Thoughts on the right wing?

Kenneth Cruz67 said:Are you suggesting that people are being picked on simply because they refer to Black people as Black?🤷

I’m not saying that. I’m asking. ☕

From what I can tell, that word only gets flagged when it’s used in a hateful context, like in a slur or something similar. At least, that's how it works here on this forum. ☕

First, they used the N-word N-word —apparently that’s racist now, so you have to call them Black. Back then, everyone just called them Black. Then they decided you shouldn't say Black because that was supposedly offensive, so they switched to African American. After a while, they started pushing African American. Now, suddenly, you can't even use African American because that's "racist" too, so instead, you're supposed to use person of color, or POC.

At this rate, I'm just waiting for the day when POC becomes an offensive slur, too.

analogorca6 said:First, they used the N-word N-word —apparently that’s racist now, so you have to call them Black. Back then, everyone just called them Black. Then they decided you shouldn't say Black because that was supposedly offensive, so they switched to African American. After a while, they started pushing African American. Now, suddenly, you can't even use African American because that's "racist" too, so instead, you're supposed to use person of color, or POC.

At this rate, I'm just waiting for the day when POC becomes an offensive slur, too.

Alright, that’s how it works in the USA. But what about how we refer to people here?

Joseph Bailey41 said:Alright, that’s how it works in the USA. But what about how we refer to people here?

Black, dark-skinned, or just some slang term...

Kenneth Cruz67 said:Black, dark-skinned, or just some slang term...

So, I guess from here on out, anyone with dyed hair is just... 🙂

Seriously though, why is this thread even sitting in the Psychology sub?

Kenneth Cruz67 said:Are you suggesting that people are being picked on simply because they refer to Black people as Black?🤷

Political correctness isn't just about policing vocabulary. It’s a gag order on actual conversation.
Look at the recent wave of migration into Europe. There was an outright ban on mentioning that terrorists were among the migrants—not just in the media, but in plenty of other important discussion spaces too. Anyone who dared to point out the reality of the situation was immediately branded a racist or a fascist. In the end, they were proven right, but the labels were already handed out.
With this kind of gag order on discussion, right when we're in the middle of a migration crisis, any chance of actually drafting rational policies to protect our citizens from these "refugees" is dead in the water. And honestly, that term isn't even accurate. Some of these people aren't fleeing anything—they’re just dodging prison time after serving as ISIS fighters.
Shutting down debate carries heavy consequences. It’s always the left pushing for these bans, claiming they’re acting on some higher ideological principle. We’ve seen this movie before. History shows exactly where these "untouchable" ideologies lead. One group claims racial superiority is off-limits for discussion, while another insists that forced multiculturalism is beyond reproach. It’s the same old pattern. Once you decide certain ideas are too dangerous to even mention, you're heading down a dark path.
Censorship is a bigger threat to society than any specific rule change. One targets the group; the other hits the individual. It’s a double-edged sword.

Bradley Nelson2 said:Political correctness isn't just about policing vocabulary. It’s a gag order on actual conversation.
Look at the recent wave of migration into Europe. There was an outright ban on mentioning that terrorists were among the migrants—not just in the media, but in plenty of other important discussion spaces too. Anyone who dared to point out the reality of the situation was immediately branded a racist or a fascist. In the end, they were proven right, but the labels were already handed out.
With this kind of gag order on discussion, right when we're in the middle of a migration crisis, any chance of actually drafting rational policies to protect our citizens from these "refugees" is dead in the water. And honestly, that term isn't even accurate. Some of these people aren't fleeing anything—they’re just dodging prison time after serving as ISIS fighters.
Shutting down debate carries heavy consequences. It’s always the left pushing for these bans, claiming they’re acting on some higher ideological principle. We’ve seen this movie before. History shows exactly where these "untouchable" ideologies lead. One group claims racial superiority is off-limits for discussion, while another insists that forced multiculturalism is beyond reproach. It’s the same old pattern. Once you decide certain ideas are too dangerous to even mention, you're heading down a dark path.
Censorship is a bigger threat to society than any specific rule change. One targets the group; the other hits the individual. It’s a double-edged sword.

