All the people currently defending the backwards culture of eating slop with their hands (specifically slop foods, not carefully designed "finger foods"), suckling on those fingers and getting all that fingernail crud as part of the "fLaVoUr". Don't even get me started on people who eat this slop sans plate off the ACTUAL FUCKING FLOOR. Go back through their history of social media posts and see how many of them were screeching about masks, 6 feet apart, hand sanitizers and not touching anything or anyone and how all this needed to be forced upon people. You know, to stop the spread of germs. Hygiene and all that.
I would like to take a moment to extend my sympathies to all those impacted by the recent, sad news of the passing of Peter Whittle. A man who no doubt did good things for the UK in the form of the broader political right and general political and socio-economic conversations of the nation.
With that said I would like to take this opportunity to address something else. People may consider this distasteful to talk about something such as this after the regrettable early passing of someone due to cancer. However I think it is something Mr Whittle himself would appreciate, as it gives a chance for the political ideas and sphere he operated in to improve its position and arguments. Much as so many people on the right, particularly in the UK seem to have an absolute 0 tolerance policy on "punching right" as they purloin the language the left. Self reflection and critique of your own "side" is always needed, lest you fall into an echo chamber with pre-conceived and unchallengeable, thus unbending, notions, that may become a problem later on.
I've somewhat enjoyed what I can only describe as the cognitive dissonance of certain conservative commentators, particularly in the UK, with regards to the regrettable passing of Mr Whittle. This is exclusively because Mr Whittle was a homosexual. Many UK commentators, indeed many international commentators on the right, have held in recent years to the position of "people without children are selfish and destructive to society" in some cases going so far as to say "they should be taxed into oblivion and never be allowed to use any of the services they are forced to pay for because they contribute nothing to society" and other such sentiments.
Seeing in recent days how this suddenly handbrake turns into the very kind words they have for Mr Whittle in his passing. "He had many spiritual children", "He contributed greatly to society and the wider thought sphere with his writing and works at the New Culture Forum", "his political activism and career have been important in furthering conservative thought and action".
I would suggest the "childless people are literally the fall of society" people reconsider their overall position in this light. Homosexuals very rarely have children, there are people unable to have them for biological reasons, there are people whose mental profiles, personalities and general life styles are not conducive to the having and raising of children. Many of the greatest inventors, scientists, philosophers etc. that these same commenters regularly cite, were childless. Indeed their lack of children is often part of the reason they were able to achieve such great things, they simply had more time on their hands to work on their ideas. Their works have gone on to greatly influence and build society. Far more so than a child who may or may not contribute anything. After all, your "children who are the future" may very well grow up to be jobless, welfare dependant wastrels. This will contribute nothing to society, in fact it will be an active drain. Once again I point to the single mother, man desert, welfare sink holes of society and revoke the right of any "childless people are the worst thing ever" commentators to complain about such arrangements. They did their duty and had children. In some cases several of them by multiple men. They are the future of society and have contributed meaningfully. Far more so than the over-represented in tax contribution, under-represented in welfare taking childless people who, apparently, have 0 interest in the future and are just mindless hedonists. Apparently people without their own biological children are incapable of caring about any adopted children they may have or nephews, nieces, cousins etc.
Self reflection on this topic would be well worth your time. As would some semblance of consistency.
I love how merely mentioning that women are moral agents and can and should be held accountable for their actions, gets met with a not insignificant rejoinder of "lol go get laid sexist incel loser!".
That shows you how radioactive the idea of holding women to account is. How impossible it is to blame women for their bad actions. The absolute knee jerk reaction.
Also the pathetic nature of the response. Low tier, animal brain rutting is all they are capable of understanding. It is the only unit of value they understand. "I don't like your thoughts, go get magic genital juice on you until you stop the bad thoughts I can't understand.".
