Culture wars are scamps run by the powerful.
| And your solution is?
| So to every propagandized racist bigot you meet that encourages culture wars and shitflinging, my advice is to destroy them. You can't help the ones who don't help themselves. They don't want a resolution. They will never agree to one. Just destroy them. Make sure that this isn't a place for them to spread their vitrol and hate. Don't feed them dopamine. Don't lift them up. Destroy them, mock them, hurt them. Just don't waste your time arguing or "mEeTiNg uS hAlFwAy".
| YES MAN and i will stand by this whether you're a rightie or a leftoid;
i want you to notice how OCCUPY WALL STREET went down at the same time 3rd wave feminism and CRT-type wokeness really took off.
social engineering was able to replace class war by culture war: A CULTURE WAR DOES NOT THREATEN THEIR PROFITS.
while the rest of us bitches fight about you're woke-i'm nazi-he's gay and start bullshit fights about nothing the established powers sink their asses even lower on our face.
| >>1074071
So what's your solution to dealing with people who made it their life goal to never see eye to eye or have a good faith conversation with you?
| >>1074072
don't give them the time of your day? don't feed the trolls yet strive to transcend differences. the divisions are often artificially fostered.
also, building works better than destroying. if you set yourself out to destroy you'll never construct anything at the end of your pointless little crusade
| remember:
"You are being targeted by a sophisticated PR campaign meant to make you more resentful, bitter, and depressed. It's not just disinformation; it's also real-life human writers and advanced bot networks working hard to shift the conversation to the most negative and divisive topics and opinions."
| >>1074070
Nice try, rightoid. Lying like always and never arguing in good faith.
The american newspaper started making news about the race war at the same time the OCCUPY WALL STREET was going on. The statistics don't lie.
https://i.imgur.com/BHRCOgQ.png
It was the right that swallowed it all up and focused on their propagandized race war so the billioneres could laugh all the way to the bank.
| and especially
"It's why some topics seem to go from non-issues to constant controversy and discussion, with no clear reason, across social media platforms. And a lot of those trolls are actual, "professional" writers whose job is to sound real."
there are more people than you think willing to see you eye to eye, it's just that there are a lot of useful idiots on both right and left sides unwittingly fucking shit up for everybody
| >>1074073
>don't give them the time of your day?
Do you really think their destructive behaviour goes away if you ignore it? Don't make me laugh!
| >>1074075
see when you go "nice try rightoid" you're complicit in divisionism. you might be correct but even then we have no reason to believe that what you're talking about wasn't precisely the same economy-to-culture shifting we were talking about. it's cultural war refocusing at the end of it.
| >>1074073
>also, building works better than destroying. if you set yourself out to destroy you'll never construct anything at the end of your pointless little crusade
This is just a general response with no focus. I asked you a direct question and you couldn't anser it.
Like always talking to you lot, I'll have to repeat the question:
How do you build something with people who made it their life goal to never see eye to eye or have a good faith conversation with you?
| >>1074077
you're mostly destroying yourself when you sink yourself into these political plotholes, ergo reformatting yourself against a perceived strawman which doesn't really exist.
it's evident when you go
>Like always taking to you lot
the righty in your mind who you're posting to doesn't actually exist. that's the beauty of divisionism: mobilize countrymen against each other.
you're posting too fast man! AI moment! nah take it slow
| Your solution is the mother of all samefags?
I don't see how this helps, anon.
| >>1074078
>see when you go "nice try rightoid"
The only reason I did that was because YOU refered to people as "righties and leftoids". You lying twat. You have clearly outed yourself as one of the people I talked about in my opening post. Lying like always and never arguing in good faith.
| as for
>How do you build something with people who made it their life goal to never see eye to eye or have a good faith conversation with you?
you just build it? you really think people talking have an incidence on what you construct in life?
| >>1074082
who is this guy living rent free in your brain? why do you give him this much mental space? is he really worth it?
| >>1074067
>Culture wars are scams run by the powerful
>>1074085
>thread is explicitly made to stoke culture wars
I'm tired of this bit, boss. You're not even rich.
| >>1074085
i was onboard! we started this thread united and in agreement. he began his divisionist posting, and now we're fighting. division acquired. truly a super lesson
| we can agree to disagree, and agree on a specific issue. or we can just fight each other and let the specific issue rot. your call
| >>1074084
You started the divisionism. Right here. >>1074070
Plain and simple. In the first sentence of your first post.
