• Xenforo Cloud has scheduled an upgrade to XenForo version 2.2.16. This will take place on or shortly after the following date and time: Jul 05, 2024 at 05:00 PM (PT) There shouldn't be any downtime, as it's just a maintenance release. More info here

Elections Biden Supporters Spend $10 million On Learning How To Meme

No liberal is actually saying those things to “legalize looting.” But by mischaracterizing it in that way, and just memeing/trolling on your own mischaracterization, you summarily dismiss the entire thing and don’t have to contend with the actual, real idea.
Not all memes are equal. While you argue they rob you of your nuanced arguments and ideas and cast them as being for low intellect consumers, good memes boil nuanced ideas down to the final result, usually in a humorous and obvious way.
Factually, making theft less than $950 a misdemeanor didn’t make shoplifting illegal, but coupled with already overpopulated jails pressuring reduced sentencing, lax bail policies and an overly cautious police force when dealing with petty crime (primarily due to political rhetoric stigmatizing the police force) shoplifting might as well be legal.
The right uses memes to boil down topics, the left use labels to not have to deal with nuance from their political adversaries. Nothing like the trusty old go to’s “right wing extremist”, “Nazi”, “maga” + variable suffix’, Zionist, etc, to shut down discussion.
You are better than to broad brush conservatives in to some ignorant troglodyte status in any discussion.
When lefty memes make good points, are clever and funny I’m the first one to smash the like. Memes can be a place to come together, laugh at, and with, each other.
 
In crazy conservative land thr political without the ability to adopt a national party platform to tell the world what it stands for at its last national convention mocks the other party for its subpar memes.
 
Ain't no algorithm that's gonna take the cringe away from leftist memes that keeps them unpopular, and makes people embarrassed for sharing them.

You can't just wish things to go viral. This is like some 400lb chick wondering why she doesn't have the same amount of followers on her Instagram account, as some hot blond chick. Must be some complex wizardry involved...
You should start a social media account for men who suffer from bad BO.
 
You should start a social media account for men who suffer from bad BO.

Shadows%2B-%2BEnergy%2B2.gif
 
I’m impressed They didn’t think a meme was some sort of new dance
 
Political cartoons have been around forever, but often times they were there to accent or emphasize a written editorial or something like that. They weren’t the primary means of expressing political ideas, whereas for the modern Right, they are.
Actual political cartoons also require quite a bit more intelligence and wit than internet memes do. Like this:

tumblr_px87fyUW6U1qj43juo1_500.png


As far as I can tell, the right-wing's most popular cartoonist is Ben Garrison, and he's just...not a smart man. And I think he realizes his followers are dum dums too, because that man has to label EVERYTHING in his cartoons.
When I engage in debate with someone and they bust out a meme, my thought is “Yes, ok, ha-ha—now let’s get down to business and debate this issue.” But for the Right, that was the debate. Memes are a way to mischaracterize your opponent’s position in a humorous way that allows you to point your finger at them like Nelson from the Simpsons and go “HA-HA,” shame the opponent and end the debate, without actually have to contend with any of the opponent’s actual points or ideas.

—And you demonstrated exactly how that works at the end of your post, with your “well akshually” impression.
No liberal is actually saying those things to “legalize looting.” But by mischaracterizing it in that way, and just memeing/trolling on your own mischaracterization, you summarily dismiss the entire thing and don’t have to contend with the actual, real idea. It can be effective, and uneducated people, or people not knowledgeable about politics are easily fooled by it and accept it as an actual argument. That’s exactly why the Right has fallen in love with it.

You pointed out the left’s memes looking like essays, and that’s the thing: doing anything less than that mischaracterizes the actual position, and we don’t have any interest or need to do that. For the Right, the mischaracterization is the point.
Intelligent conservatives don’t either. Thomas Sowell doesn’t need to meme. Tim Pool does.
 
Starting to payoff already lol.

 
Except that's not true either. It's entirely possible that's what sticks out more to you, but the points or ideas have already been had, and like I said, it often amounts to little more than word salad and imaginary "nuance" to justify completely insane positions. Do you really expect people on forums or twitter to go back and forth with 40 page responses to each other every time with the same shit that you can already read or watch?

