#far left radicals

[religion-is-a-mental-illness]

By: Michael Deacon

Published: Apr 3, 2024

For young people today, finding a partner of the opposite sex must be dreadfully hard. But this isn’t because of the pressure to look like an Instagram gym buff, or the horrors of dating apps, or the fact that no one under the age of 30 seems to drink alcohol any more.

It’s because these days, young men and women have got absolutely nothing in common.

Seriously. All of a sudden, they appear to have developed completely different values. It’s unprecedented. In the past, the two sexes tended to hold roughly similar views on politics. But research compiled over the past five years shows that in Britain – and indeed other Western countries – young women have become more progressive, while young men have become more conservative. And the resulting ideological gap is now staggeringly vast. 

Alice Evans, an academic at King’s College London, is writing a book on this phenomenon, entitled The Great Gender Divergence. She says it’s been caused by a variety of factors, including “social media bubbles” and “economic resentment”. Whatever the reasons for it, though, I think there is a vital point we’re in danger of missing. Which is that only one of the two sexes is strictly responsible.

Recently, the Financial Times published some charts illustrating how the gulf between young men and women has grown in each Western country. And in every chart, there is an unmistakable pattern. The political views of young men haven’t actually altered all that much. Their drift to the Right has been really quite gentle.

The political views of young women, however, have changed dramatically. Their move to the Left has been abrupt and profound. In truth, then, this cavernous ideological divide is almost entirely attributable to them.

Which is curious. Because, whenever the divide is discussed by politicians and commentators, they make it sound as if the problem is young men. They fret endlessly about how young men today are being “radicalised” by nasty Right-wing YouTubers such as Andrew Tate, or horrid Right-wing politicians such as Donald Trump. 

Yet they never apply this word “radicalised” to young women. Why not? I suspect it’s because these politicians and commentators tend to be progressive themselves. Therefore, they see no problem with young women becoming drastically more progressive. In their view, the more progressive someone is, the better. So the fault lies entirely with young men, for failing to emulate young women’s lurch to the Left.

Personally, though, I think this lurch Leftwards should alarm us all. The future of Western civilisation is already threatened by our collapsing birth rates. And this sudden ideological chasm between the sexes is only going to make the crisis worse. No one’s going to be forming couples at all any more, if, on every first date, the woman asks, “What do you think of Gramsci?”, and the man replies, “He’s the type of striker Man Utd are crying out for.”

It’s a chilling thought. So clearly something must be done. Politicians must spend less time obsessing over the radicalisation of young men, and start paying attention to the radicalisation of young women, instead.

As it happens, the Labour Party has announced that, when it’s in power, it will help to combat the influence that Andrew Tate has on boys. Surely it would make more sense to help combat the influence The Guardian has on girls. 

Otherwise, the only way young men are going to get a girlfriend is by frantically boning up on George Monbiot and Owen Jones. And if that’s what the future has to hold, perhaps Western civilisation isn’t worth saving, after all. 

[ Via: https://archive.md/WlLXk ]

==

Apparently, it's not "radicalization" when you're calling for the extermination of the Jews; so sexist and racist that you call everyone else "oppressors"; teaching kids about the objectively true mythology of metaphysical "gender" thetans; advocating for the compulsory elimination of all privately-owned property and its forcible redistribution; and/or chanting for the dismantling of society itself.

No, that's not radicalization. It's just the self-evident values of all right-thinking people.

🤷‍♂️🤷‍♀️

[myfootyrthroat]

There are now flyers up on campus that are along the lines of "Republicans are fascists. Democrats are complicit in fascism for not convincing me to oppose fascism."

Oddly, not being convinced that fascism is worth opposing does not seem to make one complicit in fascism. Also, like... fuck off?

[milfygerard]

literally so many people my age who were online in 06 have talked about how they were targeted and groomed by strangers on the internet. Kids have been sold extremism and abuse from the internet since theyve had access to it. I do think the internet is worse but dont pretend it was ever a safe or healthy place for kids to hang out

[wild-wombytch]

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Reduxx (@reduxx.mag)

Everyone should watch this video ☝️!

Also as a bonus, here's the top comment and I think it explains well the issue and how it ends up being about male privileges again :

[dreamteamemojis]

.

