The Political Memes Thread (memes too spicy for Channel Zero)

[Guest]

Back to our regularly scheduled *programming*

 

 

 

. 

[abrasivesaint]

Memes have always bothered me. Of course some make me laugh, of course i check this thread, but I usually stay clear of the other “dank memes” thread though. Unless i am really bored. They don’t offend me whatsoever, i either think they’re either moronic, or i get a cheap laugh. 

 

Memes worry me, a lot. I’ve seen this with my nephew and now with my girlfriend’s son. Memes and youtube videos control their worlds. I am constantly checking what my girlfriend’s son is watching because he is just spitting utter nonsense that he saw in memes as truth. Children don't know the difference, and algorithms keep them engaged. If parents don’t stay on top of what their children are watching these videos can warp their minds pretty easily. 

 

I am also always checking friends and family, grown ass men and women, who post political memes to their social media. I know they think it’s funny, but they also post them in the, “yup this says it all,” manner as well. I forget who mentioned it up there, or if i’m making it up, but memes have essentially become a “Idiots guide to politics.” It is 100% the reason why i deleted my Facebook account. 

[abrasivesaint]

And now a meme..

[Guest]

Before youtube it was video games. Before video games it was TV. Before TV it was... Radio? Before radio it was.... Comic books? Before comic books it was.... I honestly don't know. My point is that old people have always been, and will always be, warning kids something is going to rot their brain. Let it ride, baby. 

 

 

Edit - something something merilyn manson

 

 

 

. 

[abrasivesaint]

I don’t think memes fall into that argument though. They have specific, designed purposes that achieve their goals in grown ass adults, never mind children. 

 

The only argument i could see for video games, specifically first person shooters, is war propaganda. That is never the argument when video games are questioned though. 

 

The other stuff is nonsense. Kids do imitate what they see, (monkey see monkey do,) but it’s almost always harmless. I know i wasn’t immune. 

Edited September 18, 2019 by abrasivesaint

[misteraven]

2 hours ago, abrasivesaint said:

Memes have always bothered me. Of course some make me laugh, of course i check this thread, but I usually stay clear of the other “dank memes” thread though. Unless i am really bored. They don’t offend me whatsoever, i either think they’re either moronic, or i get a cheap laugh. 

 

Memes worry me, a lot. I’ve seen this with my nephew and now with my girlfriend’s son. Memes and youtube videos control their worlds. I am constantly checking what my girlfriend’s son is watching because he is just spitting utter nonsense that he saw in memes as truth. Children don't know the difference, and algorithms keep them engaged. If parents don’t stay on top of what their children are watching these videos can warp their minds pretty easily. 

 

I am also always checking friends and family, grown ass men and women, who post political memes to their social media. I know they think it’s funny, but they also post them in the, “yup this says it all,” manner as well. I forget who mentioned it up there, or if i’m making it up, but memes have essentially become a “Idiots guide to politics.” It is 100% the reason why i deleted my Facebook account. 

I completely agree. Memes, on their surface seem innocuous, but I believe them to be massive damaging to our society with where things strand. Granted I'm not advocating enacting legislation to ban them, but I find it to be a massive insidious tool, hand in hand with social media.  It is absolutely being effectively utilized as a tool to massive effect, to manipulate the masses and sway them into dangerous directions.

[misteraven]

1 hour ago, KILZ FILLZ said:

Before youtube it was video games. Before video games it was TV. Before TV it was... Radio? Before radio it was.... Comic books? Before comic books it was.... I honestly don't know. My point is that old people have always been, and will always be, warning kids something is going to rot their brain. Let it ride, baby.

Nope.

 

People weren't addicted to TV or radio and certainly not comic books. People (in general) literally can't live without their smart phones and people on social often check it religiously for fear of missing out. No doubt communication platforms have been leveraged for propaganda since day one, but nothing previous to what we have now has exploited flaws in the human condition and behaviors to the extent that this stuff has. Between science's far better understanding of human behaviors, as well as its flaws, coupled with advances in technology that allows someone savvy to not only exploit those flaws, but deliver it at a scale never before seen in human history, and you have a hell of a situation. Also, one can rightfully argue that we've also digressed significantly in terms of whats socially / politically acceptable compared to decades past, as well as strayed pretty far down the rabbit hole in terms of what is or isn't ethical / moral behavior as a whole. 

