LookBehindYouNowAndThen
@LookBehindYouNowAndThen@lemmy.world
- Comment on "Your body, my choice:" Hate and harassment towards women spreads online 3 days ago:
Although, there are plenty of assholes who will parrot that phrase as satire just to get a rise out of people. Probably 0.01.
In the words of Kurt Vonnegut: you are what you pretend to be.
- Comment on Valve must address swastikas and other hate on Steam, writes US senator in a letter to Gabe Newell 3 days ago:
- Comment on ‘Not a Thing That Comes to Mind’: Harris Says She Wouldn’t Do Anything Differently from Biden over Past Four Years | National Review 1 month ago:
You do realize that the Onion is joking about something he actually, verifiably said?
Because he’s so shitty that even a parody of reactionary talking points can’t match the reality of how racist and vile they are?
So you’re the one who “ate the onion.” As usual, you’ve got it exactly backwards in the most hilarious way possible. God damn it’s funny how reactionaries always post a source that contradicts what they believe. Also, apparently satire has to be spelled out like a Ben Garrison cartoon for it to pierce the thick protective layer around their brains.
- Comment on NTEU (The IRS Union) Endorses Harris for President 1 month ago:
That’s what they were all there for.
To cause havoc and disrupt the vote count to keep Diaper Don in office.
He went to prison for it. You can pretend otherwise, but the only people who play along are other reactionaries who are allied with this guy but are embarrassed that he took the mask off.
- Comment on NTEU (The IRS Union) Endorses Harris for President 1 month ago:
It’s so cute when conservatives think we’re all as gullible as they are.
- Comment on NTEU (The IRS Union) Endorses Harris for President 1 month ago:
Let’s take a look at the people who endorse Trump:
- Comment on NTEU (The IRS Union) Endorses Harris for President 1 month ago:
Let’s take a look at the people who endorse Trump:
- Comment on The Reason for the Electoral College 1 month ago:
Reactionaries are anti-intillectuals.
They think their assumptions and propaganda drip-feed are as good as your expertise.
- Comment on The Reason for the Electoral College 1 month ago:
- Comment on MUST WATCH: Kamala's Disqualifying Comment About Going Into Homes to Check Guns 2 months ago:
Kind of makes you wonder why everyone on his golf course isn’t open carrying since it’ll make the whole situation safer? They should issue one at the front if you’re not strapped.
When have more guns ever been a bad thing?
- Comment on Polling guru Nate Silver predicts Trump has 64% chance of winning the Electoral College in latest forecast 2 months ago:
So you’re saying that Lincoln was wrong when he said slavers identified as Conservatives?
Wow, we’re so lucky to have such an intellectual giant on Lemmy!
- Comment on Polling guru Nate Silver predicts Trump has 64% chance of winning the Electoral College in latest forecast 2 months ago:
He also used other pronouns.
He’s pointing out that conservatism as an ideology is only about preserving ones status in relation to others by systematic oppression.
It’s pretty rich for you to act like you’re correcting me when you’re wrong in your face.
But, like Lincoln’s speech shows, conservatism lies about what it really is: reactionary bullshit. Hey, just like you’re doing now!
- Comment on Polling guru Nate Silver predicts Trump has 64% chance of winning the Electoral College in latest forecast 2 months ago:
Conservatives did not consider Lincoln a conservative. They considered a revolutionary. You’re lying.
But you say you are conservative - eminently conservative - while we are revolutionary, destructive, or something of the sort. What is conservatism? Is it not adherence to the old and tried, against the new and untried? We stick to, contend for, the identical old policy on the point in controversy which was adopted by “our fathers who framed the Government under which we live;” while you with one accord reject, and scout, and spit upon that old policy, and insist upon substituting something new. True, you disagree among yourselves as to what that substitute shall be. You are divided on new propositions and plans, but you are unanimous in rejecting and denouncing the old policy of the fathers. Some of you are for reviving the foreign slave trade; some for a Congressional Slave-Code for the Territories; some for Congress forbidding the Territories to prohibit Slavery within their limits; some for maintaining Slavery in the Territories through the judiciary; some for the “gur-reat pur-rinciple” that “if one man would enslave another, no third man should object,” fantastically called “Popular Sovereignty;” but never a man among you is in favor of federal prohibition of slavery in federal territories, according to the practice of “our fathers who framed the Government under which we live.” Not one of all your various plans can show a precedent or an advocate in the century within which our Government originated. Consider, then, whether your claim of conservatism for yourselves, and your charge or destructiveness against us, are based on the most clear and stable foundations.
