Republicans and Fascism

[Gameface]

Red has not dedicated many more times his attention to meteorites than QAnon. If you don't believe me then do the search for yourself on user Red and search term 'meteorites' vs 'QAnon'.

However I will admit that Red is not the Church Lady for QAnon here on JazzFanz.

That title belongs firmly to The Thriller. Most of your mentions of QAnon were actually directed at The Thriller in telling him he was going overboard. Red and The Thriller combined account for nearly half of all mentions of QAnon on JazzFanz. Here is the data:

You're being obtuse...
I mean in life. Red exists outside Jazzfanz, believe it or not.

 

[fishonjazz]

He can provide the links but they aren't of any interest. I, like most people, simply don't care about QAnon. I simply find humor in how QAnon seems to be the reason for everything in Red's world. I know he calls it curiosity and learning but if the answer is always QAnon for everything, then I don't believe what is going on there is curiosity and learning.

Lol the fact you think qanon is reds answer for everything shows how unhinged you are. Hope you get the help you need


Sent from my iPad using JazzFanz mobile app

 

[LogGrad98]

Red doesn't seem singularly focused on QAnon to me. In fact, he seems to be well informed and knowledgeable on a wide array of subjects. What has given you the impression that he is obsessed and narrowly focused on QAnon?

Have you tried talking to him about meteorites? I think he's dedicated a lot more attention to that then he has QAnon by many many times.

Al is actually engaging in gaslighting in a way. Trying to convince someone they are obsessed with exactly the thing they are saying others are obsessed with. Textbook manipulation techniques. But he is intellectually dishonest, so really it's just trolling. Not sure really what his agenda is at this point.

 

[LogGrad98]

Red has not dedicated many more times his attention to meteorites than QAnon. If you don't believe me then do the search for yourself on user Red and search term 'meteorites' vs 'QAnon'.

However I will admit that Red is not the Church Lady for QAnon here on JazzFanz.

That title belongs firmly to The Thriller. Most of your mentions of QAnon were actually directed at The Thriller in telling him he was going overboard. Red and The Thriller combined account for nearly half of all mentions of QAnon on JazzFanz. Here is the data:

Hey I made the top 5! Yes!

 

[One Brow]

I called it months and months ago that he was a troll.

You say that about all conservatives. Of course you're occasionally correct.

 

[One Brow]

Hey I made the top 5! Yes!

I'm jealous. I clearly need to step up my QAnon game.

QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon

That ought to get me in the top 3.

 

[LogGrad98]

I'm jealous. I clearly need to step up my QAnon game.

QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon

That ought to get me in the top 3.

Cheater!

 

[The Thriller]

You say that about all conservatives. Of course you're occasionally correct.

I haven’t said that about gameface, LG, and Colton. They’re all conservative, are they not? I don’t think Ron, Jazz girl, or Fishin are exactly liberal or progressive, right? Perhaps the conservatives who I have labelled as trolls (Buck, Al, and Jazzyfresh) should engage in some introspection?

 

[Bucknutz]

I haven’t said that about gameface, LG, and Colton. They’re all conservative, are they not? I don’t think Ron, Jazz girl, or Fishin are exactly liberal or progressive, right? Perhaps the conservatives who I have labelled as trolls (Buck, Al, and Jazzyfresh) should engage in some introspection?

I’m a troll? I’m a conservative? I am neither.

Just more misinformation from you.

Debating your posts or having a different opinion than you, is not trolling. I’m not going to be a cheerleader for you. This forum is left leaning and I see many people gang together and bully people on the right. It makes me want to stand up for them.

I’m an independent and I vote for people on both side of the isle. I vote for more pro-business persons. I like social programs (UBI, healthcare, retirement, etc) but hate how government runs them. I’m not anti-abortion. I love the second amendment. I like rules and laws. I like immigration, especially if it was done correctly. It’s easy for me to call out both sides. I know that presidents really are not to blame for most issues, nor will I praise them for things they say they accomplished (jobs losing or gaining, gas prices, ect). I love education (k-12 and college). Yet I believed more majors should be trade schools. I am pro healthcare and vaccines, yet I don’t believe anything should be mandated. I believe everyone should be treated equally (trans, LGBTQ+, race, furries). I believe that government should stay out of business. Government should not be in the business of choosing winners or losers. If the government hurts a business, that business should be adequately compensated.

