A purity spiral trend on the right has been emerging for a while now but it has only gotten worse in recent years. Disbelief in the whackiest conspiracy is taken as a sign of disloyalty and anything other then the most retarded take makes you a shill. Examples include:
>you think jews are nepotistic and spiteful to their hosts?
>well I think jews are actually a cult of satanic baby eaters you deradicalization, shill!
>you think the pharmaceutical companies are greedy assholes who pray on the despairation of sick people?
>Well I think everything the pharmaceutical companies sell is poison and I'm taking wormwood extract to cure my cancer, you cuck!
>you think mega companies moved jobs overseas because the CEOs are amoral pieces of shit who care more about money than the future of their country?
>Well I think its all part of a plan to weaken the West and install communism, FED!
>you are worried about 5G because you think it will greatly enhance digital surveillance?
>well I think 5G will cause cancer and mass death, fag!
>you think the covid vaccine was bad because lockdowns were used as an excuse to attack political enemies and side effects were ultimately worse than the disease?
>well I think its all a part of the NWO depopulation agenda, pharmakike!
>you are worried about AI because of job loss, propaganda bots, and surveillance concerns?
>well I think AI is actually a demonic force in computer form, fag!
>you hate Hollywood movies because they are controlled by a few studios who push stale liberal trash?
>well I think Hollywood is putting secret symbols and predictive programming in their films to control the population, tranny!
Ect
It isn't enough to distrust the failing institutions, you need to believe they are part of a satanic plot as well. This has only gotten worse over time and I suspect it will only continue get worse over time. Is there any way this can be stopped before it collapses under the weight of its own bullshit into a flat earth singularity?
And I know many of you will claim that some of the crazier claims are pushed by bad actors, and you are probably right to some extent, but silly shit like germ theory denial and flat earth are becoming more common especially on the right. Is there a way to stop this?
[Read more] 736 replies and 161 files omitted.
>>392054You didn't even address his argument.
>character assassinationYou called him an anti-white shill first, you absolute hypocrite. That's character assassination.
>>392024He just listed six different reasons for why he hates Jews. See
>>392021 He is clearly not pro-Jew.
This is exactly what OP meant by purity spiralling. You meet another guy who hates Jews, but you ostracize him for not believing 100% of the conspiracies that you do. The result of that is a number of allies against the Jews.
>>392060>This is exactly what OP meant by purity spiralling.OP is beyond salvation and calling him out is a community service.
If You See Something, Say Something. >>392061Do you have an actual counter argument?
>>392061How is a person who hates Jews for six different reasons a "Jew apologist", just because they're skeptical of one additional reason? Explain that logic.
>>392065It shows that they actually need reasons and not just vibes and desire for validation, and that they won't drink koolaid with the rest of the bandwagon when it's time to get raptured by aliens.
>>392065For the record there are more than only six reasons I hate jews.
>>392072True, there are dozens, if not hundreds of reasons to hate Jews.
That doesn't mean that an Anon is pro-Jew for not believing one particular reason.
>>392070This is loss, you cant fool me
>>390847>you think jews are nepotistic and spiteful to their hosts?>well I think jews are actually a cult of satanic baby eaters you deradicalization, shill!From the kikes' mouth, Israel’s Satanic Elite Revealed.
B-but that's schizo stuff.
https://voxday.net/2025/06/13/israels-satanic-elite-revealed/https://www.israelhayom.com/2025/04/23/bottom-of-darkness-children-raped-in-ritual-ceremonies-expose-the-horrors/https://www.jpost.com/israel-news/article-856407 >>392358These articles do prove that there are some fucked up people in the halls of power, but they don't exactly show that jews are satanic baby eaters. Ritual abuse is horrific, but it isn't a uniquely jewish phenomenon. Christian priests notably catholics and Muslims have been known to do similar shit. These kinds of people use their positions of power to hide what they are doing and network with other fucked up people. In the halls of power intelligence agencies find these sick fucks easy to blackmail and therefore useful so the problem doesn't get fixed. I will acknowledge that fucked up networks of human trafficking exist, but I do not think they control the world or are representative of all of the elites or even kikes for that matter. And think about this, why would jpost even post an article about this if those kinds of people were controlling the world?
