I’m not on Twitter, so I get my news elsewhere, but most of the actual pictures I see are from here. So is there some kind of bias where only the fascist imagery gets posted here in the the dunk tank? Or do the libs scrolling through Ukrainian posts on Twitter literally see and ignore fascist imagery on every single post? Like, if they see 1000 Ukrainian soldiers, will they see 1000 fascist symbols?
Ukrainian fascists are the commandos of the war and have people sympathetic to them all up the chain. They are provided with a lot of power on the ground and this includes the production of propaganda.
You see a lot of Nazi imagery because (1) there are indeed a lot of Ukrainian fascists in the military and (2) the Ukrainian fascists are the ones creating the photo ops.
Liberals are first and foremost ignorant and most don’t even notice or recognize sonnenrads or whatever most of the time. And when it’s pointed out, they become defensive, as this has been their rah-rah nationalist moment, the first war in a long time they feel they can outwardly support. Acknowledging that they’re supporting Nazis creates cognitive dissonance that leads them to lash out like children.
Or just straight up deciding that Nazis aren’t that bad after all. “If I’m supporting Nazis, and I know that I’m cool and good, then Nazis must not actually be that bad either.”
I haven’t seen that specifically, more just these ones don’t count and then ranting about the USSR.
I haven’t seen an outright defense of nazis, just a defense of looking the other way. Which materially makes no difference, but as far as the thought process goes it’s a bit different than fully saying nazis are good
I can see what you mean, but on the other hand the sentiment of “Well, Hitler did have some good points” is common enough, for example. I would say it leans more towards the “not so bad” thought process than the “not actually Nazi” thought process. I think that the “not so bad” thing is probably more of a cryptofascist tactic than it is a liberal excuse, but in my experience there’s a hell of a lot of crossover between those two. Otherwise, the concept of the “scratched liberal” wouldn’t be so constantly applicable.
I have never seen a lib irl say hitler has good points, but I have seen them argue that Stalin was worse. Like before, effectively the same statement materially, but I think the thought process is a little sneakier.
I think the scratched liberal goes fascist without even knowing it. They’re not going to just suddenly get on board the “hitler good” train, but they’ll get on the “well they’re on our side this time” train, you know what I mean?
It’s a semantic difference, but idk I think it’s somewhat, if not important, worthwhile to note that they are a different creature being used by the fascist, less so than a fascist outright.
Consider yourself fortunate, then. I have, more than once.
I agree. There’s a reason we call it a pipeline.
It’s absolutely worthwhile (and important) to differentiate between out-and-out fascist and ignorant liberal. I just think for a lot of them, certainly the ones we’d call scratched libs, it’s more a matter of degree than of kind. It’s a spectrum, and unfortunately they usually end up sliding in one direction along that spectrum.
I do think you’re right that it’s far more often that a lib will deal with their cognitive dissonance by going the “that’s not Nazi” route as opposed to the “Nazis aren’t all bad” route, but I still contend that the latter does happen, and I have actually seen it happen.