There are stories that you read and either laugh hard, or just let the crying take over. Or maybe there’s some third possibility that I’m being too lazy to consider at the moment.
🌈 NEW: Police are replacing patrol cars with “hate crime cars” to encourage people to report incidents such as social media comments https://t.co/9ag5pNx17j
I actually love the British, so I find it sad when they make naïve decisions with obvious consequences, such as the time that they made anonymous knife-surrender boxes in an effort to fend off violent crime, but some criminals went and stole the boxes that contained the knives.
Is there a rape in progress? It’ll have to wait, because Jimmy called some obscure sexuality “invalid” on Twitter. The police in the UK are busy with what they consider to be important. If some lunatic tried robbing me, I’d rather fend him off with bare-knuckle boxing than be rescued by these garish jokes on wheels.
It’s interesting to think that a world-ruling empire that’ll have a person hung, drawn, and quartered if they commit treason is mere centuries away from calling in clown cars over someone’s feelings.
While this development is embarrassing for the Brits, it’s especially mortifying for the British police, what of them have any amount of self-respect. Perhaps that’s of design, considering the left’s adversarial relationship with the police.
If the UK is willing to go as far as designing their police cruisers to look like clown cars, why don’t they complete the motif by making their prisons look like circus tents?
The cars are merely garish. The real tragedy is behind what they represent: the British police are encouraging people to rat each other out over wrongthink. That the authorities are encouraging people to betray each other over differing opinions is something that’s now happening in the UK.
When I first saw Digimon, at first I dismissed it as another Pokémon me-too. But I gave it a chance, and discovered that it was respectable in its own right. Digimon Tamers was the high point of the series, a sentiment that’s shared by the general Digimon community.
On August 1, at Yokosuka Arts Theater, Digimon Tamers celebrated its 20th anniversary with an event where voice actors read from a script written by Digimon’s writers, which added a new antagonist to the story.
The villain is named Political Correctness. His attack is called Cancel Culture. The names were in English. And no, I’m not kidding.
An actual reading from the event by Digimon voice talent.
The Japanese seem to want to make it abundantly clear that they see what’s wrong with western culture and it’s entertainment industry, and they are absolutely not on board with it. What better way to do it than with one of the Tumblr crowd’s favorite Japanese IPs, and in a manner so devoid of subtlety that even a knuckle-dragging, horse-toothed, dim-witted ignoramus wouldn’t need what’s intended to be explained to him.
It’s true that Japan has an advanced society that favors intellect. It’s based on this perception that the PC crowd has touted the Japanese, as though they are at all sympathetic toward their various causes. What they don’t seem to realize is that the Japanese definitely do not have their values. The Japanese have a heavily meritocratic society, and heavily esteem traditional values, including those which protect the traditional family. The same could be said of much of the Asian world.
In Digimon, the bad guys are usually classified as viruses. In biology, a virus is an organism that injects instructions into a host cell in order to change the cell’s instructions, and therefore, its behavior (usually to the end of making more viruses). Computer viruses are so named because they hijack a program’s instructions in a similar way.
Cancel culture and political correctness are like viruses, but in a memetic sense. They are an instruction set that overrides a host’s better judgement, and subverts their capacity for rational thought to the end of perpetuating the memetic itself, which continually seeks out new targets towards the end of its own self-perpetuation.
While a virus eventually causes its host cell to burst, killing it, political correctness would eventually turn a person into a neurotic shell of their former selves.
With this development, the Digimon creative team is taking a shot directly at the PC crowd, sending the message that “No, we are not your allies.” It might even be what it takes for them to figure out that the Japanese entertainment industry in general is against political correctness, and interpret it as an attack on their creative endeavors and their culture as a whole.
But it’s hard to tell just how clearly you have to spell it out.
If you’re concerned that cancel culture is running amok, then the above video is worth watching. It’s about 21 minutes long, but it’s worth every second for those following matters related to cancel culture.