[Mercer]

2 hours ago, misteraven said:

I completely agree. Memes, on their surface seem innocuous, but I believe them to be massive damaging to our society with where things strand. Granted I'm not advocating enacting legislation to ban them, but I find it to be a massive insidious tool, hand in hand with social media.  It is absolutely being effectively utilized as a tool to massive effect, to manipulate the masses and sway them into dangerous directions.

I completely disagree and think that Memes are a valid tool for general humor, and even expression of a political/social perspective. While longform articles that are well thought out, properly cited hold more weight in some ways, they aren’t good at summarizing thoughts into an easily digestible form for most people to skim over in 2 seconds. Myself personally, I get 15-30 minute periods of down time constantly between jobs or other tasks during my daily routine, perfect for diving into Twitter/reddit/12ozProphet. Not always so perfect for picking up a book I want to pay close attention to, or going into an in depth article on the economist or something.

 

Personally I prefer both, I try to spend much more time reading books, listening to audiobooks, or reading on serious websites like the Mises Institute than I do on Twitter. I don’t think limiting myself to long form, and forgoing consumption of entertainment based content would be beneficial to my overall well being. It’s good to have a chuckle and relax sometimes, and not everything needs to be serious. I know they are memes, I don’t put this giant weight on them like they’re the gospel so to speak and often times end up debunking them, or having something I’ve posted debunked. If somethings off, or often times when a meme challenges my own views I’ll often times do my own research, thus gaining some sort of practical value, along with the entertainment value.

 

I don’t know if anyone else has picked up on this but I’ve post memes That should Both offend, and stroke the confirmation bias on both sides. Granted I lean libertarian (less that 1% of votes BTW) but I know I’ve posted at least one meme in here that provoked someone to research a subject, which is more than I can say for a lot of threads.

[misteraven]

1 hour ago, Mercer said:

I completely disagree and think that Memes are a valid tool for general humor, and even expression of a political/social perspective. While longform articles that are well thought out, properly cited hold more weight in some ways, they aren’t good at summarizing thoughts into an easily digestible form for most people to skim over in 2 seconds. Myself personally, I get 15-30 minute periods of down time constantly between jobs or other tasks during my daily routine, perfect for diving into Twitter/reddit/12ozProphet. Not always so perfect for picking up a book I want to pay close attention to, or going into an in depth article on the economist or something.

 

Personally I prefer both, I try to spend much more time reading books, listening to audiobooks, or reading on serious websites like the Mises Institute than I do on Twitter. I don’t think limiting myself to long form, and forgoing consumption of entertainment based content would be beneficial to my overall well being. It’s good to have a chuckle and relax sometimes, and not everything needs to be serious. I know they are memes, I don’t put this giant weight on them like they’re the gospel so to speak and often times end up debunking them, or having something I’ve posted debunked. If somethings off, or often times when a meme challenges my own views I’ll often times do my own research, thus gaining some sort of practical value, along with the entertainment value.

 

I don’t know if anyone else has picked up on this but I’ve post memes That should Both offend, and stroke the confirmation bias on both sides. Granted I lean libertarian (less that 1% of votes BTW) but I know I’ve posted at least one meme in here that provoked someone to research a subject, which is more than I can say for a lot of threads.

For starters, you're far more informed than the average person in regards to these topics. You also have evolved to have a healthy skepticism of anything put in front of you, especially claims about the economy and politics, which we both know you've taken the time to educate yourself on. That doesn't describe the average person.

 

Instead what we see is confirmation bias, echo chambers and people clamoring to be *woke* by joining *tribes* and jumping on *bandwagons* rolling in under a partisan banner as an unconscious way of dealing with increasing feelings of hopelessness from their own lives becoming increasingly out of control. Doesn't matter that their chosen party sold out its own ideologies long ago, so long as the talking points don't stray too far off the reservation. Anyone that isn't part of the *tribe* is the enemy and all the talking points to rally the base and fight the opposition are delivered in an endless feed of memes, that might have some grain of truth, but is mostly disingenuous or utterly misinformed. We can don our tin foil hats to discuss whether it's intentional or just dumbasses that churn them out for chuckles or attention or something more agenda driven, but either way its goes deeper than a lack of context. It's more often than not a lie by omission or half truth (at best).

 

Best way to sell a big lie is to wrap it in a thin layer of truth.