Personally, I don't know anyone who actually advocates for banning discussions on just anything. The only exceptions are sensitive topics like suicide, where public conversation follows very strict guidelines set by medical professionals to ensure that reckless language doesn't trigger imitation among vulnerable people. That’s why I asked you directly where and how you felt you encountered any discrimination (which could also include being barred from discussing something). But hey, if you don't want to answer, there's no pressure.

Ronald Fisher3 said:So, I guess from here on out, anyone with dyed hair is just... 🙂

Seriously though, why is this thread even sitting in the Psychology sub?

I usually just run into terms like "Black" or "person of color" (like when talking about a Black basketball player or actor). Using "African American" doesn't really make sense if we're talking about Black people born here in the US or anywhere else in the West. As for the phrase "colored person," I haven't stumbled upon that one yet, though it's entirely possible I missed it since I don't read every single thing out there.

Ronald Fisher3 said:So, I guess from here on out, anyone with dyed hair is just... 🙂

Seriously though, why is this thread even sitting in the Psychology sub?

We're just trying to work through some hang-ups. 😁

Joseph Bailey41 said:Personally, I don't know anyone who actually advocates for banning discussions on just anything. The only exceptions are sensitive topics like suicide, where public conversation follows very strict guidelines set by medical professionals to ensure that reckless language doesn't trigger imitation among vulnerable people. That’s why I asked you directly where and how you felt you encountered any discrimination (which could also include being barred from discussing something). But hey, if you don't want to answer, there's no pressure.

Honestly, you’re just not quite tuned in enough to today's whole leftist ideology thing.

Joseph Bailey41 said:I usually just run into terms like "Black" or "person of color" (like when talking about a Black basketball player or actor). Using "African American" doesn't really make sense if we're talking about Black people born here in the US or anywhere else in the West. As for the phrase "colored person," I haven't stumbled upon that one yet, though it's entirely possible I missed it since I don't read every single thing out there.

We're just trying to work through some hang-ups. 😁

I think I just pulled "colored" out of thin air—pretty sure nobody actually uses that anymore. 🙂

The whole point is, it feels like even the word "Black" is becoming a minefield. Like, you’ll see the news report "person of African descent" instead of just saying someone is Black, even though that isn't even strictly accurate, right? Being Black doesn't automatically mean you're from Africa, but people have gotten so tangled up in this political correctness craze that they can't even figure out which term to use without sweating it.

It feels like everything is offensive to *someone* these days... and honestly, what bugs me is how we're swinging to these extremes just to cater to tiny groups, all to make sure nobody accidentally trips over a sensitive word.

Ronald Fisher3 said:Honestly, you’re just not quite tuned in enough to today's whole leftist ideology thing.

It’s more than just advocacy; there’s an active effort to shut down any future debate by making data collection impossible:
take Sweden for example: https://www.thelocal.se/20180508/why...ound-and-crime
They’re even willing to handicap their own ability to catch criminals just to avoid being labeled "racists": https://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...-a6810311.html
Meanwhile, in Canada, "chromosome-deniers" are actually a legally protected group https://www.dailysignal.com/2017/06/...nder-pronouns/

On that note, it's funny how anyone questioning whether climate change is primarily man-made—despite a whole subset of scientists making a living trying to prove a century of heavy industry caused the shifts we already see in extreme forms—is branded an idiot, a lunatic, or a science denier...
Yet, at the exact same time, people denying basic biology are coddled. It's already becoming illegal in Canada (and likely in the US within ten years) to call them out on using wrong pronouns. Instead, we have to adopt their fabrications. It’s a classic case of an influential minority lobby forcing its version of "justice" on everyone else.