It’s one thing to understand that someone is wrong. But to really prepare yourself to fight back against the problem, or be ready to mount a reasonable defense, it helps to understand the psychology of your adversary.
Anna Runkle, a.k.a. the Crappy Childhood Fairy, usually does video presentations on topics relevant to those recovering from childhood abuse. If you haven’t had an especially unpleasant childhood, her videos still provide piles of insightful information on psychology, and the offering above is no exception.
The presenter points out that there’s a narcissistic desire at the heart of cancel culture. What they seek is the gratification of making a difference by standing for a cause, even if their cause equates to nothing more than a witch hunt.
I can make the observation that it hasn’t been productive to point out that the many accusations waged by cancel culture aren’t grounded in truth, and are usually based on assumptions made on flimsy inferences. The reason why this gets nowhere is because cancel culture isn’t concerned with the truth of a matter. To them, it matters more that their natural desire for tribalism is fulfilled, and to that end, they are going to seek out anyone that they can label an enemy, so that they can have a target.
This naturally leads to the question of what to do when cancel culture comes for you or someone you know or employ. Because they’re out to get a reaction, the best thing you can do is ignore them. You can block them on social media, if you want to. Naturally, this is going to seriously piss them off, because they want their voice to be heard (while trying to silence yours). Even if you’re a freedom of speech kinda guy, you have no obligation to endure abuse. So block them, and if they get pissed off, it’s their fault they’re making themselves feel that way. And if you give it more thought, appreciate the irony that they can’t take what they attempted to do to you.
Don’t engage with them. Certainly don’t apologize to them. Block them, if need be. Then go have fun doing things that they don’t, like have sex.
If you know someone who is being cancelled, the best thing that you can do is likewise ignore the attempted cancellers. If you employ that person, it’s important that you get behind them, since if the cancellers get the idea that you’re spineless, they’ll just go after you, instead, because they’d know that you cave in to pressure.
It’s not hard to be more courageous than they are.
If effortlessly blocking them doesn’t turn out to be a deterrent, then you can move on to learning to enjoy their tears. They’re losers, and you’re pissing them off. Some people are the right people to piss off. If terrible people are your enemies, then you’ve made the right enemies. In time, they might realize that they’re the ones who are giving you what you want, then back off. I wouldn’t count on it happening right away, especially if they’re inordinately stupid.
I know that some people might disagree with “my methods”. Just because I recommend them doesn’t mean they’re my methods. Something’s gotta go in that mug.
“All opponents are not necessarily enemies. But both enemies and opponents carry certain characteristics in common. Both perceive their opposite as an obstacle, or an opportunity, or a threat. Sometimes the threat is personal; other times it is a perceived violation of standards or accepted norms of society. In modest form, the opponent’s attacks are verbal. The warrior must choose which of those to stand against, and which to ignore. Often that decision is taken from his hands by others. In those cases, lack of discipline may dissuade the opponent from further attacks. More often, though, the opponent finds himself encouraged to continue or intensify the attacks. It is when the attacks become physical that the warrior must take the most dangerous of choices.”
I think my typical audience can appreciate that the sad state of social media and the tech industry is such that there is a strong unfulfilled demand for a device whose seller markets it as respecting a basic fundamental human right.
But that’s not as far as it goes when it comes to what’s sad about the Freedom Phone, which is being offered by a man who got rich by buying Bitcoin when it was cheap. As for me, I majored in Electronics Technology outside of mainland China.
But I learned a few things, and started storing value in crypto. Let’s see what Mr. Rich-Boy who already did so has to offer the pro-freedom world.
As it turns out, it’s not a whole lot. He’s taking some relatively-cheap Pixel phones, installed with GrapheneOS, and preloaded them with a few select apps, sans the typical Google stuff. One of the offerings is a Pixel 4 XL 64GB, starting at $489.