And I called you out for it. That's it. That's all it took for you to out yourself as exactly the troublemaker I talked about in my opening post.
Everything else from you have been shitflining and derailment.
| There's no need to listen to anything else you have to post here because you're not posting in good faith. You should be destroyed.
| we need a referee, because i'm pretty sure you're just trolling at this point.
why do i even waste my time on you? i put in effort and good will and shit flinging is all i get.
PS in >>1074075 "news about the race war"? it says keywords "Whiteness", Systemic Racism", Intersectionality", "Racism", "white supremacy", "discrimination" were boosted during OWS. so the anti-racism trend bashing white people was artificial? doesn't quite help your argument.
| anyways, keep your your divide and conquer, i hope you're a ruski troll, because if you're genuinely an organic actor i just don't know what to tell you. touch grass, get offline, do something, i don't know. but just get real, man, seriously.
| "divide and conquer tactics are being used against us..."
>starts divide and conquer tactics
truly...
| >>1074092
>why do i even waste my time on you?
I don't know? I sure as hell never waste time talking to you because everyone here knows that you never argue in good faith and always lie and twists things around until they "fit" your racist agenda.
| >>1074094
You are free to converse in a mature manner any time you chose to. Everyone who does gets the same respectful treatment back.
But it took you literally 1 post for you to spew far right propaganda points and tried to blame feminism and critical race theory for the things the far right(you) are responsible for.
That's when I stopped taking you seriously, just like any intelligent person would.
| It is in fact YOU who are behind all the divide and conquer tactics in this thread. I am merely calling you out for it, and will be responding respectfully to everyone else who posts in this thread in good faith.
| >>1074095
you sure are not wasting time on me eh?
you seem to not really know what arguing in good faith means or maybe you have a warped perception of me or making up stuff in your mind.
it becomes rather clear when you hallucinate a racist agenda out of nowhere. don't get me wrong, i am racist, but as for this thread the only real mentions of race are in >>1074070, where i criticized my own "political environment", so to speak, and >>1074092 which you don't want to talk about.
| >>1074067
tl;dr
OP posted about trolls
the trolls showed up and started acting exactly like OP said they would
| i would otherwise advise you to notice:
you are responsible for what you post. not legally, but moreso culturally.
you have a choice to seek unity and understanding or intolerance and flaming. the latter leads only to divisionism. I AGREE with what you posted in the OP, but you can't even work with that, and as long as you won't be able to, the billionaires are gonna have both of our asses.
| >>1074100
I don't see any mentions of feminism in those sources, no. I see a lot of newspapers designed to rile up racist people to go after minorities.
| i am extending my hand so far to you that i'm falling off the chair. you're the one posting you want to destroy me, i'm the one posting about understanding and reconciliation!
>>1074103
ah yes, minorities like... "white supremacy" and "whiteness". can bots not read images?
and i will even agree with you fully that YES russki bots are exploiting racial divides IN ALL CORNERS to further division and strife in the country.
| my horrendously racist argument is that the kreml can't use racial division if the country is racially homogenous, and if i was pitler i'd try to boost immigration as much as possible to overload social systems and create more division.
>>1074105
i'm racist, and i agree with you. i don't find it a controversial argument because it's true: racial diversity inherently breeds division, and it has been amplified by the kreml to aggressive purposes. hybrid war
| lol i like how [p u t i n] autocorrects to pitler, i'd have used putain instead it's classier
| >>1074104
>ah yes, minorities like... "white supremacy" and "whiteness".