>>392359>argument from incredulity>#notalljewsReally? No shit, it isn't all jews, just like all muslims aren't involved in rape/grooming gangs.
It's always 'just' the ones who can get away with it
>>392372Again I'm not saying child abuse doesn't happen, but I don't think a satanic child abuse cult runs the planet. That is what I am getting at here. This thread is about how people not believing the most hyperbolic schizophrenic takes are often viewed as disloyal.
>>392374No one has presently suggested disloyalty, what's being alleged is naivete. You haven't even made an argument, all you have done is display disbelief.
Lets try and put this another way.
What percentage of pedophiles commit crimes against children? Is it all of them all the time, or do they wait until they think they can get away with it?
>are you suggesting that little old jewish ladies will commit satanic child sacrificeNo, but like muslims and their rape gangs, they WILL support the ones who DO, either openly or tacitly, turning a blind eye.
>>392375>What percentage of pedophiles commit crimes against children? Is it all of them all the time, or do they wait until they think they can get away with it?Of course they wait until they get away with it.
>No, but like muslims and their rape gangs, they WILL support the ones who DO, either openly or tacitly, turning a blind eye.I agree with this 100% and this is why I don't want these people anywhere near my country.
>>392375>No, but like muslims and their rape gangs, they WILL support the ones who DO, either openly or tacitly, turning a blind eye.And this is true of anything with kikes. Especially bad business practices and their nepotism makes the problem orders of magnitude worse than other ethnic groups. Again look at the original post.
>>392359People that downplay JEWS have 0 grasp on todays politics.
Jews/judaism are not just random people that get in to positions of power.
It is basically oldest running criminal/evil organization in the world.
>you tricked me
Not for the first time ^_~
>>392379I do not downplay the jew. I believe they are not a "evil spiritual" phenomenon, but a biological phenomenon similar to slave making ants. When social structures get large enough there is an incentive for social parasitism and culture of the jew is adapted to social parasitism. The slave making ants do not enslave and destroy host colonies because they do so out of malice or allegiances to dark ant gods they do so because they are social parasites who can only survive by taking the resources of working ants. Similarly the jew is adapted to take the resources of other groups of people who do real work. Their culture and religion bind them together and give them license to behave like shit to their hosts and they do then the host has an "immune response" where they are removed and then they adapt new methods to evade the immune system. If the immune system does clear out an infection the host dies.
>>392402I am not religious, but you see how someone could view them from a non-religious standpoint and still view them as a civilization ending threat? Nothing I said downplays the severity of the enemy.
>>392403>but you see how someone could view them from a non-religious standpointGiven how religious thinking works I'm pretty sure they can't or don't want to. Like their continued ability to remain othered from their ideals and keep them instead on the object of their religion necessarily requires they don't think about how someone not under such bondage might instead think of something. Doing so would risk reclaiming those ideals as their own, being creative with them and destroying that religious understanding.
https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/max-stirner-art-and-religion >>392403It's quite apt to compare Jews to parasitic insects
>>392375>No one has presently suggested disloyaltyPeople have been calling eachother Jews and shills throughout this entire thread.
>>392378This.
>>392379>People that downplay JEWSNobody is downplaying Jews.
>>392394Interesting take. I largely agree.
>>392403This.
[Read more] >>392487And niggers. Do you think that anyone is actually accusing people of being jews, niggers, faggots, etc., or is this ordinary anon-board faire?
>>392488>Do you think that anyone is actually accusing people of being jews, niggers, faggots, etcActually, yes. I've been here long enough to know that there are retards here who think that anyone who disagrees with them is a shill.
Whether or not they wholeheartedly believe it is an open question, but the purity spiral persists either way.