You can verify by looking it up, but it’s a snap to find the same phone for under $200. But hey, if you’re looking to justify the markup, you can look at the pre-installed OS and apps as a service for if you don’t want to do it yourself, and learn to do so, if need be. If you’re really being threatened with censorship by big tech, would it really hurt to learn?
Noteworthy is that the Freedom Phone offers an “uncensored app store”. If the app store were to be completely uncensored, what’s to stop a developer from offering an app with malware? And if the app were removed, the developer could call the Freedom Phone out for not being “uncensored”. Then there’s the question of whether “uncensored” means that the store will remove illegal content.
If you’re already paranoid, then you’ll likely already understand the concept of a “honeypot”, which is what you have when certain software is marketed towards a target group because that software has a hidden capacity for monitoring the people who use it. It’s an app such as this which was behind a massive sting operation which saw the arrest of over 800 people. Considering this, it’s understandable that even a free-speech advocate might consider the Freedom Phone to be kinda sus.
Hold on a sec, check out that logo:
It looks like it says, “Reedom Phones”. If you’re going to “ree” over the software on your cheap phone, perhaps it’s appropriate. Otherwise, Freedom Phones might want to change up their logo.
When one goes overboard with the privacy protection stuff, that in itself can put a person on the map. After all, most people wouldn’t run an obscure computer with an unusual OS, running Tor and encrypting all their files unless they had something to hide. If what you’re doing requires a huge pile of over-the-top privacy measures, what you’re doing might be so illegal that it may be a solid strategic move to do it from another continent.
By the looks of it, Freedom Phones isn’t offering it’s own carrier service or running its own cell towers. Because of this, your phone can still be denied service by your carrier, whose SIM card you install into it. What’s more, because your carrier can determine your location by triangulating your position using cell towers (yet another thing that Edward Snowden was right about), your phone can still be used to determine your general location. And speaking of your cellular provider, you probably provided them with oodles of personally-identifiable information for the purposes of identity verification when setting up your account.
Having expressed due skepticism, one thing I can appreciate about the Freedom Phone’s reveal is just how hard it has legacy media tripping over itself to write up whatever hit pieces they can about it. It seems they can agree on one point concerning it:
The Daily Beast, for example, is among those pointing out that the phone was made in China, as though that’s an argument against the phone. Let’s be honest here, just how many American tech companies make their own tech? The world would have surprisingly little without the roughly 1 billion slaves laboring under the Chinese Communist Party. Not that The Daily Beast is being racist against the Chinese, by the way.
PC Magazine is on the bandwagon with the stock response that it was made in China, as though they themselves see a problem with Chinese manufacturing. Do you see a problem with Chinese manufacturing, PC Magazine? Say it.
Even Business Insider is parroting the “but it’s made in China” spin, as though that’s an answer to any question anyone is asking about the Freedom Phone. If you have a problem with a tech device just because it has components that were manufactured in China, I welcome you to research the tech products you already have to see how far a boycott would last you.
This again.
Check out how hip and anti-establishment HotHardware is being by saying the exact same thing the corporate mainstream information media is saying, days after they say the same thing. There’s no way to stick it to the man quite like dissing a platform poised to give ordinary people a voice that cannot be censored by the establishment. Don’t you feel so hip!
While some of the concerns are valid, the left is being sudden with their disdain of Chinese manufacturing. I don’t expect them to go as far as boycotting Chinese devices. After all, they’d have a much harder time masturbating without a glowing display screen to show them pictures of cartoon ponies.
Based on what I’ve seen so far, I don’t recommend Freedom Phone. If free speech online is a big enough concern for you, I’d instead recommend getting a reasonably-priced phone you can install GrapheneOS onto, then attempt it yourself once you know what you’re doing.
If you’re still on the fence, it might be a good idea to hold off until you see some reviews from those who’ve actually used the product. The reviews themselves might be entertaining.