Yes, I’m a big fan of my Governor. If that is what makes you think I am conservative, you would be wrong. I like action and he takes action when needed. You might not like the action he takes. I don’t agree with everything he does but I find him a net positive.

 

[The Thriller]

I’m a troll? I’m a conservative? I am neither.

Just more misinformation from you.

Debating your posts or having a different opinion than you, is not trolling. I’m not going to be a cheerleader for you. This forum is left leaning and I see many people gang together and bully people on the right. It makes me want to stand up for them.

I’m an independent and I vote for people on both side of the isle. I vote for more pro-business persons. I like social programs (UBI, healthcare, retirement, etc) but hate how government runs them. I’m not anti-abortion. I love the second amendment. I like rules and laws. I like immigration, especially if it was done correctly. It’s easy for me to call out both sides. I know that presidents really are not to blame for most issues, nor will I praise them for things they say they accomplished (jobs losing or gaining, gas prices, ect). I love education (k-12 and college). Yet I believed more majors should be trade schools. I am pro healthcare and vaccines, yet I don’t believe anything should be mandated. I believe everyone should be treated equally (trans, LGBTQ+, race, furries). I believe that government should stay out of business. Government should not be in the business of choosing winners or losers. If the government hurts a business, that business should be adequately compensated.

Yes, I’m a big fan of my Governor. If that is what makes you think I am conservative, you would be wrong. I like action and he takes action when needed. You might not like the action he takes. I don’t agree with everything he does but I find him a net positive.

I’m fine revising my list. You might not be a troll. I put you on block for several months and it seemed like over the last little bit you’ve had more productive conversations. At the time I made my assessment, you definitely exhibited to me trolling behavior. So it’s great for people to change or for my opinions to change. What I resent is the charge that I label anyone conservative a troll @One Brow which clearly isn’t the case. The other two posters I’ve called trolls, Jazzyfresh and Al, anyone want to dispute that they are exactly what I described them as?

 

[Al-O-Meter]

Debating your posts or having a different opinion than you, is not trolling.

It is not trolling but the truth of the statement wasn't the point. It has become the fashion lately for a disturbing number of those on the political left to immediately resort to name-calling. In their minds, if you discredit the source then you discredit whatever was said.

I'm not sure if you've ever listened to the Munk Debates but they're usually excellent. This past year's debate exhibited this exact same tactic The Thriller was using on you, and the audience really turned on those employing it. The resolution being debated this year was "Be it resolved, don't trust the mainstream media". On the pro side was Douglas Murray and Matt Taibbi. Arguing on the con side was Malcom Gladwell and Michelle Goldberg. The audience was polled before the debaters started speaking, and had a nearly even split. After the debate, the audience was polled again and the results were the largest aggregate change of mind in the history of the event.

It is about 90 minutes long but if you've got the time, it is interesting.


View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nvaf7XOOFHc

 

[Bucknutz]

It is not trolling but the truth of the statement wasn't the point. It has become the fashion lately for a disturbing number of those on the political left to immediately resort to name-calling. In their minds, if you discredit the source then you discredit whatever was said.

I'm not sure if you've ever listened to the Monk Debates but they're usually excellent. This past year's debate exhibited this exact same tactic The Thriller was using on you, and the audience really turned on those employing it. The resolution being debated this year was "Be it resolved, don't trust the mainstream media". On the pro side was Douglas Murray and Matt Taibbi. Arguing on the con side was Malcom Gladwell and Michelle Goldberg. The audience was polled before the debaters started speaking, and had a nearly even split. After the debate, the audience was polled again and the results were the largest aggregate change of mind in the history of the event.

It is about 90 minutes long but if you've got the time, it is interesting.


View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nvaf7XOOFHc

Thanks, I do have time in the morning to watch this. I have never heard of the Monk debate but this seems extremely interesting.