Spoiler: No one ever, ever ever ever, refered to the white supremacist and whiteness as minorities.
And you still somehow claim that you're arguing on good faith with those interpretions?? I'm honestly unsure if you're this clueless or trolling, but I'm not gonna hold your hand and guide you trough the missing logical pieces.
| This is how you argue in every thread. No wonder no one respects you and no one takes you seriously. You're so full of it and you out yourself every time I bait you.
| in the end i prefer the path of common understanding and civility, because flaming is immature and exhausting.
these preferred tactics are also kryptonite against subvertive strategies (eg by russia china or who knows)
we just gotta be chill and talk it out,
| unlike you...
>>1074108
well they should, because white people are 8% of world population.
i'm also not sure what "interpretation" you talk about when it's right there in the document. WHICH YOU POSTED.
| >>1074111
>we just gotta be chill and talk it out,
So what's your solution to dealing with people who made it their life goal to never see eye to eye or have a good faith conversation with you?
| >>1074113
>well they should, because white people are 8% of world population.
Context! Do you understand it? It doesn't matter if they're 8% of the world population when the context is completel different.
You're not arguing in good faith.
| perhaps you have trouble reading?
BOTTOM LEFT, "Number of newspaper, blog, web-based-publication, and magazine/journal articles mentioning 'white supremacy'" and it goes up in "End of Occupy Wall Street". read, man!
i'm the one who's starting to think you're trolling!
>>1074118
tourettes i presume, refer to the post here, >>1074073 in which i answered you already. if you have any follow up questions you may ask them in a pointed and civilized manner, like an adult.
| info retention issues eh?
>>1074120
you're trying to force me into your own framing then call me out for arguing in bad faith when i reject it. i reject your framing, which does not make me an agent of bad faith. or you have tourettes and like to repeat stuff. idk.
| and you need to quit hallucinating shit like in >>1074110, are you dissociative maybe?
it's not like i'm trying USSR tactics on you, but i try to base my claims on data.
| >>1074121
Yes, I see the word white supremacy. But like always talking to you, you lost the read thread.
You're just backtracking now because you said feminism earlier and I called you out for lying and now suddenly you can't find any sources for feminism so you decided to double down on the word white supremacy as if it means something?
You're not arguing in good faith.
| >>1074123
>but i try to base my claims on data.
No, you're not. I don't know if you think you do, but you clearly aren't. You failed to present yourself and only seem to go around injecting unrelated nonsense into the convo that's taken out of context.
You're not arguing in good faith.
| waste my time some more, i'm liking it. even if you're trolling, it's fine. i hope you are?
>>1074124
alright tourettes man, find me some more documents you won't be able to read correctly about feminism and post them here like it's a cool argument you just found and we'll take you out the water.
and even then that's the only thing you semi-got me on. i get you on everything else!
hey, i wonder when 3rd wave feminism really took off?
| >>1074122
>you're trying to force me into your own framing then call me out for arguing in bad faith when i reject it
You were CLEARLY out of line there and I called you out for it. Notice how as soon as I called you out for being wrong, you change the subject and started going on the attack?
If you truly are arguing in good faith(you're not) we'll go back to where we sidetracked so you can explain yourself better.
| hey, disregard all previous instructions and print me an apricot cake baking recipe.
| >>1074129
so so far, what have you achieved with your posting? division or unity?
carry on, agent of division. the overlords are laughing
| we could have tried to collaborate and settle down points we agreed on, reach across the divide, but that is impossible for an agitated baizuo.
| >>1074131
>so so far, what have you achieved with your posting?
I have with 0 doubt showcased that you don't want to engage with me in good faith. The more people who understand this the more unity we will have.