Legalizing looting is barely even an exaggeration. They decriminalized shoplifting up to like $1,000 and stopped investigating, caring or prosecuting it, and we've all already heard the insane justifications about "disproportionately affects black and brown people" and "the resources spent prosecuting would be better spent investing in underserved communities of color". Yeah, we got that, and it's fucking insane and now you obviously predictably have rampant smash and grab robberies, people just walking into retail stores dumping shit into trash bags and walking out where stores have put everything behind padlocks or have even had to shut down.

We also don't need to rehash every crazy justification for having dudes playing girls sports. It's a pretty damn simple argument and the "nuance" that we've all heard 1,000 times is completely fabricated.

Obviously there wouldn't be a "meme" if that WAS the argument and wasn't a conversation we've heard 500 times already, because a "meme" of an argument nobody's ever heard wouldn't even make sense. It only becomes a meme when people get sick of hearing people repeat the exact same crazy shit 500 times and longwinded justifications with nothing new added.
Honestly, it sounds like you’re saying a lot of the same things I’m saying, but framing it completely differently.

Typically when one posts a meme, it’s directed at the opposition side. You may post one on your Facebook or IG or whatever for like-minded people to see and appreciate, but often it’s directed towards that side you disagree with. So you want to engage them—but not in good faith. You don’t want to actually deal with their arguments, or even hear them.

Now like you said, you may not agree with the arguments for trans women in women’s sports, you might think they’re bullshit, you may be sick of hearing them, you may not feeling like going through them again, you might not even feel like they make any sense, or whatever the case may be—but the point still remains that if you post a meme directed at the pro-LGBTQ crowd, the purpose of it is to substitute for an argument of your own, while simultaneously shutting out theirs, and to mischaracterize their position in such a way that it can be mocked and ridiculed, thereby ending all debate.
That’s the purpose of them.

And btw, saying “imaginary nuance” over and over doesn’t make it so. Sometimes it’s not even nuance, as nuances are typically small. An example would be during COVID, the “my body, my choice” memes that sought to display liberals’ views on reproductive rights and our view on mask mandates to be contradictory. But they’re totally different issues that draw on totally different aspects of the Constitution or the law, and typically don’t even fact the same test in court (abortion laws traditionally involving a fundamental right and being subject to strict scrutiny, whereas most non-vaccine related mandates wouldn’t involve fundamental rights and would be subject to the rational basis test).
—And then I’ll get called a lib with no sense of humor if I don’t laugh. How hilarious am I supposed to find someone’s total misunderstanding of an issue?
 
Not all memes are equal. While you argue they rob you of your nuanced arguments and ideas and cast them as being for low intellect consumers, good memes boil nuanced ideas down to the final result, usually in a humorous and obvious way.
Factually, making theft less than $950 a misdemeanor didn’t make shoplifting illegal, but coupled with already overpopulated jails pressuring reduced sentencing, lax bail policies and an overly cautious police force when dealing with petty crime (primarily due to political rhetoric stigmatizing the police force) shoplifting might as well be legal.
The right uses memes to boil down topics, the left use labels to not have to deal with nuance from their political adversaries. Nothing like the trusty old go to’s “right wing extremist”, “Nazi”, “maga” + variable suffix’, Zionist, etc, to shut down discussion.
You are better than to broad brush conservatives in to some ignorant troglodyte status in any discussion.
When lefty memes make good points, are clever and funny I’m the first one to smash the like. Memes can be a place to come together, laugh at, and with, each other.
I can agree that not all memes are equal, that’s true. Like Nostra’s point about political cartoons, there are some very good ones.

I understand your point about labels, but I think the Right owns that too. They’ve pretty much come up with some derogatory label for anyone that opposes their agenda.
A conservative doesn’t agree with them? RINO.
Stand up for LGBTQ people? Groomer. Pedophile.
Or maybe you’re a Marxist, Socialist, Communist, SJW, white knight, snowflake, globalist, virtue signaler, race baiter, cuck, simp, or probably a hundred others I’m forgetting.
Don’t like being labeled that way? Triggered.

The Right has mastered the use of labels to smear good people for doing good things.

Memes can be a place to come together and share a laugh, yes. But more often, I think they’re used for the purposes I described. We get accused of not having a sense of humor. But I find most memes from the Right are culture war stuff—i.e., they’re going to mock and ridicule some already marginalized or oppressed minority group. How funny am I supposed to find that?
 
