Current Events > BREAKING: Multiple people shot, killed at supermarket in Buffalo, New York

(+) Yeah! (+)

What, him saying that neo nazis use propaganda and disinformation to radicalize people who are looking for someone to blame for their problems and motivate them to commit senseless violence?

Yes, I understand that. I'm sorry that you're upset by that statement?

greyfox747 posted...

What, him saying that neo nazis use propaganda and disinformation to radicalize people who are looking for someone to blame for their problems and motivate them to commit senseless violence?

Yes, I understand that. I'm sorry that you're upset by that statement?

He's literally saying disinformation simply wouldn't exist if we had societal support systems and more equity.

Do you know how to read?

greyfox747 posted...

Like, he doesn't say this at all. He says that we can also look at what was effectively his journal to see how he got to this point. You're angry about someone saying that we can look at the shooters other writings to understand his mindset and motivations.

You're getting mad about a very simple and sensible statement and making shit up about what people are saying instead.

I'm sorry that this post also put you in a tizzy. Maybe you should take a small step back and stop accusing us of being super cool with neo nazis radicalizing people.

I don't actually think that you know how to read if that's the conclusion you're taking away from that. I don't have any idea how you're struggling this much with that thread.

It's not my fault that you came in here with an assumed stance and didn't actually read.

COVxy posted...

It's not my fault that you came in here with an assumed stance

My brother in Christ, you're the one coming in here and accusing us of being super cool with alt right propaganda because you want to be mad at us.

greyfox747 posted...

My brother in Christ, you're the one coming in here and accusing us of being super cool with alt right propaganda because you want to be mad at us.

I got mad at Antifar posting a take that shits all over this tragedy by trying to reframe it into populist drivel.

Like the post I linked is literally saying "disinformation exists so that those with power can manipulate people without power, and blame those people for the issues in infrastructure".

As if there wouldn't be fucking racists wanting to kill people if we had a more equitable society.

It's fucking offensive.

COVxy posted...

You would support federal interventions of propaganda control? Or, really, any interventions at all that produce consequences for people who produce and pervey propaganda?

Yes, but I can't imagine any effective ones that don't severely violate the first amendment (much less the negative wiggle room imposed by the Supreme Court). Now, personally that doesn't bother me. Rip that shit up and start from scratch for all I care. But I don't think the people likely to hold power in the coming decades share my views on that, so the discussion feels moot to me.

Also, Ben Collins' whole shtick is covering this bullshit. Scroll through his timeline; he is not the guy to accuse of downplaying its importance, imo.

COVxy posted...

As if there wouldn't be fucking racists wanting to kill people if we had a more equitable society.

I'm not seeing that line anywhere. Are you sure you're not making things up because you came in here with an assumed stance?

We've had conversations in the past where you expressed being strictly against any government control of information, but whatever.

greyfox747 posted...

I'm not seeing that line anywhere. Are you sure you're not making things up because you came in here with an assumed stance?

Nope.

Take a moment. Re-read my post, then go back and re-read the tweet.

I'm still not seeing the line where he says that racists wouldn't exist in a more equitable society. It seems like you're just attributing a meaning that doesn't exist to that post because you want to get really mad at antifar for posting a thread from a reporter who does a lot of work in this area.

Like, you're really angry at someone saying that a disaffected young dude is a prime target for radicalization. This is not a healthy or normal thing to take issue with.

The heck is going on here

Isn't this just the Hillary line about how breaking up the big banks won't end sexism or racism, so we shouldn't do it?

greyfox747 posted...

I'm still not seeing the line where he says that racists wouldn't exist in a more equitable society. It seems like you're just attributing a meaning that doesn't exist to that post because you want to get really mad at antifar for posting a thread from a reporter who does a lot of work in this area.

Like, you're really angry at someone saying that a disaffected young dude is a prime target for radicalization. This is not a healthy or normal thing to take issue with.

Did you open twitter?

Idk, maybe try looking through the thread. Read some of the comments too.

Turns out, i'm not the only one reading it this way, because it's literally what it fucking says.

https://twitter.com/ryanjyoder/status/1527722891596468227?t=6sbv6JWAMyKu0kvgUQp9nQ&s=19

https://twitter.com/theanniesimmons/status/1527722013053202432?t=0h8gjeszHgGKWUBX3Gu6Ag&s=19

https://twitter.com/ilpomodoro2/status/1527722689946865669?t=TsmsdU6R0U9Yr8raJx8Yhw&s=19

https://twitter.com/JacksLetters/status/1527727716333518848?t=GO6fnuHFIVgKHI5-64hruw&s=19

https://twitter.com/DerJakemeister/status/1527737565234843648?t=HAaw53TqCctVAGQXTqIDgg&s=19

https://twitter.com/misfit320/status/1527736240879067136?t=fneEL1QgdttMWOdo4QmbRw&s=19

https://twitter.com/Ebetharama/status/1527726351221923841?t=d7Kj5PtQ6pkGSHTXvx4kBw&s=19

https://twitter.com/dmsdyminimalist/status/1527722462485524480?t=40XdUnzgxMpKVjZrm-swDg&s=19

Etc, etc.

