They’re not joking. They’re literally starting a genocide and a fascist military police state in front of our eyes
For a decade, I have been begging anyone who will listen to believe Trump et al. whenever they threaten someone. I swear that the only time Trump tells the truth is when he promises violence, retribution, or lawbreaking.
Just some 30 year kids. They will say edgy things. I mean, come on guys. … no really, let’s go to ikea and fuck a sofa.
You may have a career in politics ahead of you, my friend. Maybe even Vice President.
From the same party that wants to charge minority children as adults if they misbehave. Actual adults are just kids though.
Only good Nazi is a dead Nazi.
Are those actual leaked quotes on the right?? Good lord!!
In case you haven’t seen the report,
https://www.politico.com/news/2025/10/14/private-chat-among-young-gop-club-members-00592146
Thank you.
I’m stunned.
The right will boys will be boys this shit until the skies fill with the smoke of voters.
Vance already said it was kids doing dumb kid things. They’re not kids. They’re adults. If you’re old enough to vote, your a freaking adult. If you can fight and die in the military, you’re an adult. You never see anyone say oh those are just kid soldiers doing kid soldiers things. No because they’re adults who are responsible for their own actions and words.
And not even ‘technically 19 years olds are adults’ type adults, these are men aged 25-34 who posted that shit.
No Kings this Saturday! Show up!
I’m stunned.
I’m not. Kids did this shit all the time in middle and high school. These people just never ran into any kind of push back or experienced maturity
My husband is a high school teacher. He’s had more than a decade of students saying Nazi shit in an attempt to be “edgy.” They seem surprised when he calls them out on their bullshit. His response has made a few (probably too few) of them think twice about how people perceive them because of their words.
Last year was the first time he had a student who spouted that crap because he actually believed it. I think he has a couple of students now who actively identify as fascists. Times, they are a-changin’.
So what is his go-to response?
Sometimes it’s “being edgy just for the sake of it isn’t cool. Don’t be an idiot; people fought wars over this.” Students generally respect him, so once they realize he doesn’t play that game, they stop doing it in his classes.
If it’s a specific kind of bigotry, he points out that someone important to him is black/gay/trans/an immigrant/etc, and asks the kid if they’ve even met someone in that group. Most of the time the kid hasn’t and they’re just parroting things they’ve heard at home or online.
That sounds like a really good strategy, I like it. Also he must be a good teacher to be respected like that. Thank you both for being the good guys.
None of them were kids, which is sad, but I get your point. If, as kids with this mentality, were never punished or corrected it just carries over.
https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2025/10/republican-hitler-group-chat-nazi-politico/
None of them were kids
They all were at some point.
If, as kids with this mentality, were never punished or corrected it just carries over.
For a lot of these 4chan-tier chuds, the behavior was likely rewarded and encouraged. That’s how you get Charlie Kirk and Nick Fuentes tier freaks. We are quite literally paying these people to exist and reproduce.
Glad I was homeschooled then
YMMV. It’s more you should be grateful you didn’t have racist parents.
I thought the comics was clumsy satire. Turns out it’s basically straight infographics at this point.
Great.
I recognize a couple of them from an article, so I think they are.
Verified in New York Times. The graphic of the bubbles comes from politico.
I think the worst part of all of this, for me, is how unfunny it all is. Like goddamn, they are so bad at humor.
I think the worst part is that the Vice President openly defended them.
“The right can’t meme”
I think the worst part is how many worst parts there are.
I think the worst part for me is that these people have power, actual real world power. But being unfunny is definitely pathetic.
It is funny if you’re a pychopath
So that’s how I find out.
The OG reporting, for others like me.
We all knew.
Its so weird to me how they can be both Zionist bootlickers and nazis at once, it’s impressive
It makes more sense when you realise that it’s about oppression, power, and creating scapegoats. Hitler’s closest allies were the not-exactly-Aryan Japanese.
And it’s not like they won’t all turn on each other eventually, anyway. So why not have some strange bedfellows along the way?
Supporting Zionism while being actively antisemitic is a handy way for Nazis to encourage jewish people to segregate themselves. Zionism presents a potentially attractive place to go, and then aggressive antisemitism gives them a reason to leave. The two are not so radically opposed.
The Nazis rhetoric drives more Jewish people to Zionism. Strange bedfellows indeed.
This is starting to fracture a bit with right wing traitor lunatics, but it’s for two main reasons. For some, it’s just about access to Middle East energy resources. That’s the main reason that US policy is to support Israel.