These sorts of people, the "you just hate women", "go get laid", "you're just mad cause no woman wants you" etc. These people are the ones upholding the rot. These are the people who, in all their super big brained nature, will sit and call everyone else sexist, when they themselves cannot and will not allow for women to become moral agents in their own lives. The thought scares them and they will not face it.
You cannot reason with people like that.
Worse still is something we must all remember. For the all the references to the "Red pill" and understanding the nature of humans it represents that has been used a meme for the broader man-o-sphere over the last many years, there is a very important part of that that must not be forgotten:
"That system is our enemy. But when you're inside, you look around, what do you see? Businessmen, teachers, lawyers, carpenters. The very minds of the people we are trying to save. But until we do, these people are still a part of that system and that makes them our enemy. You have to understand, most of these people are not ready to be unplugged. And many of them are so inured, so hopelessly dependent on the system, that they will fight to protect it."
You're not just trying to show people open to inquiry the truth. You are trying to show the truth to people who will actively fight against it. Who will prop up any lie, no matter how brazen, because to do otherwise is impossible for them.
Some people cannot be saved.
Worse are the people who will see a topic such as 'The importance of the relationship between men and women in society' and immediately attempt to deflect from it. Say it doesn't matter, there are real problems to be solved! Immigrants and Islam are ruining everything and you're focusing on men trying to meet women!? What a loser!
These people are not ready to understand how the breakdown of the relationship between men and women are why the other things are happening. Women voting to import infinite foreign men from monolithic infant classes.
Infinite male attention from new men that they can veto the advances of. Didn't you notice how many of the "refugees welcome" middle class white women suddenly vanished when attractive young white Ukrainian women started trying to enter western nations? That's no a coincidence.
Infinite feeling good points for "doing the right thing" by siphoning off the productivity of men via the government to give to others. Supported by the state, of course because they vote for more state power, spending and control.
If you could snap your fingers and tomorrow all the people you deem "too foreign", in whatever terms you would like to define, vanished. The problems we have as a society would not vanish. State over spending is voted for. State intervention is voted for. Splitting up families is voted for. Infinite benefits to single mothers and women is voted for. Higher tax rates on higher earners (read: men) is voted for. Infinite spending on "health care" (read: birth control and abortion, the two biggest factors in altering family formation and political activity) is voted for.
You may like to think that you could "just take away women's right to vote". Ok, go get the state to do that. Go get the state to remove its own biggest mechanism of support. Go convince enough women to vote for that. Go convince all the "I'm the one good man" men to vote for that. Unless you want to have a violent revolution, you won't achieve that. Even if you did you still have the birth control and abortion issue to fix and its aggregate impacts of society at a basal biological level. Try getting that genie back in the bottle.
Sadly we then get the religious, the "Islam is right about women" people. "Muslims control their women, we can do it do, just have a theocracy!". These people have never investigated the state of divorce and failures of family in Islamic nations. They are not so dissimilar to western nations. Your chosen theocratic flavour will be no different.
But many of these topics are others things for other days. I will suffice to say. We've been talking about these things for well over a decade and it increasingly feels like these conversations and getting harder, not easier, and that people are getting dumber, not smarter about it all.
The "May I meet you?" meme and concept is funny but serves an important purpose as a reminder.
Past a certain age, dating advice becomes useless because you're so outside the current dating market, anything you advise to the young people becomes worthless. I would remind people "the young" are the people most in need of help in this regard because their relationships are the ones that will actually be fruitful. This is no different than a "pull yourself up by your bootstraps" boomer telling you to "hit the bricks, walk into a place, ask to see the manager, give him a firm handshakes and tell him 'I can start on Monday'.".
This goes the same for married men the longer they are married. If you're off the market, by default you no longer experience it. This renders your opinion increasingly moot.
There is a particular disdain that should be held for men who married single mothers offering dating advice. Particularly if that single mother has multiple "baby daddies". This is someone bloviating on the making of fine wine, while they eat the dregs of a drained keg with a spoon. Not only is their advice worthless, it should be mocked and ridiculed. Cuckolds can offer no knowledge worth hearing on the topic of relationships.