>>392489Then you haven't been here for long enough, but you're welcome to your interpretation. I'll suffice to say
>lol, can't handle the bantz >>392490I've been here since the site was made.
>>392490It isn't so much "can't handle the bantz" so much as it is there was once a lot more actual political discussion and over time that discussion became shut down when intellectual midgets started shouting "shill shill shill" at any disagreement to avoid having a real discussion or challenging their views.
>>392496I mean if just wanted to be called heretic all day I could just start posting my spiciest takes on reddit until I get banned and make new accounts.
>>392496This
It's 2017 /pol/ all over again. Except instead of redditors from /ptg/ (r/The_Donald) it's boomers from Facebook.
>>392379To up-play the problem, that organization includes every abrahamic religion. Go to any christian church and they'll pass around the offering plate and tell you to your face that it's for "defending" Israel and politicians that support israel and various islamic princes with oil rigs and gold mines. Never been to a mosque, but wouldn't be surprised if it's the same deal or similar. And since church attendance is required, you either see the problem and leave the religion entirely, or you stay and that becomes normal to you.
Abrahamism is the organization you're referring to, and limiting it to only jews downplays that. Jews cannot do what they do without christians and islamists, christians can't do what they do without jews, satanists (which is really just a type of christian) and islamists, and islamists can't do what they do without christians and jews. Recognising this is full scope doesn't downplay the role of any trirant composing it, but in fact adds to the list of reasons all three are reprehensible.
>>392498>It's 2017 /pol/ all over again. Except instead of redditors from /ptg/ (r/The_Donald) it's boomers from Facebook.Holyshit it is and many of the rtd posters were just as retarded as the facebook boomers so they became facebook boomers.
>>392499>Go to any christian church and they'll pass around the offering plate and tell you to your face that it's for "defending" IsraelThis is mostly just American Evangelicals, a sect that has been so transparently subverted by Mossad it's unreal.
And that only really became a thing in the second half of the 20th century: it was a recently-manufactured cultural shift orchestrated by glowniggers.
>Never been to a mosque, but wouldn't be surprised if it's the same deal or similar.Muslims openly hate Jews, and they double-hate Israel.
>church attendance is requiredNot true.
>you either see the problem and leave the religion entirely, or you stay and that becomes normal to youOr you go to another church that isn't as pozzed.
>Abrahamism is the organization you're referring to"Abrahamism" is not an organization. It's not even one ideology.
>Jews cannot do what they do without christians and islamistsJews have been doing what they do in the Egyptian, Roman and Persian empires, long before those religions rose.
They thrive in modern secular society too.
>christians can't do what they do without jews, satanists (which is really just a type of christian)How? Christians survived in Europe without contact with Jews, Muslims or "Satanists" for thousands of years.
>islamists can't do what they do without christians and jewsMost Muslim countries have no Christians or Jews at all. They get a long just fine with their barbaric sandnigger lives without Christians or Jews.
>>392501Ikr
[Read more] >>392502>This is mostly just American Evangelicals, a sect that has been so transparently subverted by Mossad it's unreal.>it was a recently-manufactured cultural shift orchestrated by glowniggers.Oh definitely, they glow as bright as a gun show. There's a good essay I read about that, in fact, if I find it I'll link.
>Muslims openly hate Jews, and they double-hate Israel.>Most Muslim countries have no Christians or Jews at all. They get a long just fine with their barbaric sandnigger lives without Christians or Jews.Well I'll look into that. I've sorta skipped over looking into what muslims are about since they're like, sand bandits with oil. Surely there's not much to them other than being in a nice spot geographically.
>church attendance is requiredWell that's what the churches I attended said, is that an evangelical thing?
>Or you go to another church that isn't as pozzed.My christianity phase was a cycle of going to every church on the map in my city and ecountering the same shit. If it's a matter of pozzed and unpozzed then the latter is geographically unavailable to me.