[abrasivesaint]

Agreed. 

[Hua Guofang]

10 hours ago, Mercer said:

Bottom line, if political memes offend you, the title spells it out pretty clearly what's in here. I think keeping it to a single thread outside of channel zero is better. I hope people can't resist clicking in, and a meme in here that challenges their views bothers the shit out them to the point they actually think.

 

 

I can start a "non-offensive political meme thread" for non-offensive mainstream views. You know, a "safe space" of sorts where nobody points out irresponsible government debt ratios, and other wildly offensive content like that. Doubt it will get much traffic but at least it won't offend someone.

When the straw men come out, you know there's no point in discussing because the point is being avoided.

 

Nobody said they were offended, they just said that so much of this thread is a load of shit and that there are real consequences to the "meme age of communication". I also implied that you're heavily, heavily biased and are one of the folk that doesn't like having their views challenged, evidenced by this and other silly straw man you put up.

 

Yay!

[misteraven]

Pause... Intermission.

 

Now a word from our sponsor: The power of positive thinking, meditation and crawling out of the pits of dispair

[Mercer]

1 minute ago, Hua Guofang said:

When the straw men come out, you know there's no point in discussing because the point is being avoided.

What am I avoiding?

 

1 minute ago, Hua Guofang said:

 

Nobody said they were offended,

Most people don't admit to being offended, but while they may not admit it, it's implied, and clearly obvious people are emotional about this shit. They don't want to debate their own points of view so much as express displeasure in someone else's.

 

1 minute ago, Hua Guofang said:

they just said that so much of this thread is a load of shit

Nobody said that exactly, they usually express displeasure in the statements the individual memes make. Even so, there are a couple of people expressing a general displeasure, but I never asked them to click in here and feel too fucking bad. There's a lot of garbage threads I don't like reading through so you know what I do, I don't click on them and get offended they exist.

 

1 minute ago, Hua Guofang said:

and that there are real consequences to the "meme age of communication".

Benefits of increased tech/communications capabilities outweigh all the consequences. Memes are only a result of this new format for expression. 

 

1 minute ago, Hua Guofang said:

I also implied that you're heavily, heavily biased

Like you're not, you may not have the courage to freely express what your actual views are, but that doesn't mean you're not on here saying mine are wrong. Just as "biased" as me, except I'm not ashamed of having convictions.

 

1 minute ago, Hua Guofang said:

and are one of the folk that doesn't like having their views challenged,

WTF do you think I post in here and respond to criticisms so much. I love this shit, so do you.

 

1 minute ago, Hua Guofang said:

evidenced by this and other silly straw man you put up.

 

Yay!

Do you know what a straw man is? 

[Mercer]

[Guest]

Reminded me of the perfect meme for this occasion. It's aged like fine wine and has become more offensive now than it was a decade ago. 👌 Magnifico

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

. 

[misteraven]

you just won.

 

🏆

[Hua Guofang]

@Mercer

 

This is the only bit worth taking up:

 

Like you're not, you may not have the courage to freely express what your actual views are, but that doesn't mean you're not on here saying mine are wrong. Just as "biased" as me, except I'm not ashamed of having convictions.

 

And that's the difference between you and I. I don't actually have a position on many things. I'm not arrogant enough to think that I have all the answers, I'm more prone to testing theories than proselytizing them. You seem to think that I HAVE to have a position, which I don't (this is why I stepped out of the thread discussing Venezuela and socialism). I guess I'm more of the kind of person that feels the more I know the more I realise that I don't know. I've spent the most of my professional life on this kind of stuff, actually having to be accountable for decisions, not just arguing pie in the sky on the internet where there are no real life consequences.

 

And biased? Yep, I am and I said exactly that up the page where I said you don't like being challenged on your convictions as well. But I get the feeling that you're so keen to argue your position that you barely even pay attention to what others have said.

[Fist 666]

Lol at total derail

 

21 hours ago, Mercer said:

I know man but to construct this high horse for yourself as though your intentions are somehow more virtuous. My end goal is minimizing all forms of violence, and increasing human prosperity also, I'm not sure what you're implying here.

Before I put words in your mouth, I'd love for you to define violence --I don't want to be accused of straw-manning you.

 

Does environmental violence fit into your "all forms of violence?" 

