Social media is mostly bots, most people hate the government
Liberals are at a point where they hate the Dems and the GOP
The right wing coalition is falling apart with Candace owens, Tucker carlson, and Nick Fuentes separating the Nazis from the evangelical Christians.
Material conditions are getting worse, but we haven't had the ai bubble pop or war with Venezuela. Either will make life way worse for the west and we're gonna see chaos.
Idk what's gonna happen, but I think trump 2.0 has kinda turned a lot of people away from the right by both making material conditions worse and being mean and annoying.
Look at any news sub on reddit and it's filled with pro Israel bots and shit. But the amount of obvious pro Israel propaganda from the state and by bots and shit was so obvious it's now turning every right winger under the age of 40 into a Nazi.
I don't think the mass botting campaigns work. They only make people more upset at the right and make the right look like extremely annoying assholes.
The right won a lot of ground by going "Le woke is trying to put politics into everything"
But now every fucking social media thread about sports or video games or movies gets brigaded by obvious right wing bots, even the most stupid liberals I know hate it.
People hate this it makes it seem like right wingers are now the annoying sjw that makes everything about politics (they always have been) and since most people under 40 get their news from tiktok and shit the bots and MSM manufacturing consent campaigns don't work.
My mother is 60 and gets her news from tiktok. She doesn't want the US to invade Venezuela, literally nobody does only bots do.
It's backfiring but I think the admin is super on twitter and think it's working. I think they legit do not understand that they're getting everyone to hate them and theyre making material conditions worse. I think they also believe more in the polymarket shit than polls because they're that stupid.
What happens next? Trump's polling is the worst it's ever been. The right wing coalition has collapsed and now maga is basically only the white evangelical boomers.
If material conditions get worse we're gonna see more Luigis and Tyler Robinsons in a country with way to many guns.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Coughlin
When I can't afford restaurants, I eat at home. When I can't afford streaming services, I watch things on my computer. When the algorithm recommends streamers, I watch streamers. When the streamers it recommends are rabidly right-wing and the algorithm self-reinforces if I accidentally click one, I'm walking through a minefield of Father Coughlins. A total loss of institutional legitimacy only means that every individual voice has equal legitimacy to the viewer.
As things get worse people like Candace Owens and Nick Fuentes have and will become the Personal Jesusii of the right. That's a lot more powerful than MAGA's aimlessness because the parasocial attachment is stronger/more constant. The 1930s proxy was only interrupted by the New Deal/WW2 drastically changing material conditions and a wartime ban on fascist broadcasts. It will probably succeed today given how much more advanced the tech is.
Common KKKraKKKer KKKatholiKKK L.
Stalin quote about social fascists remains absolutely evergreen.
I don't think this shit would work anymore
We're seeing the opposite kinda
Zohran was super popular, even here in Ireland. Every working class person I've met loved him, even the old racist ones.
I think we're too far away from the ussr and the red scare for this shit to work.
I also think most people find candsnce Owens and Nick Fuentes gross
This priest was a lot more similar to Zohran than a lot of people would be comfortable admitting. He didn't start out making antisemitic pro-nazi screeds, and his program wasn't a conspiracy to turn anyone into a nazi. He became a nazi because he was an anticommunist and a chauvinist. If not Zohran himself, that describes a lot of his supporters. This kind of social democracy is almost never actually liberating in first world countries, and in the third world it's only liberating because imperialism forces them to move beyond it or be crushed.
Unfortunately, that simply isn't true. Look at what people say about China, for example. Even Venezuela is partly unpopular because of which administration is pushing it. You can see many of the same Americans who supported the Iraq war opposing this not out of principle, but because they think it will be harmful to America. They still think of Iraq as a "mistake" they stumbled into that was supposed to be "quick and easy".
A) fascists in the 30s were smarter than modern fascists. They knew they had to provide social safety nets. Modern fascists don't even propose that. The Nazis, Italian, etc all ran on shit like making the economy better and stuff. That's a big part of why they were popular they did Hitler shit and actually (very shortly) increased material conditions after the great depression.
Modern fascists don't do that. They just do racism and bigotry and actively remove social safety nets and make the economy worse. This is why Trump is becoming more and more unpopular
B) how many people have you met irl that actually want the US to invade Venezuela? I've met zero. My boomer dad thinks a civil war is coming but also thinks Venezuela is gonna be Iraq 2.
I've seen support online for it, but all of social media is botted to hell.
This is mostly true, but also mostly temporary. The fascists will figure this out. They've already been claiming to want to improve the economy (bring jobs back to Amerikkka, etc.).
Yeah, that's my point. Americans don't oppose it out of principle, they oppose it because they think it will be harmful to them. The current administration is just bad at manufacturing consent for intervention, I don't think it's a genuine political development in the American public. A lot of fascists oppose it because they think it takes resources away from whites, not because they have a problem with massacring a country in the global south. All the same priors that allowed the Iraq war to happen (chauvinism, exceptionalism, etc.) are still there and can still be directed into support for actions by a more competent government.
I agree with you that the kind of overt fascism you see online isn't popular in Amerikkka broadly (except among a significant minority), but it's not because of any real incompatibility. A few small adjustments could launch a much more effective fascist movement.