[gf-boyfriend]

[thecreepycrawlersss]

our mother is so poisoned by propaganda that she literally called us sick for saying “this country is built on harming people and stealing land, do you really think that our government isn’t corrupt ?” like... and you say WE don’t know basic us history 💀💀

white cishet liberal is confronted with basic facts about the usa, yells and cries in response

[sapphia]

only just realising tumblr genuinely believes that everyone else shares their political opinions

[rustchild]

.

[samaspic31]

My irl social circle became so so trans dominated while dropping out i had forgor how bad it feels being in cis dominated institutions

[religion-is-a-mental-illness]

By: John Burn-Murdoch

Published: Jan 26, 2024

One of the most well-established patterns in measuring public opinion is that every generation tends to move as one in terms of its politics and general ideology. Its members share the same formative experiences, reach life’s big milestones at the same time and intermingle in the same spaces. So how should we make sense of reports that Gen Z is hyper-progressive on certain issues, but surprisingly conservative on others?

The answer, in the words of Alice Evans, a visiting fellow at Stanford University and one of the leading researchers on the topic, is that today’s under-thirties are undergoing a great gender divergence, with young women in the former camp and young men the latter. Gen Z is two generations, not one.

In countries on every continent, an ideological gap has opened up between young men and women. Tens of millions of people who occupy the same cities, workplaces, classrooms and even homes no longer see eye-to-eye.

In the US, Gallup data shows that after decades where the sexes were each spread roughly equally across liberal and conservative world views, women aged 18 to 30 are now 30 percentage points more liberal than their male contemporaries. That gap took just six years to open up.

Germany also now shows a 30-point gap between increasingly conservative young men and progressive female contemporaries, and in the UK the gap is 25 points. In Poland last year, almost half of men aged 18-21 backed the hard-right Confederation party, compared to just a sixth of young women of the same age.

Outside the west, there are even more stark divisions. In South Korea there is now a yawning chasm between young men and women, and it’s a similar situation in China. In Africa, Tunisia shows the same pattern. Notably, in every country this dramatic split is either exclusive to the younger generation or far more pronounced there than among men and women in their thirties and upwards.

The #MeToo movement was the key trigger, giving rise to fiercely feminist values among young women who felt empowered to speak out against long-running injustices. That spark found especially dry tinder in South Korea, where gender inequality remains stark, and outright misogyny is common.

In the country’s 2022 presidential election, while older men and women voted in lockstep, young men swung heavily behind the right-wing People Power party, and young women backed the liberal Democratic party in almost equal and opposite numbers.

Korea’s is an extreme situation, but it serves as a warning to other countries of what can happen when young men and women part ways. Its society is riven in two. Its marriage rate has plummeted, and birth rate has fallen precipitously, dropping to 0.78 births per woman in 2022, the lowest of any country in the world.

Seven years on from the initial #MeToo explosion, the gender divergence in attitudes has become self-sustaining. Survey data show that in many countries the ideological differences now extend beyond this issue. The clear progressive-vs-conservative divide on sexual harassment appears to have caused — or at least is part of — a broader realignment of young men and women into conservative and liberal camps respectively on other issues.

In the US, UK and Germany, young women now take far more liberal positions on immigration and racial justice than young men, while older age groups remain evenly matched. The trend in most countries has been one of women shifting left while men stand still, but there are signs that young men are actively moving to the right in Germany, where today’s under-30s are more opposed to immigration than their elders, and have shifted towards the far-right AfD in recent years.

It would be easy to say this is all a phase that will pass, but the ideology gaps are only growing, and data shows that people’s formative political experiences are hard to shake off. All of this is exacerbated by the fact that the proliferation of smartphones and social media mean that young men and women now increasingly inhabit separate spaces and experience separate cultures.

Too often young people’s views are overlooked owing to their low rates of political participation, but this shift could leave ripples for generations to come, impacting far more than vote counts.

==

On average, men are more moderate and centrist in their views while, on average, women are more extremist in their views. Anyone suggesting that men as a whole, or on average, have shifted is gaslighting you, as the evidence does not support this assertion.