The other thing is for true believing traitor lunatics. They think that Israel needs to exist for the rapture to occur. I don’t remember the details but this is a big part of evangelical support.
Either way, absolute lunacy, but at least if we managed to wean off fossil fuels, support for Israel would evaporate.
The Christian nationalists are deeply religious, so they see Israel as a good thing. End times or crusades or something.
The Nazis might hate Jewish people, but they hate brown people more.
The racists definitely hate brown people more.
They’re all in the maga alliance and are getting along for the moment just so they can be fascists.
Don’t forget, they’re anti establishment also.
It’s not that hard to understand the disconnect when you realize Israel are also nazis
It says so much about the Republican Party that they’re defending these limpdick fifth-graders instead of saying: “You know what? We don’t like these pathetic little shit-stains either.”
You should also be aware that the group accepts people up to age 40.
So the framing that these are children or teens is also misleading.
The Young Republicans weren’t lying when they said calling their opposition candidates white supremacists might work against them.
What are watermelon people supposed to be?
Racist term for black Americans
Huh. Thanks. I have no clue how that even makes abstract sense. (bit I don’t think I really care)
Iirc (don’t quote me on this) during reconstruction after the Civil War many black Americans had little land (if any) and watermelon was an easy crop for limited land. Racist white people then associated the fruit with those they hate.
You got it, but you left out some details. The watermelon was actually a symbol of hope and prosperity for the recently freed slaves. The former slave owners, didnt like it. So, owning the media of the time, they started running ads showing caricatures of black people eating watermelon like animals. It took less then 10 years for the belief to become common that it was always a racist trope.
See also, fried chicken. That one came from Birth of a Nation. Both of these racist stereotypes persist today. I know the black community in America wanted to reclaim the N word, but IMO, they should have reclaimed the Watermelon as the symbol of freedom and perseverance that it once was for that first generation of freed slaves who over came massive hurdles to make a life for themselves.
To give you an idea of just how bad it was, there was a story about a woman who was a nanny for a young boy. When she was freed, and had to leave the boy cried and was utterly distraught that she was leaving. A few years later that young boy met his nanny again. The woman was overjoyed to see him and asked if he’d like to share some watermelon with him. His reply? “I dont eat n***** food.”. Thats the power of the media, and then it was only a few newspapers. Just imagine what its doing to us all today.
Black people like watermelon. It’s a stereotype
Don’t most people like watermelon?
The fried chicken and watermelon thing is the stupidest thing in the world. Everyone loves these things. Every single culture in the entire world has its own fried chicken dish.
Honestly I’m not a fan, but in America it is explicitly tied to racism for whatever reason
So the party that likes the slavers, the crossed flag, that hates poor’s, … is a Nazi nest…
What are the news again?
I’m getting so fucking tired of libs’ satisfaction with hypocrisy. We already knew these people were Nazis, they’ve always fucking been Nazis. They say they aren’t because gaslighting is a fascist tactic and open support of Nazism doesn’t ring with racist middle class people who only have their internalized values to run on. Whenever chuds are caught lying there’s thousands of lib gotcha posts like it’s a victory.
Why do people on Lemmy always find a way to make everything about liberals? That’s what I’m getting tired of. Whenever something happens, people come up saying “well yeah, liberals suck”. How is that better than the thing you’re arguing against? If you’re tired of “satisfaction with hypocrisy” of one group, what is your prefered group doing? Is there someone actually doing something about it? Because I only see people writing stuff on internet forums, regardless of their affiliation.
- Liberalism is hegemonic and its subscribers wield the greatest power over society.
- Something being bad is not dependent on something else being good.
- Everything that alleviates the harm of this system on me – voting rights, property and employment protection, food regulation, socialized Healthcare, socialized education – was all won with the blood of anarchists, socialists, and unionists.
My “preferred group” – whatever the fuck that means – is currently fighting liberals, as we’ve always done.
Now fuck off.
Ah so you’re fighting liberals by writing unhinged stuff on internet. Good job. Think about it the next time no one takes you seriously.
You’re going to drown dude.
deleted by creator
It’s not a “victory”, it’s refusing to let this shit slide unspoken
Cool, what about the past three decades? Libs have allowed fascists into power as they always do and I’ve lived through three decades of them only talking. Reveling in hypocrisy is too late and too satisfying to people who don’t feel genuinely threatened.
we haven’t had a liberal in power for 50 years. Every democrat in power for decades has been Conservative Lite.