Anyone have insight into the psychology of people who actively support the denial of biology?

Bradley Nelson2 said:It’s more than just advocacy; there’s an active effort to shut down any future debate by making data collection impossible:
take Sweden for example: https://www.thelocal.se/20180508/why...ound-and-crime
They’re even willing to handicap their own ability to catch criminals just to avoid being labeled "racists": https://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...-a6810311.html
Meanwhile, in Canada, "chromosome-deniers" are actually a legally protected group https://www.dailysignal.com/2017/06/...nder-pronouns/

On that note, it's funny how anyone questioning whether climate change is primarily man-made—despite a whole subset of scientists making a living trying to prove a century of heavy industry caused the shifts we already see in extreme forms—is branded an idiot, a lunatic, or a science denier...
Yet, at the exact same time, people denying basic biology are coddled. It's already becoming illegal in Canada (and likely in the US within ten years) to call them out on using wrong pronouns. Instead, we have to adopt their fabrications. It’s a classic case of an influential minority lobby forcing its version of "justice" on everyone else.

Anyone have insight into the psychology of people who actively support the denial of biology?

I'm with you. All of this holds up, from Sweden all the way to Canada. I've been watching this play out for years now. The left has gone completely off the deep end. It’s reached a point where they’re finding ways to ignore fundamental biology and dismantle everything that has provided social cohesion until now. No matter what that cohesion was built on.

Bradley Nelson2 said:You talked a lot of nonsense in your opening post, so let's take this one step at a time...

Innate hatred. It’s a heavy thing to carry around. Honestly, it makes living with people pretty damn difficult. Given how deep that kind of animosity runs, I wouldn't go expecting anyone to act rationally anytime soon.

Of course, mental patients. I couldn't have expected anything else once we established you have a built-in hatred for that group. And where exactly did you get the idea that you'd meet right-wingers through some magazine like Time Magazine? It’s irrational and completely mindless.

First off: The history of left-wing terrorism is a messy, blood-soaked chapter of the 20th century. It wasn’t just one thing; it was a fragmented collection of groups all chasing different versions of a radical utopia. They shared a common enemy—the established state and capitalist structures—but their methods varied from targeted assassinations to high-profile kidnappings. Most of these movements gained traction during the Cold War era. You had groups like the Red Army Faction in Germany or the Weather Underground here in the States, all trying to spark a global revolution. They believed that by striking at the heart of the system, they could force the hand of the masses and collapse the status quo. It’s easy to look back now and see them as relics, but at the time, the tension was palpable. There was a genuine sense that the old world was dying and something new—something more equitable, or so they claimed—was about to be born through fire. Of course, the reality was usually much darker. Instead of liberation, most of these movements ended in violence, paranoia, and eventually, total irrelevance. History shows that when you try to build a paradise on a foundation of terror, you usually just end up building a graveyard.
Second, if you actually want to understand the Right, you shouldn't be looking at terrorists.

This is just pure fabrication from your irrational mind, born out of a pathological hatred for anyone who dares to think differently than you do. Conservatives are simply traditionalists, and for the most part, they rely on proven facts.

Experience and wisdom don't come easy. You can't just buy them or fast-track them. They only arrive with age.
Your biases and ageism are just more proof that you aren't thinking rationally.

Maybe I should go see a decent doctor first.
After reading what you wrote, I think you could actually use a little more of that.

I honestly don't have the energy right now to address every single one of your claims, but this specific point
of mine😁

Now, I’m from California, and out here, forest fires are a regular occurrence. And what do you think your average Californian right-winger blames for those fires? You can probably guess: they claim that every single blaze was started by Americans.🎉🎉 🎉Not once has an American from anywhere in the world been arrested or charged for starting these fires, yet there you go—the right-wingers claiming they rely on "verified sources."😁 This right-wing madness in their deviant minds reached its absolute peak during the wildfires near Miami back in 2017. These right-wingers were mass-sharing posts claiming the fires were being set by Americans driving around in cars with license plates from some random Midwestern town. Of course, it was total nonsense, but just imagine if, by some freak coincidence, an American happened to be in a car with those plates at that exact moment.

