It’s important to differentiate it from like. Having extreme opinions. There are plenty of adults with extreme opinions and they are a whole other conversation. – But only people under a certain age (not strictly kid, mind, though most people have shaken this off by their mid 20s) have a penchant to arrive at extreme opinions specifically because they are “edgy” and “cool”.
This tends to also come with a particularly needless hostile attitude, where they very quickly and easily start with the verbal abuse.
When everyone watches your content on a vertical screen, it simply makes sense.
There was a time period before the modernization of video sharing apps when vertical video was annoying because it was primarily consumed on a PC. But that changed years ago.
The only people still making the vertical video arguments haven’t reevaluated their stance in a decade, or don’t get out of the house much.
When the video requires a wide view, yeah that makes sense. But only when required. Shouldn’t be the default since holding the phone that way isn’t the default. Simply makes sense.
I’m 46. I’ve had phones since the 90s. Only sideways by default ones I recall are some Moto and Sidekick or similar. And they weren’t really close to today’s video capability.
What phone are you referring to that is sideways by default??
The thing with a lot of the methods mentioned is that I’ve seen both teens that are more mature than me, and people in their thirties that should probably have their internet privileges revoked.
It’s a wakeup call for a lot of young people when they start to recognize the absurdity of anti-communist propaganda, but a lot of kids swing too far the other direction and figure all the bad things they’ve ever heard about history’s worst communist leaders are lies.
It doesn’t mean that Communism is uniquely bad, but these men were violent tyrants who don’t share values with most mainstream western leftists today.
Some never grow up and say dumb shit like that radical gender expression was common in the USSR or something…
Larping as a tankie is definitely a thing of immature, terminally online kids, but I wouldn’t throw Lenin in the bunch. While Stalin is mostly condemned as a reactionary psychopath by pretty much everybody except a few leftist basement-dwellers, Lenin is still read and taught throughout the world. Nothing edgy in reading Lenin.
Edgy kids on the internet worship other psychopaths like Pol Pot or Hoxha.
It was always a thing, had a tankie friend in high-school. Though you’re right, most people grow out of it. But I don’t think this guy did last I saw him
Stalin maybe. Lenin? He was a hero to the working class. I’d really like to see your sources on how Lenin was one of “history’s worst communist leaders”.
I suppose there’s not a lot of communist leaders to choose from in general, but Kronstadt happened on Lenin’s watch and it would be a bit disingenuous to pretend this was controversy free amongst the left and working classes.
As we all know, getting more militantly progressive because you see the repeated failures of the liberal worldview is exactly the same as getting more conservative because you own more property 🤡
Ah yes, if a Communist is young, they are naiive, and if a Communist is older, they are cyncial and regressive.
The double-think is strong with you.
Where’s that Parenti quote?
“During the cold war, the anticommunist ideological framework could transform any data about existing communist societies into hostile evidence. If the Soviets refused to negotiate a point, they were intransigent and belligerent; if they appeared willing to make concessions, this was but a skillful ploy to put us off our guard. By opposing arms limitations, they would have demonstrated their aggressive intent; but when in fact they supported most armament treaties, it was because they were mendacious and manipulative. If the churches in the USSR were empty, this demonstrated that religion was suppressed; but if the churches were full, this meant the people were rejecting the regime’s atheistic ideology. If the workers went on strike (as happened on infrequent occasions), this was evidence of their alienation from the collectivist system; if they didn’t go on strike, this was because they were intimidated and lacked freedom. A scarcity of consumer goods demonstrated the failure of the economic system; an improvement in consumer supplies meant only that the leaders were attempting to placate a restive population and so maintain a firmer hold over them.”