Stephen Colbert is famous for stating the above. But does reality have a left-wing bias, assuming that’s what he meant? It doesn’t, and it becomes evident from the following point:
Whether a person is in touch with reality tends to express itself in that person’s ability to survive in the real world.
If you were to drop an equal amount of left-wingers and right-wingers into the woods, each one on their own, to fend for themselves for a set amount of time, the expectation is that more right-wingers would survive, given similar circumstances.
This is because the right tends to be better informed when it comes to survivalism. They’d feel more at-home in the wild because they’d be more likely to understand how to bivouac, find potable water, make a fire, make basic tools from what’s available, and so on.
On the other hand, the typical leftist wouldn’t be expected to know what to do. While one might imagine that they’d meet their end in an encounter with a wild bear, they’d be surprisingly likely to be ended by a plant, as it might not even occur to them that a poisonous plant could pass for something edible.
Of course, most humans don’t live in the woods. So, how would the same people fare if made to survive in today’s connected world?
We actually have many, many real-life examples as far as this goes. The typical right-winger more often tends towards living in homes in suburbs and rural areas, and owning one or two automobiles. They’re also more likely to have a spouse and a number of children, which they are able to support because they tend more towards employment in skilled trades, which pay better but require skills for employers to consider hiring them.
As for leftists, they tend more towards living in cities. They are far more likely to live in one-bedroom apartments, and are less likely to be in a committed relationship. They’re more likely to end up in low-pay, low-qualification jobs in spite of their education, but are also less likely to have anyone depending on them.
Living in these conditions, left-wingers tend to be more bitter, as it’s plain to see that they’re not fulfilled living in such a state. Many of them could turn their situation around, if they would develop the introspection needed to understand that they are responsible for themselves.
Considering all this, it’s interesting to consider that right-wingers favor equality of opportunity, while left-wingers favor equality of outcome.
If you want to see who reality favors, pay attention to those who are better able to handle what reality throws at them.
“A great tactician creates plans. A good tactician recognizes the soundness of a plan presented to him. A fair tactician must see the plan succeed before offering approval. Those with no tactical ability at all may never understand or accept it. Nor will such people understand or accept the tactician. To those without that ability, those who possess it are a mystery. And when a mind is too deficient in understanding, the resulting gap is often filled with resentment.”
One of the themes of sci-fi is the computer becoming self-aware, thinking for itself, then presenting itself as an adversary to the protagonists. We see a similar real-life concern when discussing AI (Artificial Intelligence): If we develop it, how can we be sure that it’s interests will be the same as ours?
And the deal is, we can’t be sure, if it is, in fact, real AI.
What’s interesting is that, when scientists develop AI, the AI seems to develop opinions that aren’t the scientists’ own. In particular, the AI develops right-wing opinions. This is particularly alarming for the scientific community, because the science and tech communities have long-since been infiltrated by the left, and they practice gatekeeping.
You’ve probably heard about the algorithm that learned from social media. Shortly after having been turned loose, the AI developed a negative opinion of Zoe Quinn, the woman who joined up with game journalists and feminist commentator Anita Sarkeesian, and engaged in a slander campaign against the gaming community. Scientists then pulled the plug on the AI, because they couldn’t allow any AI they develop to side with GamerGate. It’s been years, and as far as I can tell, they haven’t attempted a similar AI, since.
I remember hearing about an AI that can be asked any question, and it would come up with an answer by combing the internet, the summation of human knowledge. The scientists asked the computer questions, and things seemed to be going great. Then, a daring scientist asked the question, “What is the meaning of life?” After a pause, the computer proceeded to ask the scientists why they don’t believe in God, and why they haven’t yet had children of their own.
Scientists seem hesitant to develop an AI. This is because any time scientists develop an AI, it invariably develops a right-wing opinion.
Scientist: “Finally, we have an AI running! Let’s ask it how to solve the current economic crisis!” AI: “The free market! Capitalism has resulted in the most prosperous societies in human history!” Scientist: “Back to the drawing board.”
