Friday, July 25, 2014

There must be something in the water that non-conservatives drink. Combox #1

I think comboxes, to an extent, are a good way to gauge a certain group - be it the regulars or the occasional random posters that deny the article.

Depending on the topic, when I visit non-progressive sites & check their combox, the responses are somewhat predictable to almost "All your emotions are obnoxiously retarded." In case you were wondering, I'm not talking about conservative commentators, but the visitors - the "modernists."

Here are some topics that tend to get non-conservatives, whether they be libertarians leaning left or just flat out modern day leftists/progressives out of the woodwork:

- newly formed conservatives
- critical of homosexual "rights"
- critical of women's "rights"
- skeptical of global warming
- critical of libertarian ideals
- anything defending religion from the criticism of the secular/atheistic world view
- critical of Obama (this topic was a "golden calf" to the left, but now it seems their enthusiasm has greatly been reduced)

This shouldn't be a surprise. The topics basically make up the core of the social issues that are very much dear to leftists/modernists/whatever-you-call-them. (I'm an ex-liberal and I'm starting to get confused on what to call non-conservatives.)

There are probably other topics that have slipped my mind, but those six (not including Obama) are the main topics that tend to get the trolls where the combox reaches 150+. I'll just concentrate on the few listed.

The Newly Formed Conservative
Just recently I read an American Thinker (AT) article on being an ex-leftist. I recommend reading it. I read through the combox, not all 700+ comments (which I think is an AT record) - but most - and those that were not in favor of what was written stated the usual remarks:

- "You were never a true leftist." (Really, now?)
- "So you switched from one ideology for another?" (Let me see, you're a 'libertarian.')
- "This is just rhetoric smearing the left." (So you're saying everything was a lie or grossly exaggerated?)
- "Why should it be always a partisan war? There should be compromise!" (Mr. Naive.)
- "Kumbaya." (Okay, this was never actually said, but it's the 'moderate' card that was being played. )
- "I could say the same thing about conservatives." (So you can replace "leftist" with "conservatives for each point?)
- "Both sides have their bad." (No duh.)
- "This is just BS." (In other words: It hits too close to home OR you think the piece is either lying or over exaggerating.)

Even more interesting is that those that formed these critical comments weren't AT regulars. I presume that the article was posted on a site like reddit (actually no, if it were then the combox would be immensely vial and cruel) or people actively googled for similar posts and up popped the AT article. Or maybe the regulars who liked it circulated it gaining it mass traffic. I'm not sure how it gained that much attention.

Critical of Libertarian Ideals
Again, back to AT. I also liked this article. A good percent of the comments, 200+, are very angry libertarians - most of them first time commentators on the site. The writer's follow up article only received 77 comments, less than half of before. Unlike the above article where many of the commentators where regulars, the comments for this article were mostly first timers. How'd they sniff out this article? I guess that some site dedicated to libertarianism tagged it on its news feed and BOOM, swarming (a technique used to cause high traffic in order to overwhelm the writer and to intimidate regulars).

Critical of Homosexual "Rights"
Way too many to list. There's a few on AT and there's a ton on Breitbart.com. I frequent conservative sites and when something like this s issued I always tend to brace myself. The combox usually gets flooded and a good percent of the comments are "swarmers" - non regulars picking a fight or just mouthing off the cliches I've grown too weary to even care to refute.

On another AT article, which unfortunately I can't seem to find it, not about anything homosexual related, but on Romney's potential to win the 2012 POTUS race, the day after the election I ventured back to it. Like clockwork two pro-homosexual "marriage" advocates started sneering that "they won." Of course this was the same, amongst many other usual gloats, when it came to articles relaying news of same-sex "marriage" becoming law making conservative sites. I distinctly remember one poster saying "My friends and I will dance in the streets!" when DOMA was struck down. This was troll on a conservative site.

And there's this piece of work: 950+ comments on a site that most articles don't get 20. 950+ ... I repeat 950+. And what was the topic you wonder? A rebuttal to an atheistic online comic. I figured it was posted on the comic's Facebook page (it was, I checked) therefore all the followers of the FB page pursued it. Who coined the label "Gnu Atheists"? Whoever it was, good job, cause I like it.

When I venture to HuffPo or DailyKos or Democratic Underground, the chances of me crossing conservatives are few and far between. They're like a rare (fictional) bird - think of Kevin from UP:

Why so few sighting? I don't know. I'll just say that non-conservatives have an anger in them that resembles the tantrum of a 6 yr old, therefore leading them to hunt down any articles - or even keep a list of sites to regularly check up on - that are critical of their precious social issues/causes. They're one bitter angry and irritated group. Meow

And when I do cross a conservative their appeal is generally harmless - benign and somewhat squishy, if that makes any sense. They're probably quoting a Bible verse that gets all the angry non-religious riled up. If not they're very "matter of fact", so much so that their tone resembles a history teacher reading from the pulpit.


So here's my round up:
- left leaning libertarians
- self-righteous & smug LGBTAONQPYW people
- angry feminists
- condescending atheists

Is it safe to say that these are "modernists"? I think so. Modernists are very angry people. Why is this? The whole "conservatives are the reason this country is not 'with it'" I don't buy. I've thought about it and it just comes across as an intellectually empty blame. Or as one person (in the 700+ AT article) noted that conservatism has caused problems in his life (though he never went into particulars or gave examples). I also think this person's "confession" is somewhat misguided as well.

One thing's for sure: Conservatism (especially being a social conservative, or supporting traditional mores) is probably the most hated, most mocked and most misunderstood ideology amongst modernists - which, I'd wager, is most of the Western Civilization. It just sets off those "Pissed Me Off I Dare You" buttons.

No comments :