this post was submitted on 09 Dec 2025
49 points (100.0% liked)

Slop.

749 readers
413 users here now

For posting all the anonymous reactionary bullshit that you can't post anywhere else.

Rule 1: All posts must include links to the subject matter, and no identifying information should be redacted.

Rule 2: If your source is a reactionary website, please use archive.is instead of linking directly.

Rule 3: No sectarianism.

Rule 4: TERF/SWERFs Not Welcome

Rule 5: No bigotry of any kind, including ironic bigotry.

Rule 6: Do not post fellow hexbears.

Rule 7: Do not individually target other instances' admins or moderators.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Is it bad takes, controversial posts, or something else?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] FunkyStuff@hexbear.net 49 points 2 weeks ago (4 children)

Frustrated beyond words that so many years since March 2022, liberals still believe the reason communists are in favor of the SMO is because communists think Russia is still socialist. If 3 years isn't enough time for them to understand (not necessarily agree with, but understand) an argument as simple as "NATO holds back world socialism; Russia's war in Ukraine is fundamentally about pushing back NATO; therefore it is good for those who want to see socialism bloom if Russia succeeds in exhausting a NATO effort to expand into Ukraine." It makes me seriously question that any significant number of people are ready to seriously dig into criticism of capitalism, participate in the development of counter-counterinsurgency tactics, and all the tasks that are necessary for a revolutionary movement.

The upshot is that, much like liberals and reactionaries don't believe their own propaganda but repeat it anyway as a means of positive moral and mental affirmation about their place in the world, they also don't necessarily fail to understand the argument, but understand it perfectly well and just refuse to interface with it because of cognitive dissonance. This is also true of anti-masking, it's not that they don't understand the necessity of still taking precautions against COVID, it's that doing so would cause them to take on a counterhegemonic position that breaks from the reality they see around them and they'll be socially punished for breaking uniform.

That last bit is strategically relevant because it means it's possible to beat these people's head out of the sand if the hegemony of the liberal and reactionary ideas is itself challenged (not just the specific ideas themselves). This is difficult because it requires severing people from their currently established consensus reality, but I think we all know the world is breaking that down without our help at the moment anyway.

[–] Horse@lemmygrad.ml 27 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

liberals still believe the reason communists are in favor of the SMO is because communists think Russia is still socialist

tbh i think they repeat it because it's easy to argue against, i doubt many of them actually believe it

[–] Cowbee@hexbear.net 32 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

I think they do believe it. False Witnesses is a great essay going over why people license themselves to believe clear falsehoods.

[–] FunkyStuff@hexbear.net 28 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (2 children)

I was basing my comment on that and Masses Elites and Rebels, but my takeaway from those essays is that they don't believe the things they're saying and the targets of the propaganda aren't supposed to believe it in a meaningful sense either, only to acquire it as a kind of currency that can be used to justify their social position (e.g. asked why you're homeschooling your kids? Because Oprah is a devil worshipper!)

But it is the case. Let’s go through that list again. The following are all true of the people spreading the Procter & Gamble rumor:

  1. They didn’t really believe it themselves.
  2. They were passing it along with the intent of misinforming others. Deliberately.
  3. They did not respect, or care about, the actual facts of the matter, except to the extent that they viewed such facts with hostility.

The post-truth element of this dynamic can't be understated. It's fundamental to how propaganda works: the accuracy of the claims is not an object to the emitter of the propaganda nor its target. The value of the propaganda comes purely from its capacity to make the world make sense from the POV of someone who has already bought into living their lives a certain way. But the difficult thing is that this does imply that after a certain point, we no longer have beliefs at all, just coping mechanisms detached from material reality and any kind of ground truth.

[–] Cowbee@hexbear.net 23 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

Good point, but I don't think it's black and white. What I think often happens is that people choose to not care about the truth of what they share. Point 3 doesn't mean they don't believe it, it means whether or not its true doesn't matter as much as its utility. They are willingly choosing not to engage critically, deliberately, but also do end up reinforcing their own beliefs this way.

[–] UmmmCheckPlease@hexbear.net 16 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

@Cowbee@hexbear.net , @FunkyStuff@hexbear.net ty - good essays from both - I love learning about these rhetorical tricks - especially around bad faith arguments

[–] Cowbee@hexbear.net 15 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

I see it all the time on my Lemmy.ml account, it's useful to know when engaging with reactionaries.

[–] UmmmCheckPlease@hexbear.net 13 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Yeah I work with the public a lot in the environmental field - and understanding the origin of a lot of things people parrot is a skill to stay sharp on - especially trying to deprogram people from “crabs in a pot” mentality

[–] Cowbee@hexbear.net 10 points 2 weeks ago

Yep, absolutely!

[–] FunkyStuff@hexbear.net 15 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

If you like this kind of thinking, Roderic Day also wrote (and Nia Frome also edited) Really Existing Fascism which is excellent too but focused on the way the conception of liberalism, communism, and fascism as three distinct ideologies (though usually with some symmetry between communism and fascism in the eyes of liberals because of their shared 'totalitarianism') came to be, how that model should be improved to be more accurate to 20th century history, and a pretty cool philosophical discussion that's a bit of a summary or spin on Losurdo's Nietzsche book.

[–] UmmmCheckPlease@hexbear.net 10 points 2 weeks ago

Nice I’ll check that out - I haven’t read much meta analysis of ideologies - that’ll be a good read. Thanks!

[–] Bob_Odenkirk@hexbear.net 21 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

I actually support the SMO because I believe that one Simpsons clip is real

lenin-crush-capitalism

[–] PKMKII@hexbear.net 21 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

It doesn’t even need to be crouched in terms of socialism, just “the American empire is bad for the world writ large, NATO is a facet of that empire, ergo NATO taking an L with regards to Ukraine is a lesser of two evils situation as while Putin is not good either, Russia is not destabilizing for the world the way America is.”

I think that’s where the counterhegemonic position part comes in; libs will acknowledge that America is not perfect (unlike conservatives), but even entertaining the idea that America is not the least-bad force is beyond the pale.

[–] FunkyStuff@hexbear.net 22 points 2 weeks ago

I was reflecting on it and I think for most American libs, reckoning with the principled anti-imperialist positions that they encounter on here is probably just asking a lot, psychologically speaking. It's a real "are we the baddies?" moment where you have to really entertain the possibility that all that surrounds you is legitimately evil and has been that way for a long time. It's much easier to think that Russia is behind the fascism they see around them than to face the reality that that's the essence of America itself.

[–] RedSturgeon@hexbear.net 18 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

A friend of mine was visiting me in 2023, libs were texting him worried for his safety, because we're bordering Russia.

I've had libs text me about how scary it must be to be in such dangerous location. Oh my goodness so scary to share a border with Russia. This is how terrified they are. Interestingly none of them ever cared to help me in any way, despite their loud support for trans ppl and supposed desire for "action". They could easily help me change my gender marker for example, so that maybe I can avoid getting into trouble and just make it easier to actually function etc. They only send me thoughts and prayers.

No wonder they believe socialism doesn't work, when they're all words 0 actions and it must be like a self-reinforcing loop. Any time they see someone doing a selfless action they project themselves and they have to find any selfish reason for said action.

[–] FunkyStuff@hexbear.net 8 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Careful what you wish for though, tell enough liberals that you're near the Russian border and eventually you'll meet a fed who wants you to join ISIS-K or something.

[–] RedSturgeon@hexbear.net 4 points 2 weeks ago

I think they would spend more effort into keeping me away from the groups, they already have plenty of members and don't need infiltrators, that would discourage adventurism and encourage the creation of more potato farms.