>"Abrahamism" is not an organization. It's not even one ideology.All three will stab ya if you're pagan, and pagan is just anything non-abrahamic. If not an institution or ideology proper, they still cooperate when it comes to anti-paganism.
>Jews have been doing what they do in the Egyptian, Roman and Persian empires, long before those religions rose. They thrive in modern secular society too.>How? Christians survived in Europe without contact with Jews, Muslims [...] for thousands of years.Mostly talking about the modern institutions of these two.
>or "Satanists"Is it a mainly evangelical thing to point at everything as satanic and conspiracies of authorities doing awful shit because of satanism (rather than economics)? Seems like christians need actual satanists around to keep the hype up.
[Read more] >>392502In one way I am glad that ethnonationalism has become adopted by normies but it seems to have been adopted by some of the most retarded normies and I suspect that is because low IQ Whites are especially disenfranchised.
>>392505Oldfag /pol/ users in 2017 described this as the devil's bargain: they won the election in 2016, but the result of that was being flooded with redditors.
Similarly, in 2021 the push to get people to shake off their blind trust in government, media and academic institutions largely succeeded in the aftermath of 2020 lockdowns, but the result was Q-tier boomers inviting themselves into right wing online spaces and shitting up the place.
>>392507I remember this. I first started using /pol/ back in 2013. It has really gone down hill since then. They fall of 8chan was really devastating for discussion on the far right too. It's crazy to think about but /mlpol/ is probably the longest surviving alt-/pol/. The rest all got taken down due to shooters or drama.
>>392511And newer ones get shit up by retards.
>>392507This was among several of the - let's not call them errors, let's call them 'consequences' - that 4/mlpol/ made glaringly obvious, and is part-and-parcel to why we're here now and why there's a "here" to be 'now'
>>392526>and is part-and-parcel to why we're here now and why there's a "here" to be 'now'Exactly we left /pol/ because it had become shit. Let's try to prevent this place sharing the same fate.
>>392528Haaa, you don't know. This place will have it's own struggles, but it is in no danger of turning out like /pol/, in that you can take heart
>>392539None of these prove anything. Image one is some random on twitter. The second one is just Pfizer pitching about their product. And even the third one doesn't show that there is some secret plant to depopulate the planet. If you were an elite and the fertility crisis was ongoing and your immigration solution didn't work would you not bring that up at a meeting?
>>392536>This place will have it's own struggles, but it is in no danger of turning out like /pol/You should not assume that /mlpol/ is immune to /pol/'s problems.
/mlpol/ may be too obscure to be completely overrun by bots and redditors, but a handful of reddit/Facebook phenotypes who are not deterred by the horse porn can shit the place up all the same, drive away contentfags, and generally make the board unpleasant and unproductive to use. It's important to be aware of that and not take site quality for granted.
>>392571Do you have an actual counterargument?
>>392571Post something more convincing then social media screencaps if you want people to believe you.
>>392572>You should not assume that /mlpol/ is immune to /pol/'s problemsWho's assuming? Maybe you haven't had the pleasure, but this site is operated and maintained by some of the most stalwart, right, and proper niggers I've ever had the chance to piss off and fuck with. If you think
>a handful of reddit/Facebook phenotypeshave any chance of degrading the site (other than shitting it up occasionally with gay-ass flat earth memes) then you are very silly.
>>392573>>392574>convince meThis mentality will avail you nothing. If you need 'convincing' at THIS stage in the game, maybe you're not ready for the 501 class? Maybe you should have studied?
>>392577>If you need 'convincing' at THIS stage in the gameIf you post a claim, you should be ready to defend and support that claim under scrutiny. That's what arguments are all about. You want us to all bob our heads and clap like seals when you post "Nanobots, amirite, my fellow Q-pedes?", despite putting in zero effort to support your claim?
Don't just post random Facebook memes, and then act offended when people don't immediately believe you, or if they come to a separate conclusion after doing their own research.