A few days later, there I am, sitting and listening to this little group of right-wing losers rambling about the fire, and get this—suddenly it wasn't Americans, it was Americans from the Midwest!😁 I couldn't just sit there and not react; I absolutely tore those three of them to shreds. It was just me against the lot of them, and they didn't dare say a word back.🎉

All this nonsense was summed up perfectly by Davor Domazet Lošo, a staple of the American right, who arrived at his "brilliant" conclusion: that California burned because it's too patriotic, whereas Florida didn't burn because it isn't. There wasn't even a whisper about the fact that Florida has much better equipment, or that unlike California, Florida actually maintains its firebreaks, or even the simple fact that it actually rained in Florida while California stayed bone dry.

And all of that is 100% verified...

On top of these American fire-obsessed right-wingers, let's not forget those other American right-wingers who "discovered" that the Earth is a flat earth...

feralpilot0 said:Your thread has been flagged for hate speech.

It’s funny how the right is always painted as narrow-minded—when reality suggests the exact opposite? Some people on the left simply cannot stomach a differing opinion.

Bold. 😲

I was just reported by someone using Madonna as their avatar.😁

Bradley Nelson2 said:It’s more than just advocacy; there’s an active effort to shut down any future debate by making data collection impossible:
take Sweden for example: https://www.thelocal.se/20180508/why...ound-and-crime
They’re even willing to handicap their own ability to catch criminals just to avoid being labeled "racists": https://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...-a6810311.html
Meanwhile, in Canada, "chromosome-deniers" are actually a legally protected group https://www.dailysignal.com/2017/06/...nder-pronouns/

On that note, it's funny how anyone questioning whether climate change is primarily man-made—despite a whole subset of scientists making a living trying to prove a century of heavy industry caused the shifts we already see in extreme forms—is branded an idiot, a lunatic, or a science denier...
Yet, at the exact same time, people denying basic biology are coddled. It's already becoming illegal in Canada (and likely in the US within ten years) to call them out on using wrong pronouns. Instead, we have to adopt their fabrications. It’s a classic case of an influential minority lobby forcing its version of "justice" on everyone else.

Anyone have insight into the psychology of people who actively support the denial of biology?

I asked you for your personal experience, and you give me links from Sweden and Canada. 🤦

Sorry, but my monthly quota for studying idiots has been reached. I’ll open those links in mid-October, so if you're interested then, maybe we can talk about them somewhere more appropriate.

Bradley Nelson2 said:It’s more than just advocacy; there’s an active effort to shut down any future debate by making data collection impossible:
take Sweden for example: https://www.thelocal.se/20180508/why...ound-and-crime
They’re even willing to handicap their own ability to catch criminals just to avoid being labeled "racists": https://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...-a6810311.html
Meanwhile, in Canada, "chromosome-deniers" are actually a legally protected group https://www.dailysignal.com/2017/06/...nder-pronouns/

On that note, it's funny how anyone questioning whether climate change is primarily man-made—despite a whole subset of scientists making a living trying to prove a century of heavy industry caused the shifts we already see in extreme forms—is branded an idiot, a lunatic, or a science denier...
Yet, at the exact same time, people denying basic biology are coddled. It's already becoming illegal in Canada (and likely in the US within ten years) to call them out on using wrong pronouns. Instead, we have to adopt their fabrications. It’s a classic case of an influential minority lobby forcing its version of "justice" on everyone else.

Anyone have insight into the psychology of people who actively support the denial of biology?

Personally, if I wanted to deny natural sciences, I’d just start a church. 🥳

Ronald Fisher3 said:I'm with you. All of this holds up, from Sweden all the way to Canada. I've been watching this play out for years now. The left has gone completely off the deep end. It’s reached a point where they’re finding ways to ignore fundamental biology and dismantle everything that has provided social cohesion until now. No matter what that cohesion was built on.