 

I don't believe I'm on any high horse, my principles clearly don't align with yours, they don't need to. A  free and unregulated market has little-to-no regard for human value or the environment in real time, thus we will disagree at the core. 

 

 

This is only conversation, as @Hua Guofang pointed out, who was offended? Thinking some thing is dumb is not being offended. Feeling displeasure that some thing exists is not being offended. Disagreeing with someone isn't being offended. Hell, talking shit isn't even a matter of being offended. 

 

 

 

 

 

Defending stupid memes? Now that might imply somebody got offended...

 

 

[Kults]

1 hour ago, KILZ FILLZ said:

Reminded me of the perfect meme for this occasion. It's aged like fine wine and has become more offensive now than it was a decade ago. 👌

^ Oldie but still just as relevant today if not more so 

 

 

[Mercer]

55 minutes ago, Fist 666 said:

Does environmental violence fit into your "all forms of violence?" 

Yes, but let me break it down. First, violence in intentionally harming another human being. Most harm from pollution is unintentional, like if they had a choice of course they would choose to do less harm.

 

The Agorist position on this stems from the Non Aggression Principal, which states a person cannot agress against another's person, or property. Pollution does both, thus it is a violation that would open one up to civil lawsuits, and even criminal action. In real world terms I'd be able to sue my neighbor if they polluted the environment enough for me to claim damages, either to my property, or to me physically IE getting sick etc.

 

This idea of polluter responsibility is simple when it's obvious, like if your neighbor dumped a bunch of toxins that poisoned your well etc. The ancap solution can fight things like carbon pollution also which isn't so obvious. The best Idea I've seen is carbon removal facilities, and people planting trees, etc that can earn carbon token based on the amount of carbon they remove. Since it's ancap this carbon token would be a sort of cryptocurrency, awarded only to carbon removal/creation that can then be purchased on the open market by net carbon producers.

 

Should an oil, or fossil fuel company choose to sell gasoline, they would need to purchase an equal amount of carbon credits to cover the carbon their fuel will eventually produce when burned. Having proof a company has "paid it's tax" or covered it's damage would insulate them from legal costs, or having criminal charges leveled at them. Should you feel like helping yourself, you could plant trees for carbon credits you could sell, or even buy some of these carbon credits yourself as an act of charity if you've got the loot.

 

Company A that doesn't contribute to carbon removal, and raises atmospheric carbon by selling oil could be sued successfully for an amount far exceeding what the carbon token contribution would have cost originally. Company B would get the case dismissed having an adequate amount of carbon tokens in their possession on a public ledger tracking this information in real time (blockchain).

 

Regardless of your beliefs on this, it is 100% provable fact that accumulated CO2 emissions into the atmosphere do lower property values, and it can be calculated. Less crop production due to climate change, less land because the sea is rising etc. Plenty of places have very obvious, valid claims against fossil fuel producers right now, just no system for fighting back. You'd be surprised how much thought, and effort is being put towards finding NAP compliant solutions to environmental protection.

 

Several projects not waiting for government permission now:

 

https://carboncoin.cc/

 

https://climatetrade.com/

 

https://futurism.com/climatecoin-aims-worlds-first-carbon-neutral-cryptocurrency

Edited September 19, 2019 by Mercer

[Mercer]

2 hours ago, Hua Guofang said:

@Mercer

 

This is the only bit worth taking up:

 

Like you're not, you may not have the courage to freely express what your actual views are, but that doesn't mean you're not on here saying mine are wrong. Just as "biased" as me, except I'm not ashamed of having convictions.

 

And that's the difference between you and I. I don't actually have a position on many things. I'm not arrogant enough to think that I have all the answers, I'm more prone to testing theories than proselytizing them. You seem to think that I HAVE to have a position, which I don't (this is why I stepped out of the thread discussing Venezuela and socialism). I guess I'm more of the kind of person that feels the more I know the more I realise that I don't know. I've spent the most of my professional life on this kind of stuff, actually having to be accountable for decisions, not just arguing pie in the sky on the internet where there are no real life consequences.

 

And biased? Yep, I am and I said exactly that up the page where I said you don't like being challenged on your convictions as well. But I get the feeling that you're so keen to argue your position that you barely even pay attention to what others have said.

So you're basically admitting you're just a heckler, or a troll then. You'd never put on a performance yourself, too risky, you might bomb if you started a thread sharing your own opinions, but have no problem interrupting the show with your own critiques, judging an actual performer.