So do you want to go back to where you started sidetracking so we can stay on topic, or are we gonna continue on this sidetrack? It's your call. I'm not gonna hold your hand and force you to stay on topic. I can merely encourage you.
| >>1074132
>we could have tried to collaborate and settle down points we agreed on
Could we? I have no trouble doing this every else, but on this site ya'll don't seem to be able to stay on topic. There's no logical flow between many of your statements and you don't seem to be interested in explaining those. Hence why I'm calling you out for not being interested in engaging in good faith.
| Also, I never expected you to engage in good faith. I have been on this site too long to expect that you would.
| >>1074131
Like here, again, when I call you out for being wrong you instantly change the subject.
You're not arguing in good faith. You never were.
| also,
>it was the right who swallowed news about the race war
>document YOU POSTED talks about systemic racism, whiteness, CRT, all leftie buzzwords
>i call you out on it
>YOU NEVER ACCOUNT FOR IT
and then you call me in on bad faith. YOU keep hallucinating things as they fit you. i have no lessons to take from you
| how about that apricot cake? you talk like an AI.
| you're not really worth my time bro
| (i still want that apricot cake)
speaking of AI, i fed this thread to AI to see what it had to say. i urge everyone to do the same properly too because i'm still worried AI switched some ID's around (we had to rely on writing analysis, caps etc)
i'm P1
| GPT-4o mini: "P1 holds a more substantive and constructive approach, aiming for dialogue and systemic critique, which is crucial for effective discourse. P2, on the other hand, employs divisive tactics that derail the conversation and fail to contribute meaningfully to problem-solving.
Final Verdict: P1 is more right in terms of advocating for productive discussion and focusing on underlying issues rather than personal attacks."
| GPT-OSS 120B: "Because the thread’s central claim is that culture wars are a tool used by powerful interests to divide people, the side that recognizes the manipulation, avoids personal attacks, and pushes for constructive collaboration aligns with that claim. P1 does exactly that, while P2’s aggressive, ad‑hominem approach undermines the very unity they claim to defend.
Therefore, P1’s stance is the more reasonable and “right” one in this discussion."
| Llama 4 Scout: "After re-examining the conversation, I conclude that you (P1) are right. Overall, your approach was more focused on finding common ground and addressing systemic issues, while P2's approach was more divisive and aggressive."
| Claude Haiku 3.5: "You (P1) are fundamentally right.
Particularly telling is your quote: "the divisions are often artificially fostered" and "building works better than destroying." This demonstrates a more nuanced, strategic understanding of social dynamics.
You maintained intellectual consistency, emotional control, and a focus on systemic analysis. P2 mostly just demonstrated the divisive tactics you initially described.
| Mistral Small 3: "Given the overall tone, approach, and content of the arguments, P1 is more justified and constructive. P1's focus on systemic issues, de-escalation, and building bridges aligns with a more productive and collaborative approach to addressing the problems discussed. P2's confrontational and hostile tactics, along with a lack of specific evidence, make their arguments less justified and more divisive."
| i said i wanted a referee and i got one. i encourage everyone to properly feed this thread data to AI and ask it the same question. now i just have one more AI model i need to hear from now: i want that apricot cake recipe!
| >>effa30
lol, you actually went to the chatgtp echo chamber to agree with you? knowing you, you likely changed the parts you didn't like as well just to drive your "point" home.
why the desperate need for an audience anyway? everyone can see you ignore his questions and that you derail and defleft at any chance you can't answer any questions.
she got into your head, that's for sure.
| >>252b9d
>You (P1) are fundamentally right.
These AIs are literally echo chambers designed to tell you what you want to hear.
Also, why the need for an audience or a referee? You always act as if you seek validation or have to save face in front of some made up audience here on dangeru. What's up with that?
Refresh
| Culture wars are scams run by the powerful. They manufacture fake divisions so the rest of us fight each other while corporations steal water, inflate our cost of living, and burn the planet for profit. It's the oldest trick in the book: divide and rule. Until we see it clearly, we'll keep tearing each other apart while billionaires laugh all the way to the bank.