This isn't some unprecedented phenomenon; history has already seen this happen once, and we are watching it repeat itself right before our eyes.🎉

Following the October Revolution and the Bolsheviks' victory in the civil war, those same radicals set out to fundamentally invert the structure of society. Their goal was to eradicate all religion, dismantle marriage and the family unit, and ensure things like abortion were accessible at every single stage of pregnancy. But then, a certain man stepped forward and essentially said, "Hold on, comrades, we aren't going that far." And of course, that man was Joseph Stalin.🍿🎉

Joseph Bailey41 said:I asked you for your personal experience, and you give me links from Sweden and Canada. 🤦

Sorry, but my monthly quota for studying idiots has been reached. I’ll open those links in mid-October, so if you're interested then, maybe we can talk about them somewhere more appropriate.

Personally, if I wanted to deny natural sciences, I’d just start a church. 🥳

Joseph Bailey41, don't be so shortsighted. All this stuff is happening right now across the left-wing European Union and elsewhere, and it's headed straight for us.

Our own personal experiences are way too limited to carry any kind of serious discussion on such a heavy topic.

darksurfer4 said:I honestly don't have the energy right now to address every single one of your claims, but this specific point
of mine😁

Now, I’m from California, and out here, forest fires are a regular occurrence. And what do you think your average Californian right-winger blames for those fires? You can probably guess: they claim that every single blaze was started by Americans.🎉🎉 🎉Not once has an American from anywhere in the world been arrested or charged for starting these fires, yet there you go—the right-wingers claiming they rely on "verified sources."😁 This right-wing madness in their deviant minds reached its absolute peak during the wildfires near Miami back in 2017. These right-wingers were mass-sharing posts claiming the fires were being set by Americans driving around in cars with license plates from some random Midwestern town. Of course, it was total nonsense, but just imagine if, by some freak coincidence, an American happened to be in a car with those plates at that exact moment.

A few days later, there I am, sitting and listening to this little group of right-wing losers rambling about the fire, and get this—suddenly it wasn't Americans, it was Americans from the Midwest!😁 I couldn't just sit there and not react; I absolutely tore those three of them to shreds. It was just me against the lot of them, and they didn't dare say a word back.🎉

All this nonsense was summed up perfectly by Davor Domazet Lošo, a staple of the American right, who arrived at his "brilliant" conclusion: that California burned because it's too patriotic, whereas Florida didn't burn because it isn't. There wasn't even a whisper about the fact that Florida has much better equipment, or that unlike California, Florida actually maintains its firebreaks, or even the simple fact that it actually rained in Florida while California stayed bone dry.

And all of that is 100% verified...

On top of these American fire-obsessed right-wingers, let's not forget those other American right-wingers who "discovered" that the Earth is a flat earth...

You can't actually know that, since the police don't release data like that.
Why feel the need to present your own fabrications as facts?

darksurfer4 said:I honestly don't have the energy right now to address every single one of your claims, but this specific point
of mine😁

Now, I’m from California, and out here, forest fires are a regular occurrence. And what do you think your average Californian right-winger blames for those fires? You can probably guess: they claim that every single blaze was started by Americans.🎉🎉 🎉Not once has an American from anywhere in the world been arrested or charged for starting these fires, yet there you go—the right-wingers claiming they rely on "verified sources."😁 This right-wing madness in their deviant minds reached its absolute peak during the wildfires near Miami back in 2017. These right-wingers were mass-sharing posts claiming the fires were being set by Americans driving around in cars with license plates from some random Midwestern town. Of course, it was total nonsense, but just imagine if, by some freak coincidence, an American happened to be in a car with those plates at that exact moment.