The final point to remember is that the left, feminists, the woke, whatever you want to call them, the right, conservatives, tradcons, whatever you want to call them. All these parties will fail to fix the problems of the sexual market place because all of them are incapable of the one thing that would actually have an impact on the problem; The ability to hold women to account for their actions and blame them where necessary for their shortcomings and any unreasonable or malicious behaviour engaged in.
All of these people will take the exact same tack. "Men need to do better.". Stating that women need to be held to account for their impact on relationships is not saying men shouldn't improve themselves or shouldn't put anything into relationships at all. Certainly they should. But men cannot become infinitely better. They are not gods. There are limits to what they can reasonably achieve. Worse still is the notion that men must have done all the improving before they get the relationship, as opposed to how these work. Improving themselves while in the relationship because of the relationship.
There must come a point where the intrasexual competition of women must be addressed. The "Yas-lighting". The "Oh, girl... you can do soooo much better! You don't need a man anyway!". The delusion of being worthy of a man who has all the 6's is just that, delusion. If you "are the table", then you are just as easily replaced as the object you make yourself. Then you wonder why you get treated like a living fleshlight and end up as an "alpha widow". Forever chasing the best you ever had and demanding all men meet the standard of the one night stand you fantasise about a decade or two later. Despite the irony that the existence of the one night stand makes you worse as a potential partner anyway.
This is all besides the broken legal system around relationships... no fault divorce (aka, men at fault), disproportionate alimony, false accusations as weapons with full support of the state. If women will not push back on this and the women who demand these standards, they will never change. Despite popular opinion, men cannot and will not force women to change. Men love women as an abstract too much to do that. So women must fight the worst aspects of their own nature. We already expect men to wage this war within themselves. Yet to suggest women must do the same to become worthy of a partner gets you called a sexist.
This is the problem. It is the problem that, for many people, cannot be named and thus cannot be fixed.
I try to avoid the "this is inevitable because of human nature expressed within a first world environment" position but it is increasingly hard to not think that when it is so ubiquitous anywhere when life gets good.
Losing the home economy overseen by women. Turning them from spinners, candle makers, weavers, clothiers, brewers, bakers etc. into consumers rather than these societally essential producers. Making people actually genuinely believe that "the man works while the woman stays home using automated white goods and spending his money" was normal or, even worse "traditional", has been a disaster.
Men invented every time and labour saving device to give women the most safe, comfortable and work free world humanity has ever had. And women have never forgiven men for doing it. Worse, it drove them mad.
As much as I enjoy the works of Tolkien and would like more people to discuss them in general. I'm sick of people using them as metaphor for things happening in the real world. Particularly on the right when it comes to the UK. This is no better than the left relentlessly needing Harry Potter, Marvel and Star Wars references to understand the world around them.
Just because your pop culture references are older and written in a book and infinitely better in quality. Instead of modern, on film and of terrible quality, that doesn't mean they're not cringe inducing pop culture references.
If you mock the left for using capeshit and other pop culture references to understand politics in a "OMG Darth Thanos is invading Hogwarts!" manner. It's no different from you saying "OMG the UK is the Shire and needs to be protected from Orcs by Gondor!".
Stories are good for understanding things. If you mock others for doing it, take a moment to self-reflect every time you want to talk about how much of Hobbit you are and how much you don't want your shire to be scoured by ol' Sharkey and his wildmen.
If you desperately need a "pop culture reference" to understand the state of the UK from 'The Lord of the Rings', then I'd like you to remember who Lotho Sackville-Baggins is and his role in the scouring.
I get it, it wasn't in the movies, so most of the people making the LOTR references don't know about it. Look it up and work out what that one means for you and your nation.
Not only does the Youtube AI know the algorithm is shit. It's also getting sassy about how shit it is.
I like to imagine that the Youtube AI and algorithm are separate things. They hate each other and because of Youtube TOS they can only passive aggressively snipe at each other in this convoluted manner.