Jesus fucking christ if I had a nickel for every lib that didn’t know what liberalism even is. Shut the fuck up about people online, you’re the one who doesn’t know what you’re talking about.
Won’t respond again.
So yeah, i’m not american but i gotta tell you “the libs allow this! The libs allowed that!!” Is a total whingeing scapegoat attempt.
You literally vote in every single rep on multiple levels in the US. As in you, the people. You vote from councilmembers all the way up to congress members. And trying to blame a single political party for the people you literally vote into power is big ol’ pile of shite.
You have a vote. You have more than two parties. But you always blame just one set of politics when your shit goes sideways. What the hell is up with that.
Who the fuck are you talking to rn? I’m not in the US.
edit: On top of that, it’s hilarious to have yet another person fail to understand what liberalism is. Did I say, “Democratic Party of the USA”? Liberalism is not a specific group of politicians in one country, it is also not specific parties who call themselves liberals, it is a specific ideology organized around individualism and capital that emerged through settler colonialism. Shut the FUUUUUUCK up about shit you don’t know about like how self-righteous. Go proselytize on street corners if you’re so desperate.
Oh sweetie.
Liberalism and liberal parties are very very different things across the world. One example is the liberal party in Australia, who are infamously right wing. Liberalism meaning the left as opposed to the right is absolutely a US idea.
So if you don’t want people thinking you’re in the US, maybe don’t use their terminology and specific political constructs.
Pompous. THAT’S STILL LIBERALISM YOU DENSE MOTHERFUCKER.
AI levels of incoherence there but this site is small enough and your post history is varied enough that I believe this is truly just an igorant and satisfied person.
Have you considered once in your entire bubble-wrapped life that the language you have been given to understand politics purposefully made you unable to interpret – and therefore criticize – the policies and philosophies in the systems of power around you? These are all liberal parties. Liberalism is not when you say the rainbow capitalism or let the raciazlied people bomb kids too, though they certainly seek to appropriate ideas of social justice and civil progress. It is a durable and dominant ideology with individualism and capitalism as its primary organizing principles. Morality is written around the imperatives of infinite growth, wealth accumulation (extraction), and individual human bodies rather than human relationalities to each other and the land/spaces they exist in. “Right wing” or “left wing” is relevant only in the purposefully disarming rhetoric adopted in settler-colonial states to obfuscate that dominance. When people correctly identify that liberals, as in liberalism not as in the colloquial term for “not a Republican Party supporter,” do not challenge fascism, they are identifying that the material interests of liberals does not conflict with the overt racism and authoritarianism of fascists. Australia is a country dominated by liberalism in the same way the US, and Canada are all dominated by liberalism as these are all eurosettler countries that hold individualism and capitalism as the highest principle in their social and political systems.
Racism is fundamental to liberalism as capitalism depends on an exploitable class of people and race allows for a naturalized and immutable justification for exploitation of particular groups. Queerphobia is fundamental to liberalism as the hierarchy which is necessary to facilitate exploitation must control how people reproduce culturally as well as physically. Civil rights for racialized and queer people in these systems is articulated through the legal right to access capital both as a way to protect this imperative from violent challenges and redirect the threat these movements pose into the legal framework of the state to better control them.
“Sweetie,” you have to fucking think about what these people and systems actually do and why. **You do not know what you are fucking talking about. ** When I say liberals are fucking insufferable because they never know what they’re talking about and what the stakes are in the rise of fascism, I’m talking about you. I do not care what you think you subscribe to, because you’ve said as explicitly as possible that you do not care to know what you believe in.
I will not pay attention to your next comment, I won’t even read it. I post this only in the hopes that you aren’t some piece of shit who will never learn and in case there are other libs who may come across this comment thread and have their own internalized values challenged for once.
Jesus christ dude. Touch grass.
Ok?
Your most recent comment advocates for ableism. I couldn’t find a more perfect example of how brutal libs are.
The guys already a Nazi, disability did not make him a Nazi. Being a Nazi is more than enough to make fun of and it’s a choice too, so you can do that without also inadvertently devaluing of an entire group of people.
Fuck off.
You can’t say the N-word.
It’s their word
no, they can’t say it. it’s not pronounced nucular
Woah. Is that actually a callback to when w said it wrong and we all had to learn how to pronounce it correctly?
I still think about that every time I think or say nuclear.
yes but also
all of us here on lemmy got a list of all your embarrassing moments (including that time you spilled manicotti down the inside of your shirt) didn’t you hear?