 

[The Thriller]

This Matt Taibbi? Perhaps some sources deserve to be discredited? Taibbi, like John Solomon before him and like Glenn Greenwald before him, has been running Russian disinformation for a while. Sorry to burst your alt reality Al with actual information about the propagandists you admire:


View: https://twitter.com/juliaioffe/status/1600497921455259650?s=46&t=_cHW5HizHCT9o1w6dBmqAQ


View: https://twitter.com/juliaioffe/status/1600497923246153733?s=46&t=_cHW5HizHCT9o1w6dBmqAQ


View: https://twitter.com/juliaioffe/status/1600613935920676864?s=46&t=_cHW5HizHCT9o1w6dBmqAQ


Sounds like a credible journalist…

Spoiler: Explicit Language

 

[One Brow]

I haven’t said that about gameface, LG, and Colton. They’re all conservative, are they not? I don’t think Ron, Jazz girl, or Fishin are exactly liberal or progressive, right? Perhaps the conservatives who I have labelled as trolls (Buck, Al, and Jazzyfresh) should engage in some introspection?

Colton stays out of the mess, and at least on social issues, LogGrad98 and Gameface have gotten more liberal over the years. 'Not exactly liberal' is not "conservative".

 

[The Thriller]

Colton stays out of the mess, and at least on social issues, LogGrad98 and Gameface have gotten more liberal over the years. 'Not exactly liberal' is not "conservative".

Isn’t that one of the problems right now with the conservative movement? MAGA extremism has largely taken it over. Those who aren’t liberal used to primarily identify as conservative. But now such descriptors don’t even apply to them anymore as they’ve rejected MAGA extremism. So what does being a conservative even mean anymore? Especially since such descriptors have changed drastically in just the past decade.

I feel like you might be omitting some pretty important context. You were caught making a joke at my expense and now seem to be doubling down after I refuted your claim that I label everyone “conservative” as a troll. Which, I’m fine if you wanted it to be taken as a joke. I’m however, not in agreement with it if you’re serious about that claim. I’m curious, who on this site is conservative in your view? Could you provide a quick list?

 

[Red]

Red has not dedicated many more times his attention to meteorites than QAnon.

This is a minor point, but you really need to clean up your syntax.

I'm jealous. I clearly need to step up my QAnon game.

QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon QAnon

That ought to get me in the top 3.

Apparently, I’m going to have to step up my game as well. These are pieces of the moon. I considered posting these in the Artemis thread, but I did not personally collect these on the lunar surface. However, they are slices of meteorites. Nothing like looking up at the moon, in the night sky, with these in hand, and realizing you own a piece.





These were collected by Bedouins in the Morocco/Algeria border areas.

It does appear that I have mentioned QAnon more than meteorites. The real question, from my perspective, is what the number of times I have mentioned QAnon, or actually, the number of times anybody else has mentioned QAnon, has to do with the price of tea in China? Well, nothing, obviously.

However, I am still confused as what the number of times I mentioned QAnon actually means? Is it a problem? Does it say something about me, in particular, that I somehow need to understand and come to terms with? And will my insurance cover treatments? I thought my focus on understanding irrational social movements was only natural, personally, since social science was my thing for many years, and I think the movement is genuinely interesting. Cultural history is so interesting. And I do not have to justify that fact, as I see it, to AI-O-Meter.

Would it not be more appropriate, rather than count how many times I mentioned QAnon, that AI-O-Meter should have to post an analysis of each and every time I mention QAnon? Why should he be allowed to be lazy about it?

In other words, why does he get to avoid context? Why not post an analysis of each instance, and explain to all of us exactly why this somehow proves whatever the heck he is trying to prove? Since I still have no idea what his point is?

Simply put: I want to know exactly why the number of times I mentioned QAnon disproves the reasons I told AI-O-Meter as to what my motivation was in the first place?

Why on Earth is this the hill AI-O-Meter has chosen to die on?

 

[Red]

He can provide the links but they aren't of any interest. I, like most people, simply don't care about QAnon.

When you say the links aren’t of any interest, you realize you are pretending to speak for everyone? Why do you believe you can safely speak for everyone? Quite the ego ya got there. BTW, “Most people” does not include social scientists.

That title belongs firmly to The Thriller. Most of your mentions of QAnon were actually directed at The Thriller in telling him he was going overboard. Red and The Thriller combined account for nearly half of all mentions of QAnon on JazzFanz.

And I’ve only just started. One reason I’m posting these, in addition to catching up with@The Thriller, is to demonstrate just how out of whack you are in dismissing the study of QAnon as irrelevant. So foolish to go through the effort of actually counting the times to prove nothing whatsoever, to have no point to make at all.

Anyway, here are my mentions # 36-41. I’ll be in first place before you can say “look, a meteorite!!”