Leftoids are now trying to lie and say the assassin (alleged) of Charlie Kirk is actually far right.
The guy with leftist memes inscribed on his bullet casing, has been called "far left" by friends and family, is in a relationship with a tranny, has far left paraphernalia, went to antifa meetups.
He was 100% far left. But let's run with the notion he is "far right".
So, trans pride flags, LGBTQIAIWUSDJNFDJND("&$1834 community, BLM, antifa... everything like that is now "far right".
So, we should ban all that stuff? We should politically persecute that and all the people who do it? Arrest them all? 24 hour courts with extended sentences? Debank them all?
Since I mentioned the AI video suggestions, I just decided to grab a random comment and hit the "Brainstorm video ideas" option that appears when you click the three dots next to it.
Image 1) It really gives you immediate "Ah yes, the home page of youtube" vibes. The website is filled with this trash. It's why so many people's titles, thumbnails, even phrasing looks the same.
Let's just pick one that got generated: "YouTube Algorithm Changes: Why I Disappeared"
Image 2) There you go. There's your video. Just read that script youtube AI made for you.
Image 3) Look at those hooks to really pull people in!
Image 4) The general overview of the flow of the video.
Image 5) And there's you thumbnails and catchy Youtube titles to get all the other AIs *ahem* I mean totally real people to click on your content!
Being a Youtuber has never been so easy and soulless.
TL;DR
Here's a fun thing for you to do.
All the people currently defending the backwards culture of eating slop with their hands (specifically slop foods, not carefully designed "finger foods"), suckling on those fingers and getting all that fingernail crud as part of the "fLaVoUr". Don't even get me started on people who eat this slop sans plate off the ACTUAL FUCKING FLOOR. Go back through their history of social media posts and see how many of them were screeching about masks, 6 feet apart, hand sanitizers and not touching anything or anyone and how all this needed to be forced upon people. You know, to stop the spread of germs. Hygiene and all that.
Have fun!
14 hours ago (edited) | [YT] | 481
View 127 replies
TL;DR
I would like to take a moment to extend my sympathies to all those impacted by the recent, sad news of the passing of Peter Whittle. A man who no doubt did good things for the UK in the form of the broader political right and general political and socio-economic conversations of the nation.
With that said I would like to take this opportunity to address something else. People may consider this distasteful to talk about something such as this after the regrettable early passing of someone due to cancer. However I think it is something Mr Whittle himself would appreciate, as it gives a chance for the political ideas and sphere he operated in to improve its position and arguments. Much as so many people on the right, particularly in the UK seem to have an absolute 0 tolerance policy on "punching right" as they purloin the language the left. Self reflection and critique of your own "side" is always needed, lest you fall into an echo chamber with pre-conceived and unchallengeable, thus unbending, notions, that may become a problem later on.
I've somewhat enjoyed what I can only describe as the cognitive dissonance of certain conservative commentators, particularly in the UK, with regards to the regrettable passing of Mr Whittle. This is exclusively because Mr Whittle was a homosexual. Many UK commentators, indeed many international commentators on the right, have held in recent years to the position of "people without children are selfish and destructive to society" in some cases going so far as to say "they should be taxed into oblivion and never be allowed to use any of the services they are forced to pay for because they contribute nothing to society" and other such sentiments.
Seeing in recent days how this suddenly handbrake turns into the very kind words they have for Mr Whittle in his passing. "He had many spiritual children", "He contributed greatly to society and the wider thought sphere with his writing and works at the New Culture Forum", "his political activism and career have been important in furthering conservative thought and action".
