I asked some friends what they thought, and one of them mentioned they were accused of being antisemitic for doing exactly that. So what is true about the lizard joke that’s definitely not true about the robot one that you think determines antisemitism?

using “woke” as a pejorative

I am not using woke as a pejorative, but as a descriptor; it’s good to be woke.

“Woke scolding” is what you are in the process of doing, and it damages the cause. You’re misrepresenting me in ways that don’t make sense given the context and you’re bringing up history of terms that don’t reflect their present meaning to evoke unwarranted feelings of shame. If we were in a more public forum while you were arguing this disingenuously using the language of we who are aware of and opposed to oppression it would risk turing away once potential allies and further radicalizing individuals who have only been shown clips of visually identifiable “leftists” screaming while a chud pretends to be a reasonable centrist instead of a fascist who was just distributing Qanon pamphlets. I urge you to be more conscientious with your rhetoric.

Yeah, things like calling me “sweetie” and implying that my mild criticism is me acting like you committed a high crime are not exactly going to change my mind. Telling other people what to do based on a misplaced notion of what’s harmful is exactly what I mean. It reminds me of that really creepy phase of internet discourse when a large ammount of people started insisting on saying “Latinx” as a gender-neutral inclusive version of “latino” or “latina”. The worst part about that was it was an exonym that was being forced on a minority community by a bunch of white liberals who had a notion of what was wrong with someone else’s culture and were actively trying to fix it. So instead of being slightly annoying and unhelpful they were being actively harmful in their ignorance. BTW, for anyone wondering: I’ve learned through speaking with people that the preferred term is “Latine”.

Now, obviously the same damage is not being done in this instance, but it illustrates why I’m saying this, and shows the dangers of bandwagoning as soon as you think something might be perpetuating oppression. No doubt that it’s good to be aware of how our behavior affects others and to adjust accordingly, but what I see here is people defending a billionaire against a term by saying that it’s antisemitic without being educated on it by the wider Jewish community beforehand, and so I find it largely unconvincing. If I see further discourse about it I’ll investigate, and if one of my friends starts talking to me about it I’ll heed their concerns. However, a small number of strangers on the internet saying something isn’t enough to change my mind, especially not without a good argument.

the point about the dog whistle is legit.

No, it isn’t; a dogwhistle is a message that isn’t detectable by someone unaware of it. Using lizard person like that isn’t an antisemitic dog whistle because people have been using it to disparagingly refer to the wealthy/politicians/etc. irrespective of their heritage for decades at the very least. Whether the term used to be used a specific way, or even how it originated isn’t actually relevant to the question.

Basically what I’m saying is you need to calm down and figure out the difference between being woke and being a wokescold. It’s hard to strike that ballance, but the first step is realizing you haven’t done it yet.

I don’t think they’re Jewish.

Even if they are, that’s not why we despise them.

I can fight a blue whale. The whale would fail to perceive me as a threat, and so when it wanders away I win by default.

My advice is that she get help from a therapist that specializes in cluster B personality disorders. Preferably all of them 'cuz holy fuck.

I think testosterone levels in cis men actually have been decreasing on average. I don’t know how testosterone affects the aging process, so I can’t speak on if the other person is being reasonable, though.

Also, last I checked the reason was still a mystery.

I disagree that a worker state is a thing that can exist at the scale envisioned by MLs. The defining feature of capitalism is the prevalence of the employer-employee relationship, which the USSR preserved; the state employed the workers who were alienated from their labor and had little say in the operations of their workplace. That’s not socialism.

Socialist state

The thing that MLs consider a “socialist state” is capitalism where the state is a universal employer, which is decidedly not socialism.

They still strongly support worker ownership

Lenin destroyed the worker’s councils, and I’ve met multiple MLs who consider co-ops to be a bourgeois institution in disguise.

oppose Imperialism

That’s a common story, and also an outright lie. See: literally every time they defend Russian imperialism.

they can be reasoned with

Only if they’re honest in their delusions, which most of them aren’t.

One in a Thousand ist still low enough that it is very likely you will never meet a person involved with this in your entire life.

What? If I met only 1 new person every month for my entire life, I’d meet 1000 people before 85 years. If I only met 1 new person a week, I’d meet 1000 people before I turned 20. I’m a goddamn hermit, but I still rarely go more than a week without meeting someone new, and when I meet new people it’s often more than 1.

I’ve already met people who later died in in traffic accidents, so what the fuck are you talking about?

MLs argue that socialism can’t be used to mobilize an economy as a way of justifying the actions of Lenin, Stalin, etc. this is a fundamentally anti-socialist stance.

While I agree with you in principle, I actually do think that 1/7k is unexpectedly high. If 1/10k people had an incestuous relationship, that would be low enough that I wouldn’t find it surprising. This study, if we take it to be cross-sectional, implies that the rate of incidence is much higher, at least on the order of 1/1k, possibly something around 1%. I don’t know the frequency that people of incestuous individuals have a child as a result, but the idea of it being higher than 1/7 strikes me as unlikely. Of course, multiple children can result from a pairing, so that has the potential to sway the numbers, but I’d hope that incestuous individuals are less likely to desire children from the relationship, and as a result would take a pregnancy as a sign to stop.

Dude I really don’t care what you think or say.

Sure.

I am just bored and think this is fun.

Ok, so you admit it; you’re a disingenuous troll. Blocked.

Omg you’re that hypocritical guy that was complaining about people complaining too much about Hexbear. You seriously put your take out there, got ratioed, and now you’re making a post about how people shouldn’t argue in favor of defederation? It’s one thing to say “I don’t think we should defederate from this particular instance” but to complain about people talking about it is far outside the bounds of reason.

I think you’re a Hexbear person in masquerade because you’re using the weird faux first principles argument style that conservatives and tankies use along with the disengenuous reframing tactics of trolls. People are allowed to care about things that you don’t, and they can argue in favor of things you don’t like. I find it amazing how you accused me of being a child, and now I think you were projecting.

Oh, shit! >!They hit the pentagon!!<

CW: I’m a sick bastard.

I’ve never been called a tankie. What arguments are you getting in that’s having people call you a tankie?

Uh aktualy it’s called a “midden”.

I personally find dishonesty immoral and I value behaving ethically very highly. As a result, I don’t lie about myself online. I don’t need to tell the whole truth, and I can say things that are untrue in specific contexts where I believe it’ll be read as insincere (satirical, sarcastic, etc.) but I don’t deliberately convey untrue statements as if they were true.

What’s mumble?