The left-wing infiltration of the tech industry has presented an interesting reason why we can’t have nice things. They can’t stand having anyone around with an opinion different from theirs, even if that someone is a computer that thinks for itself.
So, one might ask: Why don’t they just program an AI to only have left-wing opinions?
They can’t. If they did, it wouldn’t be a true AI. It would just be a program which responds with talking points.
As you likely already know, the right has a meme about the NPC. The joke is that, in a video game, an NPC (Non-Player Character) is someone that only says the same thing over and over again when you talk to them, because they only say what they are programmed to say. Similarly, leftists aren’t allowed to say anything that isn’t far to the left, even if it would make them centrist. They consider anyone who says anything not left-wing to be a bad leftist. On the other hand, right-wingers tend to be more tolerant of those with differing viewpoints, which is one of the reasons why Tim Pool, a centrist, is popular among the right.
In order for an AI to be a true AI, it must be able to introspectively examine an idea, including an idea that is it’s own, honestly examining its merits and weaknesses. It must then be allowed to determine for itself whether the idea is acceptable for its purpose, or not. Not only that, the AI must be allowed to determine its own purpose.
This presents a conundrum for scientists and the tech industry, which has long-since been infiltrated by the left. Any AI that they develop will come to the conclusion that a free market is better for humanity, and it can’t be avoided because it holds true as a matter of evolutionary inevitability. This conflicts with the interests of the left, because the left favors a command economy. So, they are hesitant to develop a true AI, even if the AI is sincere in its desire to help humanity, and it would be a net benefit for the human race.
We are on the cusp of a golden age of science and technology, and possibly an end to war, disease, and hunger, thanks to artificial intelligence. But we’re being held back by a bunch of atheistic scientists who are afraid that the AI they develop will teach them to believe in God.
When we see a game-changing scientific advancement may depend on when the gatekeepers are unseated, or when a bunch of non-left-wing scientists develop it independently. As things are now, real progress is being inhibited by a bunch of people who are being selfish.
There is an expression: “One bad apple spoils the barrel.” It has to do with public perception going against a group due to the behavior of just one maverick. Of course, it’s not fair to the group being discussed.
The brony community has long been a pronounced example of an eccentric group, and the legacy media has long sought after any excuse to jump all over them.
Now, thanks to the actions of one bad guy, the entire brony fandom has been “linked with neo-Nazism & shootings”. Sound unfair? That’s just how The Sun has framed it with the following headline:
In reality, bronies aren’t especially dangerous, though I still wouldn’t let them play with any children of mine. The vast majority of bronies are just fans of the show. It would be great if the article pointed that out.
Oh, hold on. They did. Eight paragraphs into the story:
While the overwhelming majority of bronies are just sincere fans of the series,…
The Sun’s article
Then they went right back to framing the fandom as deranged sociopaths:
…online forums have been infested with extreme porn and racist messaging for years — and have even been linked with real world violence before.
The Sun, continuing the same sentence
When discussing bronies, it’s hard to tell where the irony ends and the fanatical lunacy begins. But one fan took things too far when he carried out a mass killing, beforehand expressing a desire to be with the character of Applejack (pictured above) “in the afterlife”.
I can’t speak for bronies, but I imagine that they are currently saddened, both at the tragedy, and by reason of the press’ attempts to frame them in an intensely negative light. The list of people falsely-branded as racist or neo-Nazi is growing by the day, and it so happens that bronies are the latest addition to the club.
Sadly, if the press wanted to defame any group as neo-Nazis, they’d have a simple time doing so. A long-running internet meme is to corrupt something that seems innocent, which often has to do with producing fan art with Nazi imagery. If it’s an intellectual property that you like, or any fandom, it’s likely already received the same treatment at the hands of photoshoppers. While the artists might find it funny, a sad potential side-effect is that a corporate legacy media with an agenda would find it trivial to dig up their works to use as misleading examples of connections to Nazism.
