Koarnine

Usually people say brain rot nowadays when referring to either themselves (in a self-deprecating way) or another, specifically to make light of or make reference to how detached from reality (or down a rabbit hole) their actions or words have been.

First example that comes to me is, when explaining a post-ironic meme with years of subtle context to someone who is another demographic or not part of that audience, and they clearly cannot comprehend it due to lack of shared understanding. In that case, presuming the stakes are low, I would be likely to say 'ahh that's just brain rot, don't worry' to relieve the other party and indicate that I know they won't understand.

When using it against others you are showing in few words that something is inappropriate or only important to people with brain rot.

As to some general examples;

• people who think that realistic looking people in video games are 'woke'. These people are brain rotted by failing to 'touch grass' for far too long. What they advocate for is seen as obviously out of touch with reality to those who do touch grass.

• people who think they only need to participate in voting every four years, and that is the pinnacle of political action, usually have liberal brain rot (which they have absorbed through popular culture even before the internet) that pacifies them to this lesser participation

I can think of many more, but generally it's supposed to imply that notions left to fester unchecked, or often those reinforced by an echo chamber, will present as 'brain rot' - a fundamental disconnection from reality in certain areas, that is the obvious result of 'unchecked rot' in terms of information diet rather than underlying conditions.

As if the world can stand up to the USA, you must stand up from within...

The dems won't learn, I didn't say they will.

I am not saying that not voting for the dems is 'fine'.

I'm talking about spending your energy appropriately.

I'm saying you can hate the ones who didn't vote if you want, but it's a waste of your energy. Voter apathy and disenfranchisement is the fault of the party, not the individual, is what I mean by the entitlement to the vote.

If there are the perpetrators (djt voters and the literal ghouls), the victim are necessarily the remaining group. Just because there were those disenfranchised, doesn't mean those are the perpetrators, no they are also victims. Just like those who voted against it.

Usually, the party in power loses the election, rather than the opposition 'winning' per se on merit out right. They lose it by losing their support through their own actions, or public perception of their actions (which they should be trying to influence). So how did the dems lose 2024? Unless it was stolen which is, quite possible.

You know, like I know, the Dems won't necessarily learn the right lessons from non voters. I'm not arguing the merit of not voting.

The Dems will only change when they rally around something they see as winning them support. But the only recent example of this, Zohran Mamdani who has huge public support, is being fought with more gusto by the majority of Democrats than they have ever fought DJT.

If the Dems had some policies that they held and didn't compromise on, and didn't show such obvious contempt for their constituents during the election season, maybe they would have done better. Not to mention not listening to the consultants who seemingly intentionally tanked their campaign.

Anyway, not here to argue, I don't disagree with you, I read the other thread here after I left my comment and I agree with you on a lot. I just think if you should hold contempt and hate in your heart for anyone, it should be the perpetrators.

Because if you don't hold them in contempt, but instead hold other victims in contempt (even if they didn't vote or voted something silly), then you are essentially reinforcing the bad behaviour even further.

People aren't motivated by 'vote for us, we wont do anything tangible, but the other side is super bad', as much as I would have hoped. They are far more motivated by 'vote for us, we will do something tangible' even if the one saying that is lying blatantly, as long as the vibe is confidence.

Well yes there would because communication is necessary and important. They may want to communicate this distinction outwardly in a way that can't be ignored, in order to fight perceptions.

I do think your argument holds some water, that it can reinforce sexism to think rigidly in that way. But I think the leap from that to the conclusion misses the key context of the society and culture in which we exist.

And moreso the signals members of it use in order to find others like them, signal support, or signal opposition.

I agree people should have voted kamala to prevent what's happening now...

But for progression now, nothing about shaming the voters disenfranchised by the Democrats is worthwhile.

The Democrats were never entitled to any votes, they shouldn't have been so conceited as to tank their own popularity with conceit in the interest of capital.

The ones who voted for trump are to blame in the immediate for sure, what's happening right now in the US is tragic. But to be so myopic as to pretend that's all that matters is foolish.

Look on Aliexpress for adaptors for the shavers, that's made my life so much easier until I get new ones with usb-c.

I also have 3 wireless ones that shoulda been usb-c but bought em far before the new mandate.

Also I thought the rules did apply to more than just phones though I may be mistaken.

You say that as if half of the people in their home country don't want to do the same shit?

This isn't a tenant of 'the left' but rather of liberalism.

Deference to law, police and morals that adhere to the legality of action are liberal brain rot, only the left in so far as the right is fascism.

Being on the left often carries pacifist sentiment but deference to legality and unwillingness to act is a liberal tendency.

Broski, how do you think gay people got rights?

How long ago did they march, gain acceptance widely... When did gay marriage become legal?

These things didnt happen that long ago, what do you mean 'nothing' came of these movements...

You simply miss perspective, surely?

In the last century, we got civil rights, women's rights (to vote, to own a bank account, to divorce, to abort), gay rights and well...

You guys have started to lose some of those... But they happened within the last century, they were movements that were successful.

So clearly popular movements work and you need to readjust your expectations. These things are difficult and take time, you must win the hearts and minds before you can adjust the legislature.

Complying preemptively is how you lose everything and fascists win.

I didn't say it was the most effective, I said give other means if you don't think it is.

Over 11 million people, huggy wuggy nooo!

Not an attack on you it just bothers me to see this constantly misrepresented everywhere, 6 million is if you only count Jewish people, 11 million counts all victims of the camps including my great aunt and uncle.