I can agree that not all memes are equal, that’s true. Like Nostra’s point about political cartoons, there are some very good ones.

I understand your point about labels, but I think the Right owns that too. They’ve pretty much come up with some derogatory label for anyone that opposes their agenda.
A conservative doesn’t agree with them? RINO.
Stand up for LGBTQ people? Groomer. Pedophile.
Or maybe you’re a Marxist, Socialist, Communist, SJW, white knight, snowflake, globalist, virtue signaler, race baiter, cuck, simp, or probably a hundred others I’m forgetting.
Don’t like being labeled that way? Triggered.

The Right has mastered the use of labels to smear good people for doing good things.

Memes can be a place to come together and share a laugh, yes. But more often, I think they’re used for the purposes I described. We get accused of not having a sense of humor. But I find most memes from the Right are culture war stuff—i.e., they’re going to mock and ridicule some already marginalized or oppressed minority group. How funny am I supposed to find that?
Don’t be a snowflake, Joe.

{<redford}
 
Honestly, it sounds like you’re saying a lot of the same things I’m saying, but framing it completely differently.

Typically when one posts a meme, it’s directed at the opposition side. You may post one on your Facebook or IG or whatever for like-minded people to see and appreciate, but often it’s directed towards that side you disagree with. So you want to engage them—but not in good faith. You don’t want to actually deal with their arguments, or even hear them.

Now like you said, you may not agree with the arguments for trans women in women’s sports, you might think they’re bullshit, you may be sick of hearing them, you may not feeling like going through them again, you might not even feel like they make any sense, or whatever the case may be—but the point still remains that if you post a meme directed at the pro-LGBTQ crowd, the purpose of it is to substitute for an argument of your own, while simultaneously shutting out theirs, and to mischaracterize their position in such a way that it can be mocked and ridiculed, thereby ending all debate.
That’s the purpose of them.

And btw, saying “imaginary nuance” over and over doesn’t make it so. Sometimes it’s not even nuance, as nuances are typically small. An example would be during COVID, the “my body, my choice” memes that sought to display liberals’ views on reproductive rights and our view on mask mandates to be contradictory. But they’re totally different issues that draw on totally different aspects of the Constitution or the law, and typically don’t even fact the same test in court (abortion laws traditionally involving a fundamental right and being subject to strict scrutiny, whereas most non-vaccine related mandates wouldn’t involve fundamental rights and would be subject to the rational basis test).
—And then I’ll get called a lib with no sense of humor if I don’t laugh. How hilarious am I supposed to find someone’s total misunderstanding of an issue?
Well to start with the last point, "my body, my choice" has always been nothing more than a bumper sticker slogan itself in place of an argument. The memes are pointing out how stupid the slogan was to begin with, because of course there are plenty of times where you can't just do whatever the hell you want or harm anybody you want with your "body", so the ubiquitous slogan that itself was made for dumb people to regurgitate instead of an argument is pasted onto all kinds of places that we all agree doesn't apply. Even before covid, it was pasted onto suicide bombers and all kinds of crap.

I disagree that they're primarily directed at people you disagree with. They're primarily shared with people you do agree with, and the only reason they're humorous is because it does distill the arguments that people have already heard over and over, and in your example and many others, are captioned onto pictures of one of the many places it doesn't apply, showing how silly the argument was to begin with. If they were of some brand new compelling argument that nobody's heard before, they wouldn't work as a meme because nobody would find it funny if wasn't argument that everybody already recognizes.

I would say even primarily, or at least to a large extent, they exist to mock the reality that politicians, special interest groups, media etc already do distill arguments into catchy phrases and slogans because they want support for things from people who don't really even understand the issue they're supporting, but do have a rolodex of slogans to repeat in order to let everyone know they're on the team. The times they're directed at opposition are when the opposition start trying to fall back on the slogans or overused arguments.
 
It's absolutely hilarious how much pride Trumpists take in their stupid memes, like captioning a picture and passing it around is some difficult skill that takes 10,000 hours to master. "The left can't do it! We're the chosen ones!"

Unless, of course, it's time to downplay Russia's interference in the election. Then we get: "they just posted memes. They don't influence me."
Please post some of your own original memes. The thread where you and yours regularly embarrass yourselves in the attempt is stickied. All are welcome.
 
Back
Top