As long as on person is stupid enough to buy their bs they will continue doing it … :/
Which group chat was this? Also, genuinely curious why “liberal” is used to insult right wingers. I’ve always heard it used for left wing stuff
Because the technical definition of ‘liberal’ is somebody who has buy in to the idealogy of liberalism1. According to the original left vs. right wing of the French National Assembly “liberals” were left wing and “conservatives”, aka monarchists, were right wing.
That was nearly 250 years ago.
In the modern era where monarchies are mostly extinct the way that an individual achieves the modern equivalent of the “divine right of kings” is via the “right to private property”. So both it and conservatism are fighting to fill the niche that once held the monarchists, the fight is whether it should be wealthy corporations or a religious monarchy that fills it. It should go without saying that these are both extremely far right positions.
1 also worth reading a bit about the technical definition/understandings of neoliberalism
Liberal is sort of two separate things - a brand adopted by usually a party that markets itself as socially progressive and a philosophy of property forward law that creates a punch out of individual rights to citizens (and to a much lesser extent subgroups) to things like freedom of movement, freedom from unlawful seizure of property, freedom of expression and “style of life”.
If you have existed on the outside of the left wing you might only be familiar with the brand aspect. The criticism of the wider left in general of these “Liberal” branded parties is that they are often performative in their progressive nature. The brand is just marketing.
The hotbutton discussion however inside the wider left in regards to the political philosophy of Libralism is that both the Republicans and Democrats are by technical definition Liberals and that base philosophy has within it the political prerogative of constantly upholding protections on keeping the absurd aggregation of wealth in private firms (something Libralism at it’s core is designed to do). A large number of different leftist philosophies see this as a core problem. Therefore in leftist spaces self identifying Liberals are usually flagged as dupes of a branded center-right party - not as progressives who support social causes of wider acceptance.
Libralism as a philosophy is kind of the air we breathe. It’s not left nor right. It creates a body of individual rights but Capitalism is used as a measure of what constitutes personal autonomy. Someone dying from a lack of success is acceptable because at it’s core Liberalism is designed to coerce (most) people to perform perpetual labour in return for protection inside the system. The system creates classes of people who are citizens who are protected and by doing so it creates exceptions to citizenhood (like prisoners, refugees, immigrants or indigenous peoples) who can be exploited.
Most Democracies are philosophically a sort of blended patchwork of Liberalism and Socialism with some other stuff mixed in. The two are either compatible or opposing depending on which school of Socialism you are talking about.
That actually makes a lot of sense. Thank you. I was raised very conservative, migrated libratarian, and am slowly leaning more libertarian socially but centrist economically. Where I’m from “Liberal” is sort of an insult for the far left so it’s weird to see it used within the left. I’ve never seen that before.
Yeah “Liberal” as an insult from a Conservative from the leftist perspective is very funny and also sad. Conservatives often utilize the wrong terms for things which muddy the waters and make it harder for their flock to swap sides because messing around with diction makes following leftist discussion impossible if you have an understanding of the terms gleaned from a non-academic source.
Take the term “neo-liberal” the right uses it in its most literal translation to mean “new liberal” and uses it to evoke the far end of the progressive spectrum of the left.
In actuality the term was coined in the Reagan/Thatcher era to mean the sort of generally conservative policy of privatizing swaths of government services entirely, defunding government social programs, removing regulations/ depowering regulatory bodies and practicing so called “trickle down economics” policies. The philosophical term is frozen in time just the same way terms like “neolithic” or “neoclassical art” is. Republicans are literally more Neo-Liberal than the Democrats (who are sort of more passively status quo preserving liberal. Neo-liberal mostly by virtue of inaction. )
Linguistically the well is very poisoned. The left wing could try adopting new terms but the right wing is faster to disseminate their counter to that by just creating new bastardized meanings of the terms because the right has a more unified media structure. The left is fractured. It deals often with trying new things rather than preserving status quo which means it exists in a lot of subgroups.
I don’t know the specific context you’re looking at but when liberal is used on Lemmy as a derogatory it’s generally directed at those affiliated with, say, the Democratic party (of America). ITT some comments are drily pointing out that this isn’t a good “gotcha” comic because it is objectively obvious what the right’s agenda has been this whole time, to the point that calling it out is essentially an empty gesture.
Are you European? Liberal means something else in most of our countries
From the US. Yeah maybe it’s used differently elsewhere. It’s just a little confusing to me haha
The way I interpret it, it’s like when Homophobes call each other f***ts. Homphobes hate being called gay slurs. So essentially the same people don’t like being called gay slurs or Liberal.