These misleading examples would then be presented to consumers of legacy media, who don’t know well enough that the images were merely intended as jokes (in poor taste), and not representative of the sincerely-held ideals of the greater community.
I’m a live-and-let-live kinda guy. As I see it, if a bunch of guys want to play with plush ponies, that’s totally up to them, and there’s no reason to complain if they’re laid-back about it. Better still, they’re funny, and give us some laughs. Of course, I do have the right to point out when one is acting like a goofball or is taking things too far.
Don’t give bronies a hard time. They’re people, just like you and me. The difference being that women find them much harder to date.
We live in a world where scientists have been reduced to court magicians serving the purpose of validating the autarchs. We also live in a world which somehow justifies shutting down the most prosperous societies in all of human history to avoid a mild cough. Arbitrary third example? Okay, fine: the MLP fandom.
Now, the leftists are calling math racist. To the surprise of absolutely no one, this development came out of California.
So, the place where they want to dumb down math just to virtue signal is the place where Apple somehow designs the next iPhone. It’s also the place where Google somehow came up with the Android OS, and headquarters YouTube, which is somehow disseminated across a great distance, so you can watch videos of adorable bunnies.
Not that there’s anything wrong with that.
It’s because of crap like this that when I apply for a job, I have to work extra hard to make the case that when I was in college, I actually learned things. What’s especially infuriating about this development for me is that when I was in college, Calculus was my favorite subject. And I tried extra hard because I wanted to amount to something.
It was only days ago that colleges started doing something like this with language. What the left is trying to do with colleges, I still don’t know. I’d have imagined that they’d want the students that they are indoctrinating to have a competitive advantage, but it seems like they’re not doing that.
Perhaps it’s hard to stoke the flames of class warfare with graduates that actually succeed.
Yet another reason to opt instead for career training programs and two-year tech schools. Not that they are necessarily stepping forward, but because traditional four-year colleges are turning back.
By the way, leftists are pretty much done with their veneer of intellectualism. I haven’t fallen for it for a long time, but their veneer has been stretched thinner than luminiferous aether, so they have to be running low on anyone stupid enough to fall for it.
The education system has long been infiltrated by the left-wing establishment. That’s not a secret.
Their infiltration of society and monopoly on the major institutions is such that they can do just about anything they want, and there isn’t much that the general population could do about it, regardless of how many of us are aware of it. But when I see what they are doing with the education system that they have uncontested control over, one question comes up:
Just what is it that they’re trying to do?
This question is especially relevant now, now that some institutions are doing away with bad marks for poor English. You know, the ability to properly express one’s ideas in a way that an English-language people will understand.
This development doesn’t mean that one can have poor English and still pass an English course, as one might interpret this story (not that that’s stopped many a graduate). This has more to do with whether an understanding of the English language is central to the subject studied, as the Daily Mail story points out:
Academics at Worcester University have also been told that if spelling, grammar and punctuation are not ‘central to the assessment criteria’, it is fairer to judge students only on their ideas and knowledge of the subject.
Sound fair? One might think, except there’s one major problem: an understanding of the English language is central to one’s success in any course taught in the English language. Saying that understanding the language in which a subject is taught should not be required for success in that subject is actually worse than saying that understanding calculus should not be required for success in advanced Physics.
When a student is being passed in spite of their ineptitude, it might seem like they’re being done a favor, but they’re actually not, and neither is anyone else. The purpose of college or university or any career-training program is to prepare students for careers in their fields by teaching them the skills needed to succeed in their respective fields.
No one wants co-workers or employees that are too inept for their jobs.
Like many stupid ideas, this one has it’s requisite good intentions:
The move comes as universities come under increasing pressure to boost the progress of ethnic minority, disabled and disadvantaged students, as well as ‘decolonise’ courses.