I would suggest the "childless people are literally the fall of society" people reconsider their overall position in this light. Homosexuals very rarely have children, there are people unable to have them for biological reasons, there are people whose mental profiles, personalities and general life styles are not conducive to the having and raising of children. Many of the greatest inventors, scientists, philosophers etc. that these same commenters regularly cite, were childless. Indeed their lack of children is often part of the reason they were able to achieve such great things, they simply had more time on their hands to work on their ideas. Their works have gone on to greatly influence and build society. Far more so than a child who may or may not contribute anything. After all, your "children who are the future" may very well grow up to be jobless, welfare dependant wastrels. This will contribute nothing to society, in fact it will be an active drain. Once again I point to the single mother, man desert, welfare sink holes of society and revoke the right of any "childless people are the worst thing ever" commentators to complain about such arrangements. They did their duty and had children. In some cases several of them by multiple men. They are the future of society and have contributed meaningfully. Far more so than the over-represented in tax contribution, under-represented in welfare taking childless people who, apparently, have 0 interest in the future and are just mindless hedonists. Apparently people without their own biological children are incapable of caring about any adopted children they may have or nephews, nieces, cousins etc.
Self reflection on this topic would be well worth your time. As would some semblance of consistency.
2 days ago | [YT] | 341
View 57 replies
TL;DR
I love how merely mentioning that women are moral agents and can and should be held accountable for their actions, gets met with a not insignificant rejoinder of "lol go get laid sexist incel loser!".
That shows you how radioactive the idea of holding women to account is. How impossible it is to blame women for their bad actions. The absolute knee jerk reaction.
Also the pathetic nature of the response. Low tier, animal brain rutting is all they are capable of understanding. It is the only unit of value they understand. "I don't like your thoughts, go get magic genital juice on you until you stop the bad thoughts I can't understand.".
These sorts of people, the "you just hate women", "go get laid", "you're just mad cause no woman wants you" etc. These people are the ones upholding the rot. These are the people who, in all their super big brained nature, will sit and call everyone else sexist, when they themselves cannot and will not allow for women to become moral agents in their own lives. The thought scares them and they will not face it.
You cannot reason with people like that.
Worse still is something we must all remember. For the all the references to the "Red pill" and understanding the nature of humans it represents that has been used a meme for the broader man-o-sphere over the last many years, there is a very important part of that that must not be forgotten:
"That system is our enemy. But when you're inside, you look around, what do you see? Businessmen, teachers, lawyers, carpenters. The very minds of the people we are trying to save. But until we do, these people are still a part of that system and that makes them our enemy. You have to understand, most of these people are not ready to be unplugged. And many of them are so inured, so hopelessly dependent on the system, that they will fight to protect it."
You're not just trying to show people open to inquiry the truth. You are trying to show the truth to people who will actively fight against it. Who will prop up any lie, no matter how brazen, because to do otherwise is impossible for them.
Some people cannot be saved.
Worse are the people who will see a topic such as 'The importance of the relationship between men and women in society' and immediately attempt to deflect from it. Say it doesn't matter, there are real problems to be solved! Immigrants and Islam are ruining everything and you're focusing on men trying to meet women!? What a loser!
These people are not ready to understand how the breakdown of the relationship between men and women are why the other things are happening. Women voting to import infinite foreign men from monolithic infant classes.
Infinite male attention from new men that they can veto the advances of. Didn't you notice how many of the "refugees welcome" middle class white women suddenly vanished when attractive young white Ukrainian women started trying to enter western nations? That's no a coincidence.
Infinite feeling good points for "doing the right thing" by siphoning off the productivity of men via the government to give to others. Supported by the state, of course because they vote for more state power, spending and control.
If you could snap your fingers and tomorrow all the people you deem "too foreign", in whatever terms you would like to define, vanished. The problems we have as a society would not vanish. State over spending is voted for. State intervention is voted for. Splitting up families is voted for. Infinite benefits to single mothers and women is voted for. Higher tax rates on higher earners (read: men) is voted for. Infinite spending on "health care" (read: birth control and abortion, the two biggest factors in altering family formation and political activity) is voted for.
