left was more violent. Not especially relevant, but it is interesting.
Fox won’t cover it
Republicans are a threat to humanity.
While I don’t disagree, this person was also quite clearly mentally ill.
Now who is it that keeps cutting support for… Oh right…
There are many examples of mentally ill Republicans
Republicans are an example of the mentally ill.
Are there examples of Republicans who are not mentally ill?
let’s see here…
nah
And not many examples of mentality stable Republicans.
I doubt they’ll stop with people, friend. They will keep trying to eat the whole world, until there is nothing left but themselves to eat, or they are stopped by us.
I think it’s time the term “Y’all Queda” comes back.
Idk about you but I never stopped using it.
That and magats are my two favorites
I still like red hatters, but that never caught on
Yeah I don’t think we want to demonize the folks that work at Redhat.
Haha me too, though IBM sure is making it easier :(
Yeehawdists
Cult 45
I’ve never heard this one! Hahahahaha! wow!
Someone better find a March Hare to accompany that MAGA hatter.
That’s disturbing. That quoted bit of dialogue definitely has some grandiose language. Seems like yet another case where extremist right wing media fed into psychosis leading to a tragic outcome.
Yeah definitely a mix of mental health and too much propaganda. In the quoted portions he is clearly delusional. He tells all postal workers that if they don’t quit and join their countrymen he can’t promise protection for them. He may have done something like this anyway but clearly the anti Biden message has resonated with him.
Are we calling conservatism a psychosis now? Ok, I can see that.
I think it’s more that this nut job latched onto conservatism as his thing. If it wasn’t that it would have been something else.
That being said, if conservatism wasn’t preventing adequate mental healthcare maybe this wouldn’t have happened.
But it wasn’t something else and it’s never something else.
Really? No crazy person has ever snapped and killed someone for any reason other than conservatism?
What ideology produces a comparable number of spree killers to the far right?
You don’t have to be “crazy” to kill someone (unless you care to argue that every soldier is a crazy person) and you don’t have to be far-right to kill someone.
But American conservatives absolutely target and encourage murderers using exactly the same methods as Muslim extremists do. They told him exactly who he should kill and why he should kill them.
Would he have killed him anyway, even if conservatives hadn’t pushed him to? Sure, maybe.
But in this reality, he held up a severed head to the public and repeated conservative talking points.
I’d agree that conservatism is probably the biggest one as far as political idealogy currently but throughout history communism and anarchism have certainly had their share. I’m sure we could find examples from just about any of them if we took the time to dig into it. I wasn’t limiting it to political ideologies though. Crazy people have snapped and murdered people for all sorts of non political reasons as well.
The far-right intentionally targets vulnerable people. It’s why all their heroes are teenagers or violently mentally ill.
Imagine what hes going to realize/think/feel when he gets medicated.
“He’s going to get medicated, right?” -Padme
I think he will hold onto this fractured reality because letting go of it will be too painful.
You don’t need to be psychotic to murder someone. Soldiers can be trained to kill. There could be nothing in his head to medicate away, just a bunch of conservative dogshit where his mind should have been.
Stochastic terrorism in action.