Then the dude posts this:
https://twitter.com/oneunderscore__/status/1527742149529419777?t=SPxhmGUDFjzQu3dVhKRZdw&s=19

Completely undermining his thead after the backlash. Like, if the dude was just looking for any old excuse to kill black people, why the fuck does it matter that he had a toothache? Did he have a seizure and forget the thrust of the thread?

Like, he makes the point multiple times in the thread, it's not an accident. He says that disinformation is used to sway the public, so that they don't care about societal inequities and place the blame on others like them. That is the true purpose, and those that suffer the brunt of those inequities are those who are easily swayed. That we shouldn't just be looking at disinformation, but the issues in society that lure people into it.

But then he says "dude was just looking for any old excuse to kill black people."

It's also important to note that this kid had the resources to go see a good dentist. Which kind of eliminates the central point of the thread to begin with.

COVxy posted...

He says that disinformation is used to sway the public, so that they don't care about societal inequities and place the blame on others like them. That is the true purpose, and those that suffer the brunt of those inequities are those who are easily swayed. That we shouldn't just be looking at disinformation, but the issues in society that lure people into it.

Do you disagree? Because for me, part of taking disinformation seriously is examining what makes people or societies susceptible to it.

There's nothing good about that thread. The only reason people like it is because it hints at their favorite political issues.

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]

Right? You wouldn't think that someone would take this much issue with someone saying that white supremacists blame their problems on minorities and radicalize people into violence by convincing them that all of their issues in life are caused by minorities and giving them a target to attack

.
COVxy posted...

That we shouldn't just be looking at disinformation, but the issues in society that lure people into it.

You're right dude, we definitely should not look at why people buy into radicalization. You've nailed it. Bravo. You're so smart.

Intro2Logic posted...

Do you disagree? Because for me, part of taking disinformation seriously is examining what makes people or societies susceptible to it.

What a crazy idea.

Intro2Logic posted...

Do you disagree? Because for me, part of taking disinformation seriously is examining what makes people or societies susceptible to it.

I think that it's a point to be made about a lot of radicalization, but has very little to do with this particular case, and cases like it. Like, do you think the answer to someone like Elliot Roger is enforced sexual partners?

Like, there's a repeated flavor of this event that has very little to do with traditional terrorism and the way they recruit.

He's not wrong about disinformation though, that's exactly what a certain collective of people use. First you plant the idea, the people who believe certain shit never question it and spread it around to others who repeat it.

It's the oldest trick in the book and people still fall for it.

greyfox747 posted...

You're right dude, we definitely should not look at why people buy into radicalization. You've nailed it. Bravo. You're so smart.

Great job cherry picking my post, pretending to completely miss the point so that you don't have to engage with conversation you just might have been wrong in.

Like even if you thought that the primary point was relevant for this type of event, it's demonstrably not relevant here because the kid had the resources to get his tooth fixed.

COVxy posted...

Like, do you think the answer to someone like Elliot Roger is enforced sexual partners?

Again, way to really nail what other people are saying, you really come up with the best and most genuine points. It's really easy to tell that you're definitely not lashing out and putting words into other people's mouths. It's very easy to have an honest discussion with you.

Do you think this incident is very very different from that incident?

I mean, we're talking about solutions to this type of mass shooting, correct?

Everyone knows that when you're angry about people talking about radicalization, the mature and honest thing to do is to start talking about how they probably support sex slavery.

It's always a pleasure to talk to you.

Just so that we're being honest with eachother, do any of you all really believe that a toothache really contributed to this massacre? That this kid didn't have the resources to fix his toothache, and that's partly why he went and killed a bunch of black people?

I just...do you really honestly believe that? Or do you just think it's a nice rhetorical device to pivot the conversation to something else?

Id appreciate if youd stop referring to this piece of shit as kid

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]


Dude released a manifesto explaining what radicalized him. Strangely enough, inaccesible healthcare didn't pop up in it.

He did however complain about a toothache in his DMs to himself, so that shit's probably the legit reason.

The shooter had more access to healthcare than most people in the US. This isn't it.

RIP to the victims

How could you possibly argue that this dude was lurred into right wing propaganda because he disenfranchised by lack of healthcare, when he literally had better healthcare than most of the country? Like, it's just clearly a rhetorical device, that has no relationship with reality. Which is particularly gross in this case.

It's wild that you'll go to bat for such a ludicrously stupid idea simply because it falls along a certain line.

Topic's not great

:v