A few days later, there I am, sitting and listening to this little group of right-wing losers rambling about the fire, and get this—suddenly it wasn't Americans, it was Americans from the Midwest!😁 I couldn't just sit there and not react; I absolutely tore those three of them to shreds. It was just me against the lot of them, and they didn't dare say a word back.🎉

All this nonsense was summed up perfectly by Davor Domazet Lošo, a staple of the American right, who arrived at his "brilliant" conclusion: that California burned because it's too patriotic, whereas Florida didn't burn because it isn't. There wasn't even a whisper about the fact that Florida has much better equipment, or that unlike California, Florida actually maintains its firebreaks, or even the simple fact that it actually rained in Florida while California stayed bone dry.

And all of that is 100% verified...

On top of these American fire-obsessed right-wingers, let's not forget those other American right-wingers who "discovered" that the Earth is a flat earth...

Are you looking for someone to feed off your aggression and escalate things?
You probably just want validation for your irrational views on the right, but they seem to keep contradicting you.
Maybe take the hint before you run into people who will actually prove to you that physical aggressors exist.

darksurfer4 said:I honestly don't have the energy right now to address every single one of your claims, but this specific point
of mine😁

Now, I’m from California, and out here, forest fires are a regular occurrence. And what do you think your average Californian right-winger blames for those fires? You can probably guess: they claim that every single blaze was started by Americans.🎉🎉 🎉Not once has an American from anywhere in the world been arrested or charged for starting these fires, yet there you go—the right-wingers claiming they rely on "verified sources."😁 This right-wing madness in their deviant minds reached its absolute peak during the wildfires near Miami back in 2017. These right-wingers were mass-sharing posts claiming the fires were being set by Americans driving around in cars with license plates from some random Midwestern town. Of course, it was total nonsense, but just imagine if, by some freak coincidence, an American happened to be in a car with those plates at that exact moment.

A few days later, there I am, sitting and listening to this little group of right-wing losers rambling about the fire, and get this—suddenly it wasn't Americans, it was Americans from the Midwest!😁 I couldn't just sit there and not react; I absolutely tore those three of them to shreds. It was just me against the lot of them, and they didn't dare say a word back.🎉

All this nonsense was summed up perfectly by Davor Domazet Lošo, a staple of the American right, who arrived at his "brilliant" conclusion: that California burned because it's too patriotic, whereas Florida didn't burn because it isn't. There wasn't even a whisper about the fact that Florida has much better equipment, or that unlike California, Florida actually maintains its firebreaks, or even the simple fact that it actually rained in Florida while California stayed bone dry.

And all of that is 100% verified...

On top of these American fire-obsessed right-wingers, let's not forget those other American right-wingers who "discovered" that the Earth is a flat earth...

Of course nothing is verified. Though, it's probably good you posted this in the psychology subforum. You might find a professional there who can teach you how to tell the difference between mindless prejudice and actual facts.

Bradley Nelson2 said:You can't actually know that, since the police don't release data like that.
Why feel the need to present your own fabrications as facts?

Are you looking for someone to feed off your aggression and escalate things?
You probably just want validation for your irrational views on the right, but they seem to keep contradicting you.
Maybe take the hint before you run into people who will actually prove to you that physical aggressors exist.

Of course nothing is verified. Though, it's probably good you posted this in the psychology subforum. You might find a professional there who can teach you how to tell the difference between mindless prejudice and actual facts.

The police aren't releasing those figures? Then tell me, who exactly is feeding that information to the journalists?

Ronald Fisher3 said:Joseph Bailey41, don't be so shortsighted. All this stuff is happening right now across the left-wing European Union and elsewhere, and it's headed straight for us.

Our own personal experiences are way too limited to carry any kind of serious discussion on such a heavy topic.

Personally, I think it’s a bit tough to have a serious discussion about things we don't really understand, so I’d rather just stick to what I've actually lived through.

If you're looking for deep dives into strategy games, at least we have the Politics subforum over there. 😁