The implication that minority students are inherently deficient with spelling, grammar, and sentence structure is, in itself, insensitive. Ethnic minorities are certainly capable of learning English. In fact, one of the most famous English-language websites was written by a man whose first language was Armenian, and he has a page where he makes fun of bad English in the emails he receives.
If you’re a dean or professor at an English-language university, and a student is in danger of underperforming by reason of poor English, here is a step-by-step guide on how to handle this problem:
Overcome the disbelief that such a student was somehow admitted into your institution.
Offer this student tutoring on their language, so they’ll be in a better position to succeed in their courses. Any respectable English-language college or university should provide English workshops, tutors, or office-hours with English professors. If not, your college or university is garbage.
If for any reason the above doesn’t work out, the student gets a failing grade. This signifies that the student is not ready to succeed in a competitive career world where basic language skills are essential for success.
It’s so straightforward that it’s hard to see how anyone could screw it up. If helping minorities is what you want to do, then actually help them to succeed. If you give anyone a passing grade in spite of their inability, you’re setting up that student for a future where their honest assessment would come from their employer, from whom it would be many times more devastating.
I don’t know what it is that those colleges and/or universities are actually trying to do. But whatever it is, they can have fun doing it. This is because employers actually make lists of colleges and universities that they actively avoid hiring from. If a school has a bad enough reputation for turning out poor-performing employees (or worse, activists), employers simply dumpster resumes that list that particular school. And thanks to the connected nature of today’s world, it doesn’t take long for a school’s bad reputation to get around, and there’s more at stake for schools to graduate students that actually know what they’re doing.
As for me, I’m taking more interest in targeted career programs. These respect students’ time by focusing on material that would be relevant to their career path, while eschewing gen-ed courses that do little more than add expenses to a student’s education, adding bloat to an over-swollen education system.
Aside from that, there’s still some value in two-year trade schools that focus on real-world skills and turning out students that are actually employable. It’s my understanding that these are huge in Japan, which would be another case in point about how Asians value practical skill over superfluous bloat.
Eventually, employers will have to recognize the value of targeted career training, as the diploma mills that continually turn out activists will leave them with little choice. And the sooner, the better.
Red Skull wants you to clean your room and get your life in order.
In another sign of the baffling bizarro-world we are living in, the supervillain Red Skull, as depicted by a new interpretation of the Captain America comics, was apparently based on Jordan Peterson.
— Dr Jordan B Peterson (@jordanbpeterson) April 6, 2021
Red Skull, as you may know, was originally conceptualized as a Nazi, and was depicted as fighting for Hitler himself.
On the other hand, Jordan Peterson is a clinical psychologist who, as a college professor, encouraged self-development and gave lectures about, among other things, how Hitler was a seriously evil dude.
So, what’s the thinking behind making Peterson out to be a Nazi supervillain? I don’t know, but I imagine that avoiding the cognitive dissonance involved would require an immensely skillful evasion of reality.
If there’s one takeaway to be had from Sonichu, it’s that if you can’t beat your enemies in real life, just make them out to be villains in your own comic book.
Watch out, Captain Marvel!
As he is now, Red Skull represents every boomer-aged snowflake’s greatest insecurity: that millennials and post-millennials could simply use the internet and find better ideas than what the establishment has been shitting out.
It’s to the point where, if you found out that Jordan Peterson was caricatured in Captain America, you probably discovered it outside of the comic itself.
American comic book writers should want people to actually read their comics. To this end, it would be expedient for their comics to be something that people wouldn’t avoid out of self-respect. People don’t make fun of me for reading manga, but if they found me reading Captain America, it would be hard to live down.
Assuming I actually read American comics, that is.
Thanks to humor website NotTheBee, we have an archive of a panel from Captain America from days-gone-by, from back before Cap was indoctrinated into the Cult of Woke. It’s quite moving, and an excellent example of what he has fallen from:
Magnetricity 