"It was always the women, and above all the young ones, who were the most bigoted adherents of the Party, the swallowers of slogans, the amateur spies and nosers-out of unorthodoxy." -- George Orwell, "Nineteen Eighty-Four"

[straynoahide]

just what men need to hear: "you're by default unworthy, unless you do what we deem useful, and that is: kill people!"

leftist romantization of the weaponization of male bodies is super progressive, and not misandric at all!

just like traditional disposability of males as cannon fodder in warfare. progressive like all-male conscription.

even the thickest fatherfucker here should not miss why this sociological left is incompatible with healthy masculinity: you fail to see males as human.

[thenewdemocratus]

George Carlin On Political Correctness

Source:Frustrated Idealist– The Great George Carlin in 1990. Source:The New Democrat “George Carlin talks about how groups and institutions are inclined to restrict the vocabulary you use with emphasis on the feminist movement.” From the Frustrated Idealist Source:Rob Logan– The Great George Carlin in 1990. From Rob Logan “Now I’ve probably got the feminists all pissed off at me because I’m…

[porcupine-girl]

Things we already know about the UHC shooter, mostly from his social media:

- He has a bachelor’s and Master’s in computer science from an Ivy League school.

- He has read several books on chronic back pain.

- His profile banner includes a photo of an x-ray for back surgery. (Spinal fusion I believe.)

- Based on messages from his family, he dropped off the map a few months ago and they’ve been worried about him.

- His political beliefs are a bit all over the map; without doing a deep-dive my take is a pretty average centrist tech bro who’s read too much evopsych.

I’m a bit worried that, as the left is so fond of doing, people will turn on him immediately for that last part. Let’s not do that! Can we agree not to do that? Because here’s the important thing:

He’s a victim of the system, just like we all are. The system pushed him past his limits, and he lashed out at it. The details of his political leanings don’t actually matter - what matters is that you don’t have to be a radical leftist to lash out at a health insurance company. That’s shows how bad things are broken, that a guy who seems fairly privileged in most respects, with no strong political motive, could be beaten down and broken to the point of doing this. He has two Ivy League computer science degrees and yet had nothing left to lose.

This is a class war that doesn’t differentiate between the working class, middle class, even upper middle class. We’re all dog food for the 1% to chew up and spit out. Even if he turned out to be hardcore right wing, in this one single issue we’re united with him.

Everyone’s been talking about how this guy has seen insane levels of support across the political spectrum - which means nobody should be shocked that he could have come from any spot on that spectrum. I’m hoping the fact that he doesn’t seem super far left or right politically will make it easier to keep that unity, but the left just looooves our purity tests. Let’s maybe not this time.

[umi-archive]

Feeling really weird about this election cycle bc my closest friends are radical and refuse to vote for kamala, and while I totally understand not wanting to tick that box, there is a very real threat of 4 more years of trump and i'm like how.. can you overlook that??? like things might not get that much better under kamala, but they will get so much worse with trump. like we are suffering currently bc of trump's presidency and will continue to suffer for years to come. and they know this. everyone knows this. and yet. they continue to scream proudly that they refuse to vote for kamala, knowing that the only other option is trump, knowing that everything will be even more fucked. and it just makes me question what the fuck people stand on.

we are in california and our vote for president matters a little bit less, so sure, don't vote for kamala. as if it's cool or brave to withhold your vote "bc of principles" while knowing full-well it won't affect the outcome. that's not brave, my guy. that's privilege. but there are radical folks voting in states where it really matters, and they are having to put aside their griefs and frustrations to vote for someone who doesn't represent everything they stand for, and they are doing it because they know it's what's best for everyone as a whole. it doesn't make them less leftist or less principled. obviously everyone needs to make the decision for themselves, and if people can't stand the idea of ticking that box for kamala bc of her political history, they get to make that choice. but to me, it's such a selfish and privileged (and also kind of dumb???) act to withhold your vote knowing that the only other person who could become president is the worst person alive.

it's so confusing and silly to me. people's rights will be taken away but congrats on getting to stand on your principles i guess.

[ivan-fyodorovich-k]

to be fair the further left one side goes the further right the other goes and vice-versa, the two phenomena don't have nothing to do with one another