I think the trump admin is filled with idiots who cannot fix the economy and it's gonna cause dissent and the American public to dislike them.
I also think most Americans don't like Venezuela but I don't care if they like Venezuela. I just don't want them to support an invasion. If we can get them to oppose an invasion that's good. The main thing rn should be getting as many people to support not invading.
We can worry later if most people didn't support it for selfish reasons. The average American isn't very politically aware or knowledgeable.
The goal rn should be to make sure hundreds of thousands of Venezuelans don't die from American invasion and im gonna ally myself with the pro America liberal aunts of the world if they're gonna be on my side because I care about making sure people in the global south don't get bombed.
We can use the alliance over supporting no war to get them to move left on foreign policy.
Agreed, the problem is that the reasons they oppose these things are fragile, meaning it will be easily possible for a more competent administration to get them to support them later. There was widespread opposition to the Vietnam war, but more importantly, decades later there was widespread agreement that it was bad. That didn't stop 90%+ support for the Iraq war.
Of course, at no point did I or would I argue against this.
The difference now is that nobody gets their news from MSM anymore.
It's way harder to manufacturer consent with genz and millennials.
Social media has made it so that everyone picks their news sources.
Back in 2003 everyone was watching CNN and shit. My household doesn't even have that.
I don't think they can manufacture consent like they used to.
They tried for Charlie Kirk, they got people fired, they held memorials, they have Erica Kirk on all of MSM parading the corpse of her husband. And what do you see?
Everyone under the age of 40 is mocking his death. Ai vids of his face on rappers and porn stars. We are charlie Kirk song is a meme.
I don't think they can do 2003 anymore
This is true and a good point, but that's why there's so much social media astroturfing. That's why there's all these "think of the children" social media control laws being pushed. You're right that their current strategy doesn't work that well, but they're not out of the game yet.
Some right-wing media figures had a ton of success (especially with young people in some cases, like Jordan Peterson) for a while. That seems to have plateaued, but I expect a new set will appear that adjust their strategies to suit.
We've kind of drifted in this conversation though, I agree with your original point that the online "discussions" are not really representative of the broader American population.
Not yet. They'll only change what they're doing if they think their current trajectory wouldn't let them retain power, but they don't think that. We're in a situation where the ruling class is feeding on their own slop and becoming increasingly out of touch with reality, they think we're starting a 1000 year Reich because all of their bots on Twitter tell them they're doing a great job.
Only once they run into the brick wall of material reality, (a landslide for Democrats or and economic crash or something) will they reevaluate their priors. Until then, "affordability" is a DemonCRAP hoax and that the economy is A++++
I agree, I'm only saying they've been talking about it at times. Obviously it's not really implemented, as you say.
I'm pretty sure Fuentes talks about that sort of thing pretty often. He's one of many people opportunistically exploiting austerity sickos like shabibo who say there literally should not be retirement, for example.
He's not in charge though and isn't popular and never will be
He's too much of creepy fucking loser
The fact if the matter is modern fascism is more so miller and Vance who do not want that
Many such cases
I don't think I ever realized that the USA didn't recognize the USSR for 16 years
I disagree.
Nick Fuentes isn't popular. I think he's well known now and has an incredibly online and loud fans, but he's never gonna have a big audience.
Less than 1% of the population currently listens to him and he's probably at his peak rn. He's gonna fall off eventually as the right moves on to the next guy.
Owens is doing really well but I don't think she's attracting anyone new. She's just absorbed the audiences of Shapiro, crowder, pool, and has gotten a lot of the boomer and Gen x evangelicals to watch her.
She's not converting anyone, she's just a case of there being a lot of right media personalities 5 years ago but because of Israel, they're all hated now. If you look at Shapiro and pool they're all hating on her because they stole their audiences. Her massive growth is just her stealing the tpusa and daily wire audiences plus older audiences going more online for news.
Tucker is the scary one that everyone should watch out for.
I have seen zero evidence that we're gonna get an actually large right wing media guy.
Tucker was that on Fox News, I don't think they can do it again, but if anyone can do it it's him.
The right is in power and people aren't that stupid, they know the right is making their lives worse. Only people already committed to fascism will stay committed.
What we are seeing be popular are left wing populist figures like zohran
Zohran has a million times more motion than any of these online right wing Nazi influencers. The difference is he doesn't have a terminally online fanbase and bots to push his shit 24/7
It might not be any of the current crop. A decade ago I would have said Ben Shapiro or Jordan Peterson were contenders and now they've fallen off. It probably won't be a singular figure and it doesn't need to be. Some of the biggest right wing threats like megachurches and constitutional sheriffs grow rhizomatically through a bunch of mini-Hitlers neither of us could name. One of the other big themes of the 1930s was the collapse of state welfare putting it in the hands of churches and protestant-run citizens councils that judged the worthy poor in newspapers. As the state and its legitimacy erode, local authority and small movements gain more power. Online personalities will be the ones manufacturing consent for the mini-Hitlers in that decentralised country. If a streamer can mobilise 100 people in any small area, that's enough to swing most small town elections or intimidate most municipal meetings.