Edited September 19, 2019 by Mercer

[Hua Guofang]

3 minutes ago, Mercer said:

So you're basically admitting you're just a heckler, or a troll then. You'd never put on a performance yourself, too risky, you might bomb if you started a thread sharing your own opinions, but have no problem interrupting the show with your own critiques, judging an actual performer.

Didn’t think you’d (want to) get it. 

 

BTW, I took a position on China embracing the free market, I took a position on arming the populace for national Defence, etc. because these are things I understand intimately and have worked on and researched. I did not take a stand on gun control because it’s hugely complex and I don’t know enough about it Instead, I ask questions. I did not take a position on whether socialism destroyed Venezuela by encouraging corruption and cronyism as I wasn’t sure whether the true answer was whether a corrupt and cronyist party had chosen socialism. So, I asked questions. 

 

That you you haven’t even noticed this just reinforces that you pay little attention to what others have to say. That you think asking questions and testing theories is trolling or heckling shows you don’t understand how a discussion even works. 

 

And with that that being the case, the last word is yours. Cheerio. 

[misteraven]

@Hua Guofangand @Mercer- you guys aren’t going to win each other over. This head butting will just continue until some gets tired of firing a volley back or stops coming on. Either way there is no win for anyone, including 12oz considering you’re both valued OG members of the community. If you want to continue, go ahead and DM each other.  

 

And I’m not one to shut down constructive dialogue, but only thing this is doing is cluttering up a thread that you guys were enjoying for a while and creating an atmosphere that I imagine is probably starting to feel kind of sour. 

 

You're both clearly intelligent and have each made some valid points. It’s not about making everyone see things you’re way and certainly not about bulldozing a win to a political argument online. Feel free to explore topics and the merit of differing view points, but this has become an obvious impasse, so let’s dead it on the forum and go back to either laughing or actually exploring a topic or position. 

[abrasivesaint]

How it read to me is that he doesn’t go all in on matters he isn’t quite sure about, whether or not it aligns with his political leanings, simply because he “needs” to have an opinion on the matter, and that he feels like you think he has to. 

 

It seems you shopped around and decided on a set of beliefs you agreed with. You’ve said in other threads you would call yourself an AnCap, or in the least you have a lot of beliefs aligned in that philosophy. You throw Agorism around all the time as well. Thus your arguments generally come from those foundations.  

 

Correct me if i’m wrong on any of that. 

 

It comes off that you liked AnCap and Agorist ideology, and went whole hog on those systems. Where as some of us don’t form our opinions off of predesigned philosophical systems but information we gather, and if that may end up aligning with a certain ideology, so be it. Nothing wrong with either approach if that’s what suits you. 

 

Edit: dont know why the text size is so big, didnt intend that, ha. 

Edited September 19, 2019 by abrasivesaint

[Kults]

Meanwhile, in the frozen barrens up north *queue curb them

 

 

 

[Hua Guofang]

30 minutes ago, misteraven said:

@Hua Guofangand @Mercer- you guys aren’t going to win each other over. This head butting will just continue until some gets tired of firing a volley back or stops coming on. Either way there is no win for anyone, including 12oz considering you’re both valued OG members of the community. If you want to continue, go ahead and DM each other.  

 

And I’m not one to shut down constructive dialogue, but only thing this is doing is cluttering up a thread that you guys were enjoying for a while and creating an atmosphere that I imagine is probably starting to feel kind of sour. 

 

You're both clearly intelligent and have each made some valid points. It’s not about making everyone see things you’re way and certainly not about bulldozing a win to a political argument online. Feel free to explore topics and the merit of differing view points, but this has become an obvious impasse, so let’s dead it on the forum and go back to either laughing or actually exploring a topic or position. 

Pffft, you clearly don’t know how to Internet!

 

yeah, I’m down with everything here and as much as I just had a good solid crack at Mercer I still respect him and would buy him a beer. 

[misteraven]

37 minutes ago, Hua Guofang said:

I just had a good solid crack at Mercer I still respect him and would buy him a beer. 

I talk to him regularly IRL and he said the same thing about you almost verbatim just the other day.

 

Alright, hopefully you two can can give each other a virtual bro hug and we can get back to good shit.

 

[Guest]

Nurse, this thread is in dire need of more meme STAT! 

[abrasivesaint]

[Kults]