Again, you say we have made the slavery question more prominent than it formerly was. We deny it. We admit that it is more prominent, but we deny that we made it so. It was not we, but you, who discarded the old policy of the fathers. We resisted, and still resist, your innovation; and thence comes the greater prominence of the question. Would you have that question reduced to its former proportions? Go back to that old policy. What has been will be again, under the same conditions. If you would have the peace of the old times, readopt the precepts and policy of the old times.
You charge that we stir up insurrections among your slaves. We deny it; and what is your proof? Harper’s Ferry! John Brown!! John Brown was no Republican; and you have failed to implicate a single Republican in his Harper’s Ferry enterprise. If any member of our party is guilty in that matter, you know it or you do not know it. If you do know it, you are inexcusable for not designating the man and proving the fact. If you do not know it, you are inexcusable for asserting it, and especially for persisting in the assertion after you have tried and failed to make the proof. You need to be told that persisting in a charge which one does not know to be true, is simply malicious slander.
- Comment on Polling guru Nate Silver predicts Trump has 64% chance of winning the Electoral College in latest forecast 2 months ago:
We’ve been over this, remember?
Abraham Lincoln himself said the slavers called themselves Conservatives. You want to pretend like the great realignment didn’t happen, because facts are inconvenient to the narrative you find useful.
I know reactionaries are anti-intillectuals, but the reading assignment was pretty short.
- Comment on Polling guru Nate Silver predicts Trump has 64% chance of winning the Electoral College in latest forecast 2 months ago:
They also thought slaves should count as 3/5 of a person for representation purposes.
So maybe we shouldn’t hold up their anti-democratic streak as an ideal.
But reactionaries are gonna reactionary.
- Comment on 'Maybe We Took A Wrong Turn Somewhere,' Thinks Party Whose Candidate Just Got Endorsed By Dick Cheney And Vladimir Putin 2 months ago:
And Donald Trump endored Putin.
Anyone who thinks Putin would prefer Harris over his cockpuppet is either lying or a useful idiot.
- Comment on Shock & Awe Dick Slithers Out Of His Neocon Lair To Endorse Kamala Over 'Depraved' Trump 2 months ago:
Same as it always was for reactionaries:
Far from yielding a knee-jerk defense of an unchanging old regime or a thoughtful traditionalism, the reactionary imperative presses conservatism in two rather different directions: first, to a critique and reconfiguration of the old regime; and second, to an absorption of the ideas and tactics of the very revolution or reform it opposes. What conservatism seeks to accomplish through that reconfiguration of the old and absorption of the new is to make privilege popular, to transform a tottering old regime into a dynamic, ideologically coherent movement of the masses. A new old regime, one could say, which brings the energy and dynamism of the street to the antique inequalities of a dilapidated estate. Over the last two decades, various writers and journalists have claimed that conservatism went into decline when Trump, or Palin, or Bush, or Reagan, or Goldwater, or Buckley, or someone took it off the rails. Originally, the argument goes, conservatism was a responsible discipline of the governing classes, but somewhere between Joseph de Maistre and Joe the Plumber, it got carried away with itself. It became adventurous, fanatical, populist, ideological. What this story of decline overlooks—whether it emanates from the right or the left—is that all of these supposed vices of contemporary conservatism were present at the beginning, in the writings of Burke and Maistre, only they weren’t viewed as vices. They were seen as virtues. Conservatism has always been a wilder and more extravagant movement than many realize—and it is precisely this wildness and extravagance that has been one of the sources of its continuing appeal.
Corey Robin- The Reactionary Mind
- Comment on Why Kamala Harris Will Not Bring Prices Down. Her Plan Needs Inflation | dlacalle.com 2 months ago:
The police don’t pick someone up without a reason.
Back the blue! 💙
- Comment on Why Kamala Harris Will Not Bring Prices Down. Her Plan Needs Inflation | dlacalle.com 2 months ago:
Oh, I see.
