Dumbasses & General Stupidity Thread

[firestar464]

[firestar464]

Brother, please get off Chatty

[firestar464]

[firestar464]

[firestar464]

[firestar464]

[firestar464]

[wjfox]

[firestar464]

[firestar464]

[firestar464]

Don’t say ‘Watch out for ice’: FEMA warned storm announcements could invite memes

https://www.cnn.com/2026/01/23/politics ... torm-memes

[wjfox]

[firestar464]

[firestar464]

Bari Weiss’s new CBS hires include ‘germ theory denialist’ doctor

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/202 ... mark-hyman

[wjfox]

[Yuli Ban]

The most dumb-tastic part of it is that "national socialism" = "Nationalsozialismus" in German, which is a compound word in German.
It's like saying a schoolhouse is where teachers and students live, or that a football is literally a ball for your foot.

Their “socialism” explicitly rejected:
– Marxism
– class warfare
– worker control of industry
– internationalism
– abolition of private property

You know, I know I bring Aurore's Tale often up and have for a long while, but I swear the most relevant fucking research I've ever done for that story happens to relate to this topic: how there's a complete misunderstanding of "socialism" precisely because of how totally the optics of Marxism took over leftist thinking in the West.
In reality, there's a massive tradition of "left-populism" that's been completely forgotten, and which confuses people because pretty much anything leftist is confused for socialism or Marxism on principle.
Like
"99% vs 1%" is *left populism*. That's not actually socialism. It can cross over into it, but by itself, you can absolutely be a capitalist or even traditionalist and think "f*ck the 1%"
It's not socialism until you start talking about the actual workers (especially productive/industrial workers) and the owners. In some cases, both groups could actually be very small. In Russia in 1917, literally both the proletariat and bourgeoisie/nobility alike were about 2% of the population each. Proles just had peasant support, generally. Similar thing in France in 1789. Generally, it was the Parisian bourgeoisie and some provisional poor who wanted to overthrow the nobility, not the "99%"
99% vs 1% just reads well for populist purposes, it's easy to understand, but "I oppose the 1%, I support regulation of capitalism to make a more equitable society for all" is not actually socialist. But it's called such in America, because literally anything that isn't rugged cowboy Nietzschean anarcho-capitalism in America is called 'socialism."

Civic education in America is so terrible that no one really understands this nuance. Which is how people get away so often with saying "the Nazis were socialist because they supported public welfare and are called national SOCIALISTS." The actual meaning of that socialism (völkisch nationalist unity) be damned

[wjfox]

[firestar464]

[wjfox]

[firestar464]