>maybe you're not ready for the 501 class? Maybe you should have studied?>YOU'RE NOT QUALIFIED TO DEBATE ME! EDUCATE YOURSELF!This is the exact same arguments that midwit communists make when you ask them to defend their positions, and then they deflect and say that you can't argue with them because you haven't read some obscure socialist book from 70 years ago.
>have any chance of degrading the siteYeah, they absolutely can. It happened to Ponychan, and it can happen to us too if we let it.
[Read more] >>392577>This mentality will avail you nothing. If you need 'convincing' at THIS stage in the game, maybe you're not ready for the 501 class? Maybe you should have studied?IT'S NOT MY JOB TO EDUCATE YOU, CHUD!
>>392580It is in fact not his job, but he shouldn't expect us to all agree with him if he's not willing to support his position.
Idk why he'd even post his position if he's not interested in persuading people.
>>392581Oh was making fun of him. Shitlibs speak like that when they can't defend their positions.
>>392582Yes, I know. It's a classic midwit deflection. It's not exclusive to liberals though, as we can see here.
>>392581You think I expect agreement? LOL
>>392580Yes, petulance has clearly worked, keep at it
>>392582You presumed to be making fun, but you were actually illustrating how debased your mentality is. Good luck with that.
>>392583You lot seem to think that throwing a tantrum will get you what you desire. Throwing a tantrum CAN work, but it's a very specific set of circumstances, and should not be considered the 'go-to' method.
>>392585You can't defend your positions. You're a brainlet and you aren't fooling anyone.
>>392586If you want to be worth the effort, you'll need to do better than posture like a flat-earther
>>392587You're the one posturing. You have yet to back up your positions with anything better than social media screencaps. If you want to post twitter screencaps might I suggest 4chan?
>>392571>Stop questioning the anti-vaxx doctrine.see the article
>>391370 linked to. You have the uphill battle of people being skeptical of you as you push rhetoric that feds have used as a bioweapon in other counties and likely here. You are in agreement with many neoliberal conservative politicians with Heritage Foundation and Epstein file member ties. You are not the skeptic in this scenario.
>>392585If you're not trying to have a discussion/argument, why even post at all?
>throwing a tantrumNobody is throwing a tantrum. Projecting much?
>>392587It was you who posted the Facebook memes without backing up your points. Same behavior as the flat earther.
>>392597You wanna try that again? I'll link which posts ITT are mine, but its none of the ones you're talking about.
Hint: Pinkie clown and the boop >>392611Then why were you replying to us when we were talking to the other guy?
You're wasting our time.
>>392569Your below provincial mindset is astonishing. Would you like to post in New York Times' comments section instead?
>>392613Do you have an actual counterargument?
>>392573>if you want people to believe youYour entitled to disbelief and it is up to you what to do about it.
>>392615Why would you post at all, if not to make arguments?
>>392611Yeah I had a feeling this was ninjaz.
>>392615Notice how one side of the debate provides academic sources and tells the other side "you are wrong" when others disagree and the side of the debate the post social media screencaps and shout "YOU'RE A SHILL!" when others disagree. This is a political discussion forum only one of those sides is trying to have good faith discussion .
>>392617It's simple; to try to make the opposing viewpoint stop talking. They don't want to be challenged.
>>392620
Wrong post.
Also, those sources are still more substantial than random social media screencaps, and instead of dismissing the sources outright you should read them and point out their mistakes and flaws.
>>392618>academic sources Those have to be taken with a extra grain of salt. Fake science is widespread.
>>392622And facebook posts and random blogs don't need to be taken with a grain of salt?
>>392622And you don't seem to get the point. The point is only one side of the debate is trying to have a discussion the other side is trying to make those having the discussion shut up.
>>392618>I had a feeling it wasUh huh, that explains why you lied
>It was you who posted the Facebook memes without backing up your points >>392627That's a separate poster, you retard.
>>392629I hope some of you catch my subtlety
>>392630Tell us more about your mother.