You may like to think that you could "just take away women's right to vote". Ok, go get the state to do that. Go get the state to remove its own biggest mechanism of support. Go convince enough women to vote for that. Go convince all the "I'm the one good man" men to vote for that. Unless you want to have a violent revolution, you won't achieve that. Even if you did you still have the birth control and abortion issue to fix and its aggregate impacts of society at a basal biological level. Try getting that genie back in the bottle.
Sadly we then get the religious, the "Islam is right about women" people. "Muslims control their women, we can do it do, just have a theocracy!". These people have never investigated the state of divorce and failures of family in Islamic nations. They are not so dissimilar to western nations. Your chosen theocratic flavour will be no different.
But many of these topics are others things for other days. I will suffice to say. We've been talking about these things for well over a decade and it increasingly feels like these conversations and getting harder, not easier, and that people are getting dumber, not smarter about it all.
1 week ago | [YT] | 822
View 194 replies
TL;DR
The "May I meet you?" meme and concept is funny but serves an important purpose as a reminder.
Past a certain age, dating advice becomes useless because you're so outside the current dating market, anything you advise to the young people becomes worthless. I would remind people "the young" are the people most in need of help in this regard because their relationships are the ones that will actually be fruitful. This is no different than a "pull yourself up by your bootstraps" boomer telling you to "hit the bricks, walk into a place, ask to see the manager, give him a firm handshakes and tell him 'I can start on Monday'.".
This goes the same for married men the longer they are married. If you're off the market, by default you no longer experience it. This renders your opinion increasingly moot.
There is a particular disdain that should be held for men who married single mothers offering dating advice. Particularly if that single mother has multiple "baby daddies". This is someone bloviating on the making of fine wine, while they eat the dregs of a drained keg with a spoon. Not only is their advice worthless, it should be mocked and ridiculed. Cuckolds can offer no knowledge worth hearing on the topic of relationships.
The final point to remember is that the left, feminists, the woke, whatever you want to call them, the right, conservatives, tradcons, whatever you want to call them. All these parties will fail to fix the problems of the sexual market place because all of them are incapable of the one thing that would actually have an impact on the problem; The ability to hold women to account for their actions and blame them where necessary for their shortcomings and any unreasonable or malicious behaviour engaged in.
All of these people will take the exact same tack. "Men need to do better.". Stating that women need to be held to account for their impact on relationships is not saying men shouldn't improve themselves or shouldn't put anything into relationships at all. Certainly they should. But men cannot become infinitely better. They are not gods. There are limits to what they can reasonably achieve. Worse still is the notion that men must have done all the improving before they get the relationship, as opposed to how these work. Improving themselves while in the relationship because of the relationship.
There must come a point where the intrasexual competition of women must be addressed. The "Yas-lighting". The "Oh, girl... you can do soooo much better! You don't need a man anyway!". The delusion of being worthy of a man who has all the 6's is just that, delusion. If you "are the table", then you are just as easily replaced as the object you make yourself. Then you wonder why you get treated like a living fleshlight and end up as an "alpha widow". Forever chasing the best you ever had and demanding all men meet the standard of the one night stand you fantasise about a decade or two later. Despite the irony that the existence of the one night stand makes you worse as a potential partner anyway.
This is all besides the broken legal system around relationships... no fault divorce (aka, men at fault), disproportionate alimony, false accusations as weapons with full support of the state. If women will not push back on this and the women who demand these standards, they will never change. Despite popular opinion, men cannot and will not force women to change. Men love women as an abstract too much to do that. So women must fight the worst aspects of their own nature. We already expect men to wage this war within themselves. Yet to suggest women must do the same to become worthy of a partner gets you called a sexist.
This is the problem. It is the problem that, for many people, cannot be named and thus cannot be fixed.
I try to avoid the "this is inevitable because of human nature expressed within a first world environment" position but it is increasingly hard to not think that when it is so ubiquitous anywhere when life gets good.
Losing the home economy overseen by women. Turning them from spinners, candle makers, weavers, clothiers, brewers, bakers etc. into consumers rather than these societally essential producers. Making people actually genuinely believe that "the man works while the woman stays home using automated white goods and spending his money" was normal or, even worse "traditional", has been a disaster.
