No i didn't.
I understand what capitalists are and he does too. We agree with the definition.
He just feels forced to conflate both to justify a toxic meme.
I like this meme because hahaha Jordan Peterson dumb. But also, It makes me feel better for liking butts more.
I love how this paints the affirmation as some random unprovoked act and not the counter reaction to the harassment, because if they would paint it as what is it, a counter reaction to the harassment, then it would become obvious that the "live and let live" approach is under attack by bigots and the affirmation is an attempt to counter the attack and reinstate "live and let live".
In some cases, but rich people are usually right wing as it justifies their wealth. Consequently they are classists. And racism is just another type of classism.
In other words, Europe has their own rich monsters.
Nah, the right is on the raise in Europe too. The question is for how long and how far do they get.
I lack the knowledge to add anything important to that topic but I wanna say, it seems ridiculous for this to be true. Not believing a scientific theory due to tone.
A memes get shared, consequently removed from context and consequently misunderstood. And removed from context, op isn't around to explain and most people aren't willing to read or write this much.
You are right that a meme has to be somewhat simple. Which is why I believe memes should be seen as a somewhat dangerous medium to communicate politics. The radicalization of the right wing was heavily powered by memes.
As the meme depictes a conversation, it could encourage people to have the conversation like that, and such a conversation wouldn't be productive.
Edit: op btw made it clear to me that they wanted to reach the people "here" with his message and seemingly don't care about possible consequences. Their audience was exclusively intended to be "here", what I would call the in-group and I am considered about the conversation of out-group and in-group.
Interesting response to a point that invalidates the response.
Also you understand that the nature of the discussion in this situation is vastly different to a normal conversation, or a non-ml forum. This forum is a very political, primary ml, environment. You are primarily talking to people who generally agree with you. My critic is about how people who currently don't agree with you, maybe due to ignorance, will experience this meme, or the actions promoted in it. Making it bad agitprop. Unless your aim is to alienate the in-group from the out-group and not to recruit the out-group into the in-group.
Because you know the actual enemy, you defend a meme that demonises "propagandised individuals" instead of the enemy. Interesting choice.