QAnon and the Emergence of the Unreal

Ethan Zuckerman delves into how the conspiracist community surrounding QAnon represents a hazardous new form of participatory civics and digital storytelling.

jods.mitpress.mit.edu

https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/00027642221091199?icid=int.sj-full-text.citing-articles.16

Abstract​

What is truth in politics? Movements such as the anti-establishment, internet-born conspiracy theory QAnon are offered as dramatic cases of just how “irrational” people have become in a “post-truth” political world. However, with a growing number of everyday Americans believing in such theories, labeling adherents “irrational” ignores the internally rationalizing logic of conspiracy theories, so we ask the question: how do QAnon followers think through, argue, and rationalize their political truths? This paper establishes a discursive framework that demonstrates how QAnon adherents translate the theory’s paradigmatic political epistemology into personal ideologies. I identify the narrative structures that guide belief, examining how QAnon followers develop a general political plot, set the parameters for conflict, embrace their role in the story, determine what is in the political canon, and relate to the narrative that has been constructed. This analysis highlights the contradictions within the QAnon conspiracy theory—not to pathologize adherents’ irrationality but to demonstrate how people must wrestle with contradiction, paradox, and confusion when developing political ideologies. When framed as the as victims of a brainwashing cult, QAnons routinely respond, “no cult tells you to think for yourself”; instead, their narratives allow them to interpret QAnon in service of developing personalized political truths. Thus, this paper takes their words at face value to see the world as they interpret it. I argue that ideologies are a function of broader political epistemologies such as QAnon; they are embodied, narrativized ways of being in the world that make life livable—despite any inner contradictions—and guide political participation.

QAnon: A Conspiracy Cult or Quasi-Religion of Modern Times? - ECPS

DOWNLOAD PDF

www.populismstudies.org

As with ISIL, QAnon’s ideology proliferates through easily-shareable digital content espousing grievances and injustices by “evil oppressors.” To perhaps a greater degree than any comparable movement, QAnon is a product of the social media era which created a perfect storm for it to spread. It was QAnon’s spread onto the mainstream social media platforms—and from there onto the streets—that made this phenomenon into a global concern. Social media platforms, again, aided and abetted QAnon growth by driving vulnerable audiences to their content.​

No One is Immune: The Spread of Q-anon Through Social Media and the Pandemic | Strategic Technologies Blog | CSIS

Conspiracy theories are on the rise, with groups like Q-anon taking advantage of pandemic related anxieties to convert unsuspecting social media users.

www.csis.org

https://compass.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111/soc4.12945

Transcript: QAnon and Conspiratorial Narratives

Visit the post for more.

youarenotsosmart.com

 

[One Brow]

Isn’t that one of the problems right now with the conservative movement? MAGA extremism has largely taken it over. Those who aren’t liberal used to primarily identify as conservative. But now such descriptors don’t even apply to them anymore as they’ve rejected MAGA extremism. So what does being a conservative even mean anymore? Especially since such descriptors have changed drastically in just the past decade.

I think you have occasionally posted videos from The Lincoln Project, who IIRC are non-MAGA conservatives. We need to wait until Trump is no longer a figurehead (likely when he dies) and sort out the aftermath before we judge whether MAGA is primarily Trumpism or the new normal.

I feel like you might be omitting some pretty important context. You were caught making a joke at my expense and now seem to be doubling down after I refuted your claim that I label everyone “conservative” as a troll.

I was not making a joke, I was expressing a long-running frustration that I have expressed before, and I reaffirmed my position. You bring valuable content. You also bring harsh and quick judgements. Neither disguises the other.

Which, I’m fine if you wanted it to be taken as a joke. I’m however, not in agreement with it if you’re serious about that claim. I’m curious, who on this site is conservative in your view? Could you provide a quick list?

Non-trolling?

When they care to chime in, I enjoy reading:
RandyForRubio
JazzSpazz
Bucknutz (who says he is not conservative, but seems right-leaning to me)

 

[One Brow]

Why on Earth is this the hill AI-O-Meter has chosen to die on?

Die? He always comes back.

 

[Red]

#42. So, why is the subject of QAnon not perfectly appropriate in a thread involving fascism?

The Christofascism of QAnon – Byline Times

Steven Monacelli, who attended the 'Qonference' of the paranoid conspiracy theory in Dallas earlier this month, fears the quasi-religious movement might not die out without a fight

bylinetimes.com