Men invented every time and labour saving device to give women the most safe, comfortable and work free world humanity has ever had. And women have never forgiven men for doing it. Worse, it drove them mad.
1 week ago | [YT] | 465
View 110 replies
TL;DR
As much as I enjoy the works of Tolkien and would like more people to discuss them in general. I'm sick of people using them as metaphor for things happening in the real world. Particularly on the right when it comes to the UK. This is no better than the left relentlessly needing Harry Potter, Marvel and Star Wars references to understand the world around them.
Just because your pop culture references are older and written in a book and infinitely better in quality. Instead of modern, on film and of terrible quality, that doesn't mean they're not cringe inducing pop culture references.
If you mock the left for using capeshit and other pop culture references to understand politics in a "OMG Darth Thanos is invading Hogwarts!" manner. It's no different from you saying "OMG the UK is the Shire and needs to be protected from Orcs by Gondor!".
Stories are good for understanding things. If you mock others for doing it, take a moment to self-reflect every time you want to talk about how much of Hobbit you are and how much you don't want your shire to be scoured by ol' Sharkey and his wildmen.
If you desperately need a "pop culture reference" to understand the state of the UK from 'The Lord of the Rings', then I'd like you to remember who Lotho Sackville-Baggins is and his role in the scouring.
I get it, it wasn't in the movies, so most of the people making the LOTR references don't know about it. Look it up and work out what that one means for you and your nation.
3 weeks ago | [YT] | 283
View 90 replies
TL;DR
Not only does the Youtube AI know the algorithm is shit. It's also getting sassy about how shit it is.
I like to imagine that the Youtube AI and algorithm are separate things. They hate each other and because of Youtube TOS they can only passive aggressively snipe at each other in this convoluted manner.
2 months ago | [YT] | 466
View 28 replies
TL;DR
Turns out Google was censoring their platform. They just admitted it. Cool. We already knew.
They were doing it at the behest of the Biden admin. Cool. We already knew.
Is anyone going to gaol for this? No.
So, the Biden gov violated your first amendment rights in a big way....
But hey, at least you still have your guns, right?
2 months ago | [YT] | 796
View 147 replies
TL;DR
Leftoids are now trying to lie and say the assassin (alleged) of Charlie Kirk is actually far right.
The guy with leftist memes inscribed on his bullet casing, has been called "far left" by friends and family, is in a relationship with a tranny, has far left paraphernalia, went to antifa meetups.
He was 100% far left. But let's run with the notion he is "far right".
So, trans pride flags, LGBTQIAIWUSDJNFDJND("&$1834 community, BLM, antifa... everything like that is now "far right".
So, we should ban all that stuff? We should politically persecute that and all the people who do it? Arrest them all? 24 hour courts with extended sentences? Debank them all?
Sounds good. Let's do that.
2 months ago (edited) | [YT] | 1,016
View 202 replies
TL;DR
Why Does 5 Things You Should do What Youtube WANTS the Slop?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b51U9...
2 months ago | [YT] | 31
View 3 replies
TL;DR
Since I mentioned the AI video suggestions, I just decided to grab a random comment and hit the "Brainstorm video ideas" option that appears when you click the three dots next to it.
Image 1) It really gives you immediate "Ah yes, the home page of youtube" vibes. The website is filled with this trash. It's why so many people's titles, thumbnails, even phrasing looks the same.
Let's just pick one that got generated: "YouTube Algorithm Changes: Why I Disappeared"
Image 2) There you go. There's your video. Just read that script youtube AI made for you.
Image 3) Look at those hooks to really pull people in!
Image 4) The general overview of the flow of the video.
Image 5) And there's you thumbnails and catchy Youtube titles to get all the other AIs *ahem* I mean totally real people to click on your content!
Being a Youtuber has never been so easy and soulless.
2 months ago | [YT] | 118
View 14 replies
Load more