3 ms·

> all of U.S. politics fits neatly into just two political parties. There are Anarchists, Communists, Marxists, wtf Antifa is (actually quite Fascistic in the

> all of U.S. politics fits neatly into just two political parties. There are Anarchists, Communists, Marxists, wtf Antifa is (actually quite Fascistic in their anti-Fascist stance), neoNazis, the Trump faction, normies, leftists, progressivesm (the last 3 definitely kept out of the DNC), actual conservatives, the Religious Fundamentalists(of all religions), then the DNC and RNC duopoly, which is an influence pedaling racket that claims to represent the majority of US citizens, as a fig leaf of legitimacy.

krapp 2y ago
The anarchists, communist and marxists don't count. They have absolutely no political relevance or power outside of social media. They're a no-op. Leftists and progressives, when they vote, tend to vote Democrat, and never vote Republican. Except for that one time when they really wanted Bernie but we don't talk about that. Antifa's politics would have put them solidly hard left, but like all black activist movements they were commoditized by white liberals, infiltrated by the CIA and rendered impotent and useless. They would either opt out or vote Democrat, simply because that's what black voters and leftists tend to do. neonazis, trumpists, and religious fundamentalists, when they vote, tend to vote Republican, and never Democrat. Those groups basically form the modern Republican base at the moment. >the DNC and RNC duopoly, which is an influence pedaling racket that claims to represent the majority of US citizens, as a fig leaf of legitimacy. They do represent the majority of US citizens. Most US citizens aren't extreme enough not to have their views representable by the mainstream.
- unclebucknasty 2y ago
  First I'm hearing of Antifa originally being a "black activist movement". Citation?
  - krapp 2y ago
    My citation is that I'm stupid and got them confused with BLM. That said (and I'll take my lumps for it,) Antifa basically came up as an anti-Trumpist reactionary movement, so still leftist. Probably all wanted Bernie.
    - unclebucknasty 2y ago
      >got them confused with BLM Person online acknowledges mistake. Noting the date/time as Internet history. Can't really say anything except "respect". But, yeah, I don't know what Antifa is in the modern American context. They did seem to arise here as a reaction to Trump. But, oddly, it was referenced then as if they'd always been active in the U.S. I remember thinking, "did I miss something?" Thereafter, they magically appeared as if on cue when the right needed to be spooked or "motivated", as in 2020. They were a convenient bogeymen. Combine that with their anonymous nature, "fluid" membership, known alt-right hoaxes and impersonations thereof, and I'd bet they were more false flag than authentic, even if it was initially organic. I mean, where are they now?
      - krapp 2y ago
        >But, oddly, it was referenced then as if they'd always been active in the U.S. I remember thinking, "did I miss something?" I think that was mostly propaganda. They were "active" in the sense that some form of anti-fascist or extreme leftist movement existed in the US prior to Trump, at least according to the Wikipedia page, but "Antifa" as an identity is clearly post-Trump viral marketing. I guess it depends on how much value you put on the label versus the ideology. >I mean, where are they now? Where is the hacker known as "anonymous" now? Even QAnon seems to have mostly fallen off the radar. Have they disappeared, or does the media simply not pay as much attention to them anymore? I always have to remember that consensus reality is manufactured by capitalist and state interests, it's a product like any other, and its purpose is to influence and monetize first, and reflect objective reality last. Events are always happening in the background that I'm not aware of, simply because it isn't commercially or politically viable to make me aware.
unclebucknasty 2y ago
Right. But, how would this duopoly have emerged or be sustainable in a nation that truly embraced individualism?

krapp 2y ago

The anarchists, communist and marxists don't count. They have absolutely no political relevance or power outside of social media. They're a no-op. Leftists and progressives, when they vote, tend to vote Democrat, and never vote Republican. Except for that one time when they really wanted Bernie but we don't talk about that. Antifa's politics would have put them solidly hard left, but like all black activist movements they were commoditized by white liberals, infiltrated by the CIA and rendered impotent and useless. They would either opt out or vote Democrat, simply because that's what black voters and leftists tend to do. neonazis, trumpists, and religious fundamentalists, when they vote, tend to vote Republican, and never Democrat. Those groups basically form the modern Republican base at the moment. >the DNC and RNC duopoly, which is an influence pedaling racket that claims to represent the majority of US citizens, as a fig leaf of legitimacy. They do represent the majority of US citizens. Most US citizens aren't extreme enough not to have their views representable by the mainstream.

unclebucknasty 2y ago
First I'm hearing of Antifa originally being a "black activist movement". Citation?
- krapp 2y ago
  My citation is that I'm stupid and got them confused with BLM. That said (and I'll take my lumps for it,) Antifa basically came up as an anti-Trumpist reactionary movement, so still leftist. Probably all wanted Bernie.
  - unclebucknasty 2y ago
    >got them confused with BLM Person online acknowledges mistake. Noting the date/time as Internet history. Can't really say anything except "respect". But, yeah, I don't know what Antifa is in the modern American context. They did seem to arise here as a reaction to Trump. But, oddly, it was referenced then as if they'd always been active in the U.S. I remember thinking, "did I miss something?" Thereafter, they magically appeared as if on cue when the right needed to be spooked or "motivated", as in 2020. They were a convenient bogeymen. Combine that with their anonymous nature, "fluid" membership, known alt-right hoaxes and impersonations thereof, and I'd bet they were more false flag than authentic, even if it was initially organic. I mean, where are they now?
    - krapp 2y ago
      >But, oddly, it was referenced then as if they'd always been active in the U.S. I remember thinking, "did I miss something?" I think that was mostly propaganda. They were "active" in the sense that some form of anti-fascist or extreme leftist movement existed in the US prior to Trump, at least according to the Wikipedia page, but "Antifa" as an identity is clearly post-Trump viral marketing. I guess it depends on how much value you put on the label versus the ideology. >I mean, where are they now? Where is the hacker known as "anonymous" now? Even QAnon seems to have mostly fallen off the radar. Have they disappeared, or does the media simply not pay as much attention to them anymore? I always have to remember that consensus reality is manufactured by capitalist and state interests, it's a product like any other, and its purpose is to influence and monetize first, and reflect objective reality last. Events are always happening in the background that I'm not aware of, simply because it isn't commercially or politically viable to make me aware.

unclebucknasty 2y ago

Right. But, how would this duopoly have emerged or be sustainable in a nation that truly embraced individualism?