Social Qanon Megathread V1

[tonni]

Yeah, my thoughts exactly

Tucker is an entertainer so it's okay to deflect to other issues but if you make fun of these deflections, that's a derail.

 

[44nutman]

Another thing Q Anon and Antifa members have in common, neither could get laid in a whorehouse with a pocket full of Fifty dollar bills.
Have you seen members of both groups. Last time any of those dudes seen pussy live, is when they were being birthed out of it.

 

[JDavis]

it doesn't matter whether the original poster(s) acting in the name of Q meant to troll everyone or steer them into an insane fictional rabbit hole.

It absolutely is fan fiction, but it doesn't stop some people from completely buying into it. They first attribute credibility to the messenger (Q) then others chime in and reinforce the belief that this messenger is a sort of prophet. Once the issue of credibility has been negotiated and agreed upon, the poster is then able to lay out a message that enables others to formulate a sort of logic structure but it is entirely based in faulty reasoning. So when you build a logic structure on faulty reasoning, you end up disconnected from reality without knowing it. We ALL do it to some extent, me included. The trick is to know when your logic structure is predicated on faulty reasoning, and priming yourself to change your knowledge structure out with a new one. Easier said than done. But most of us are still able to navigate through life with some semblance of being grounded into reality. These Q adherents believe in something so grotesque pertaining to some of our most pervasive institutions. Sadly, it has garnered enough of a following and it has infiltrated the minds to some at such a level that a few were pushed toward extreme action. The pizzagate incident was the first example of this. The January 6th insurrection of Capitol Hill was another. I'm not saying everyone of them in Capitol were Q adherents, but some definitely were.
Also, I'm sure that if you take two Q adherents and sat them down for an exhaustive interview to question their beliefs, you wouldn't get two exactly similar sets of answers. Instead, you would get overarching themes and similar cognitive underpinnings to a point where they feel connected to the same cause but have interpreted reality in their own way.

No I get and appreciate someone bothering to spell the nuts and bolts of it for posters generally asking

I'm just sick of my "all news is fake news" construction broRogans ignoring where shit like qanon comes from, and it's a fan fic website that literally lives for making people believe harmful shit

 

[D 1 Wrestler]

thanks for the effort but still seems like a boogeyman. Looks like stringing a bunch of crazy events together and blaming them on some faceless entity. A lot of them seem to be just people who "referenced a hash tag" or were a member of a facebook group.
Again, I'm no expert on it, nor am I claiming to be but I'm just not seeing a lot that tells me its some organized group of people led by Q. I'm not making less of the events on the wiki page either. Just saying.

You need to access rabbit hole style websites to get to the good stuff , places like 8 chan off shoots where your average person like tucker could never find nor navigate

 

[Proud American]

Just when you thought Lyin Tucker Carlson couldn't reach any lower. He's now stating that Qanon doesn't exist because "we spent all day trying to find it" and "it's not even a website".

He goes on to say that people shouldn't tell you what to think and if they do, you are a slave. Does anyone see the issue with that statement? Here is a guy, lying to you and saying not to believe the truth because then you are a slave while telling you to believe him, a guy who had to state in court that his show is not credible. This is the same thing Lyin Donald Trump said to his followers. That only Trump should be believed. How did that turn out? Apparently, when you believe a liar, you get lied to.

Tucker did not say q anon didn’t exist.

he is aware that here are followers of q anon

 

[ShadowRun]

The only time I hear about Q anon it’s from the left msm or left people ..

Has there been one person in WR that was about Q anon ?

 

[Damien Karras]

my apologies...

I need to clarify what I meant...I meant that Qanon is potentially more dangerous than other "internet phenomenon" becuase we are getting people to act on their beliefs.

like if Flat Earthers decided to sabotage certain NASA missions to prove the Earth is flat.

Ahhhh ok
Yeah. Well, the weakness of ideology or social phenomenon is the ability to coordinate collective action. It is incredibly useful to impregnate the minds of some into individual action, and it is almost impossible to completely get rid of in society, but it is useless in performing any purposeful action of magnitude required for actual change.
Those who have acted on their beliefs with Q have done so out of their own introspection. They may have possibly already been predisposed somehow to violent aggression and impulsivity, and have reasoned themselves into doing something dangerous toward others. Nobody told them what to do. They were fed a bunch of misinformation of which the claims were serious but fantastical, and they felt compelled to do something about it. And then you have the President who comes along and tells a large group of people to go reclaim their country. That's enough to send anyone with these teetering thoughts over the edge.

 

[HereticBD]

The only time I hear about Q anon it’s from the left msm or left people ..