>>392622All sources require "salt," you have to read all things critically, and it's an insult to both yourself and the subject not to. Academic sources *want* you to be critical of them so they can be further refined.
>>392632>Academic sources *want* you to be critical of themNot quite. The establishment already refused scrutiny with slogans like "the science is settled" and outright fleeing debate.
>>392633Only faggots in the media say that. Peer review is essential to the process.
>>392635It seems you have no arguments.
>>392637The argument might be you are incredible naive.
>>392631She's right over there, on the table, but that hardly seems relevant
>>392635But it is strange to me how much you seem to hate academic sources, but you have absolutely zero problem with social media screenshots or blogs. It is certainly possible to put your thumb on the scale in academia, but it takes even less effort to make shit up on a blog or social media.
>>392638You are literally getting upset because people are asking for better sources than social media posts and blogs.
>>392641>people are asking for better sourcesPeer reviewed, settled science, consensus, are all buzzterms meaning TRUST US, we know and are better than you and you should have faith on us. Like a religion.
>>392642I can trust science if things based off of the science work. You act as if something posted in an academic journal must 100% be a lie. That's just silly. I act as if random blogs and social media are unreliable because they are. At least the academic sources have some prosses to filter out bullshit even if that process is not perfect. There is no bullshit filter on blogs or social media.
>>392642And on top of that people are right to ask for evidence of huge claims like "a shot from almost 5 years ago is depopulating the planet" I have a big family and several coworkers who took it. Most of them are shitlibs so they got several boosters too. No one I know had problems and I still have to deal with traffic every day. I don't see bodies on the streets. So yeah the claim that a shot from years ago is causing the world to end is going to require better evidence then "some dickhead on social media/random blog said so"
>>392643>At least the academic sources have some prosses to filter out bullshitSure, I don't argue that. However, academics are reliant on funding, that means that any meaningful deviation from mainstream science will be quickly squashed. Blogs are independent, take mainstream science and rip it apart. If that is deconstruction just for the sake of it, the blog will go into oblivion, otherwise, the new thesis will be reblogged and refined to reach the experimental phase.
>>392638It's incredibly convincing when you screencap your own posts from 5 minutes ago. Quality content.
>>392640This.
>>392642Anything is better than a handful of random social media screencaps.
>>392645Being "independent" does not make them correct. Judge the source by its evidence and substance.
>>392646>Being "independent" does not make them correct.Far less when you are "dependent" so.
>>392644>to ask for evidence of huge claims like "a shot from almost 5 years ago is depopulating the planetThe fact is the one of the main manufacturers and promoters was Bill Gates, who has generously talked about depopulation together with his billionaires pals.
>>392648Again, judge a source by the evidence they present.
And also, blogs are not necessarily"independent" either. They rely on sensationalism and engagement farming to stay relevant, which means they'll say anything to keep your attention.
You only get to see whatever Zuckerberg and Musk's algorithms permit you to see. Notice how on Facebook you get to talk about 5G nanobots all you want, but if you deny the Holocaust you get banned immediately? It's because they permit you to talk about the former.
>>392633>THE^tm establishment>"the science is settled"Spectaclebabble. You are forfiting your ability to participate in academics as a process over to twitter debate addicts and Heritage Foundation owned thinktanks that can't nor are interested in doing it right.
1. Make a website
2. write your paper on the subject you have interest
3. find peers to review it
4. revise it
5. repeat 3 and 4 until it doesn't suck
6. publish it to said website
There are several free means of getting a website such as neocities, and self hosting isn't that hard expensive but the availability of the former option makes that a non-barrier, so don't hide behind that.
Pandoc lets you convert markdown to html so you don't even need to know how to code HTML, nor is HTML hard, and knowing every semantic HTML tag will make you a better writer so learn it anyway.
[Read more] >>392650>They rely on sensationalism and engagement farming to stay relevantAs well with academics, as they rely on "outcomes" to get funded.