Why do you go to them? The scenery?
- Comment on Why Kamala Harris Will Not Bring Prices Down. Her Plan Needs Inflation | dlacalle.com 2 months ago:
Trump’s Dad was arrested at a KKK march.
As long as we’re comparing.
- Comment on “The United States Hates Women”: ASU Event Offers Dystopian, Anti-Capitalist Vision of America 2 months ago:
Don’t worry, women.
We know what’s best for your uterus, now that it’s property of the US government. 🫦
Why aren’t you having children? Don’t you know that’s your JOB?
- Comment on 48% Of NYC Bus Riders Don't Pay Fares 2 months ago:
Because reactionaries hate poor people and public transit.
Two birds with one stone for them.
- Comment on Tulsi Gabbard says she'd be 'grateful to serve' in a second Trump administration: 'Help him save our country' 2 months ago:
Oh no.
The candidate who lost her primary for being a reactionary dipshit joins the reactionary dipshit campaign.
What ever will we do?
- Comment on East Texas turns out for Ted Cruz’s Keep Texas, Texas Tour 2 months ago:
What a weird thing for a Canadian to do.
- Comment on Democratic National Convention surprise guest turns out to be COVID-19 as multiple attendees test positive 2 months ago:
Why do you think Trump wants everyone to get the fake vaccine? Is he a part of the deep state?
- Comment on Britain, Which Birthed American Ideas About Liberty, Has Embraced Despotism 2 months ago:
In political science, a reactionary or a reactionist is a person who holds political views that favor a return to the status quo ante—the previous political state of society—which the person believes possessed positive characteristics that are absent from contemporary society. As a descriptor term, reactionary derives from the ideological context of the left–right political spectrum. As an adjective, the word reactionary describes points of view and policies meant to restore a status quo ante.
Anti-intellectualism is a central tenet of reactionary movements. The truth literally doesn’t matter; it’s what is in their hearts that counts.
And what is in their hearts is a hatred for people who want to make the world a better place for everyone instead of just their sad, weird little tribe.
- Comment on Even cnn calls Biden’s lies out 2 months ago:
Remember when the jingoistic chodes were saying that anyone who is against the war in Iraq hates America?
Meanwhile, their fellow reactionaries were wearing secessionist merch.
Nobody hates real Americans like conservatives; their whole platform is “identity politics,” where the only approved identity is “backwards, ignorant reactionary.”
- Comment on Even cnn calls Biden’s lies out 2 months ago:
when your own turns on you, it’s a pretty clear sign.
24 former Trump allies and aides who turned against him
Former Trump officials are among the most vocal opponents of returning him to the White House
Full List of Former Donald Trump Officials Refusing to Endorse Him
I’m sure you meant something else though.
- Comment on House GOP investigators accuse Biden of ‘impeachable conduct’ in long-awaited report 2 months ago:
It’s soooo funny when people who are voting for a racist, fascist, famously loathed conman try and tell real Americans about political strategy.
Nah, we’re good. 😂
- Comment on A Harris-Walz Administration Would Be A Nightmare for Free Speech 3 months ago:
Network news has become so partisan, distorted and fake that licenses must be challenged and, if appropriate, revoked. Not fair to public!
DJT
With all of the Fake News coming out of NBC and the Networks, at what point is it appropriate to challenge their License? Bad for country!
DJT
We’re losing a lot of people because of the Internet, and we have to do something. We have to go see Bill Gates and a lot of different people that really understand what’s happening. And we have to talk to them. Maybe in certain areas closing that Internet up in some way [audience member cheers]… Somebody will say, ‘oh, freedom of speech, freedom of speech.’ These are foolish people. We have a lot of foolish people. We have a LOT of foolish people.
DJT
“Maybe he should have been roughed up, because it was absolutely disgusting what he was doing,” Trump said on the Fox News Channel on Sunday morning. “I have a lot of fans, and they were not happy about it. And this was a very obnoxious guy who was a trouble-maker who was looking to make trouble.”
DJT
Nobody should be allowed to burn the American flag - if they do, there must be consequences - perhaps loss of citizenship or year in jail!
DJT
Yeah. That guy is a free speech champion!
