Originally Posted by rhaikh
Originally Posted by Derid
Using random dubmfucks on twitter means your own discourse has fallen to the level of random twitter dumbfuckery


Well he is a dumbfuck, but not really random.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jason_Kessler


Originally Posted by Derid
I would dig up some "Stalin did nothing wrong" tweets from your fellow socialists


That is essentially what the OP in this thread is doing - Part 1 of my point with this link. Part 2 backing up my previous claims about the IDW leading to the alt-right.




I think the overarching point here, is were it not for twitter giving a platform, no one would even know about the guy. His rantings, as well as the stalin did nothing wrong and many other crowds would have an audience the size of their sleepy neighborhood tavern. Incidentally, twitters purpose in these cases seems to be helping a couple people who agree connect and giving a few thousand random people someone to yell at. You say he isn't random, but the whole problem with things like twitter is any random person can get an audience and any troll can be fed as long as he sufficiently pushes peoples emotional buttons one way or another. 140 characters (or whatever the limit is) isn't a platform for studious discourse, its a stage for trolls - most of which we would all be better off not feeding, left, right, fascist, communist or otherwise.

The fact that a huge chunk of dumbfuckery from all sides seems to originate or revolve around twitterverse is not lost on me. If you got famous (or infamous) on twitter, and not because of a cute cat pic, its because you said something that triggered peoples emotions. The whole environment self selects for people who engage in the trolliest possible behavior.

I remain unconvinced that the guy is evidence of anything leading to anything though, other that the loudest demagogues and most intentionally offensive getting the most attention on antisocial media.


For who could be free when every other man's humour might domineer over him? - John Locke (2nd Treatise, sect 57)