Has there been one person in WR that was about Q anon ?

Don't you get it though? Trump supporters just say they've never heard of it. It's all part of their grand scheme...

 

[Rocco Siffredi]

saying blind generalizations without evaluating people on an individual basis sounds pretty stupid

"blind" being the key word there, partner. You get a bowl of soup with that mark...it looks good on you though

 

[gaffbyknees2]

But my brother told me Biden/Oboma/Pelosi will all be arrested on March 31st and Trump reinstated That's still good to go right?

 

[gaffbyknees2]

It's just an idea.

chick peeing is hot. need vid

 

[JDavis]

"blind" being the key word there, partner. You get a bowl of soup with that mark...it looks good on you though

I don't know how you go from saying everyone who works as a ___ is the devil's cobbler to pointing fingers at us but go right ahead man

 

[SurferH2O]

The only time I hear about Q anon it’s from the left msm or left people ..

Has there been one person in WR that was about Q anon ?

Thanks for that.... I'm all out of "Thanks".

I'm not exactly sure what Qanon is. I thought it was just a group of losers that get trolled on a regular basis by 4Chan. They have no leaders, no mission statement, nothing that I am sure of at all.

I think the only people trying to make Qanon a big thing are Leftists / Establishment.

 

[andnowweknow]

Easy. Tucker is a mildly entertaining (at times) political entertainer. There's no need to discredit him. Especially when he says something stupid.

The "he was just joking" defense/excuse has survived Donny's demise...

 

[Rocco Siffredi]

This is where you've been conned to think 1 lie is the same as 20,000 lies.

I never gave the number for their lies. They are beyond count. But you keep simping for your favorite politician. I don't trust a single one....not even ones I have a favorable view of.

but you go listen to Mother Goose spit her "facts"

 

[Seano]

The only time I hear about Q anon it’s from the left msm or left people ..

Has there been one person in WR that was about Q anon ?

Nice work, Qbro.

 

[moosaev]

I actually don't really get what Qanon is. I hear it brought up a lot of course, but what it actually is, I have no idea.

But you know everything about Antifa i'm sure.

 

[Seano]

But you know everything about Antifa i'm sure.

Not really. I've seen them at protests and shit like that. I don't care who they are. They do seem more organized and real than Qanon.

 

[44nutman]

Tucker is an entertainer so it's okay to deflect to other issues but if you make fun of these deflections, that's a derail.

Funny you say entertainer, because when he has to go to Court, Tucker and every other TV/Radio/Podcasting pundit has claimed to be entertainers in front of a judge.
The Grand Seer Truth Telling Wise Man(or Woman), is basically shucking and jiving for ratings. There is little to no news any more, just blow hards. I miss the Policy Wonks of the early 90's, now the news channels are filled with hosts playing gimmicks. The difference between entertainers like Tuck and Policy Wonks from the 90's like George Will, is George Will did not change his opinion when his party did.
Tuck is basically trying to distance the Right from the Shit Smearers that stormed the Capitol. All of the right wing media are now doing it and it was no different from the left wing media down playing BLM and Antifa burning down shit. Nobody wants to be associated with Shit Smearers, so you will see a push by Right Wing pundits to down play or to trivialize the Shit Smearers. It becomes a Snake eating its tail scenario because the same pundits are the ones that riled up the Shit Smearers.
All pundits in court admit its just an act. Their job is to rile up the Rubes which in turn sells Boner Pill ads. The problem is most Rubes cant see the manipulation, which is why they are Rubes.

 

[Jack V Savage]

everybody ought to read noam chomsky's book "manufacturing consent" and realize that both sides are absolute propagandists, that all of the news media are propagandists and that we need to call out lies, not sides or all is lost.

Agreed that everyone should call out liars on all sides. Just because you consider yourself a leftist doesn't mean you have to let sleazes like Hedges or Dore slide. But additionally, I'm going to call you out for the implication that you have read Manufacturing Consent, as you either didn't read it or didn't understand it based on your own comments. The thesis is certainly not that the media lies. C&H's belief was that incentives and the filtering system led to well-intentioned journalists ending up producing work that is friendly to the current power structure. The advantages of their real argument over your representation of it is that it's more accurate (I think some legitimate criticisms can be made of it, but there is also something to it) and less crazy. Further, it doesn't give license to ill-informed people to simply ignore information that goes against their biases, the way "the media are all lying propagandists" does.

BTW, great somewhat related piece from Will Wilkinson (basically about the SSC/NYT situation, but touches on a lot that is relevant to media bias and media operation in general):

https://modelcitizen.substack.com/p/grey-lady-steel-man