• TheFriar@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      7 days ago

      Do we need a catchy “go Nazi get…____” catchphrase? It was such a g when the right wing did it! They do love a good catchphrase. Easier to remember.

        • TheFriar@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          7 days ago

          A lot of people have pitched ideas, and this one is my favorite.

          Doesn’t rhyme and gets right to the point. This has my vote. Mocks the entire idea of having a cutesy catchphrase. But is a catchphrase in itself. And one that isn’t even catchy. Love it.

          • Tavi@lemmy.blahaj.zone
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            6 days ago

            I’m gonna be that guy and say most of this misses the mark. The point of stupid catchphrases is to make it extremely obvious why something is wrong in a manner that is personally relatable to the audience, nuance be damned. Not only does this not do that, it implicitly agrees with the original premise. Let’s look at common examples and retorts.

            “Black lives matter” -> “All lives matter”

            The initial phrase is short punchy and too the point, but the retorts is as well. Instead of trying to address the issue, it reframes the original to give it a meaning that it doesn’t have. (Black lives matter too)->(Only black lives matter). An effective* retort, but not a cache phrase of its own, lest the person be caught looking “liberal”.

            “Global warming” -> “Look, a snowball/Why is it so cold?”

            This retort does the same thing by instead taking the words literal meaning and misinterpreting it deliberately, rather than engaging with the vast body of science that backs it up (our actions as humans have caused a consistent rise in global temperature averages which has caused ecological disasters and a financial apocalypse). The retort moves the perspective away from the original wide view point, and directs your personal attention to the “snowball/cold” (it’s cold, therefore it is not warm) despite being incredibly stupid, this comes off as smug to their team, so they are going to repeat it. Excellent thought termination.

            “Eat bugs” -> “Shrimp is bugs”

            Congratulations to all of you that remember the original lemmy raids and psyop posting, so I’ll go through this one for fun. This one stems from a right wing conspiracy theory claiming that due to impending food shortages all regular food will be given to rich elites and we will all be forced to eat bugs. Uhhhhh??? (Food anxiety, antisemitism?, “economic anxiety”/suffering under capitalism, invocation of gross) Shrimp is bugs succinctly acts as a retort because it reframes the issue. Bugs ain’t cheap (you won’t be forced to eat lobster???) Shrimp aren’t gross/unfamiliar (Don’t tell me you’ve never had seafood). Destroying a global cabal in under three words might take some workshopping. (half point for smug because it is stating the obvious)

            “Couch-fucker/Weird” -> no retorts yet …

            10/10 no notes lmao. Being verifiably false and still accurate gives you the smugness point off of the bat. “Weird” invokes the gross which reduces support for people that wear spray tan makeup. Couch fucker is both distinct and specific enough to to be remembered, succinct in criticizing Vance’s lack of charisma and hot-topic-esqe makeup, and cannot be easily misinterpreted without ceding the entire argument.

            “Go woke go broke” -> Go Nazi get shot?

            A retort should be:

            1. Be smug/obvious about it. (x)
            2. Make the people saying it seem gross/weird/weak. (x)
            3. Explain/refute/sidestep the issue. (x)
            4. Under 4 words/Writable with emoji. (✓)

            I’m much more fond of “Follow your leader” although that’s a general insult for people that are going mask off.

            Much more fond of something that is inherently dismissive of the point like “go sleepy, baby”. Always mock the fascist.

      • Meron35@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        7 days ago

        Go nazi declare bankruptcy

        Redpilled? Get killed

        Go fash lose cash

        Lick boot, lose loot

        Go right eat shite

        All incel, no braincells

        Nazi salute, go destitute

        ADL? Common L

        Ku Klux? Lose bucks

        Go apartheid, all downside

  • Honytawk@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    32
    ·
    7 days ago

    After Twitter already not being profitable. Add all the loss of marketing from businesses and users leaving, then the cost of all the bots and lawsuits.

    How come it is “barely breaking even”? Who is paying them? Fascists?

  • Blackmist@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    33
    ·
    7 days ago

    Aw geez, what a shame. As if Neo-Goebbels is going to shut his propaganda arm over something as trivial as money.

  • TehWorld@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    23
    ·
    6 days ago

    Bullshit. No way does Twitter make anywhere near a profit, and that’s NOT taking into account the payments on 44Bn.

  • Cool_Name@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    17
    ·
    7 days ago

    Wouldn’t barely breaking even actually be exceptionally good in the history of twitter? I though it had been burning money from its conception.

    • FooBarrington@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      7 days ago

      No, Twitter had started making a profit when he bought it. The last year they had a court case which made the year a loss, but the years before were profitable.

    • tal@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      6 days ago

      You’d expect it – most online companies do, as it makes sense for companies with high fixed costs and low variable costs – to have a growth phase, during which it loses money but aims to grow by being very appealing. Once it’s grown as far as it reasonably can or as money permits, the growth phase ends and the monetization phase begins. Twitter’s growth phase was over. It would never have been expected for Twitter to just lose money forever.

  • Obinice@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    6 days ago

    At this point if you’re still working there knowingly building a powerful fascist gathering platform after so much time available to leave, taking dirty Nazi money as payment for your services…

    I dunno man… should I feel bad for the staff, or are the remaining staff complicit enough at this point?

    • njordomir@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      6 days ago

      Do they have employees on H1B? If so, that may be why they haven’t jumped ship for less-Nazified pastures. Not excusing anyone, just striving to understand.

    • _stranger_@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      6 days ago

      Feel bad for the poor bastards stuck there on visas. Feel less bad about anyone looking around that can’t quit but can’t find another job. Would you hire someone who’s still working at Twitter? I probably wouldn’t even pull that resume for an interview.

    • Spacehooks@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      7 days ago

      Starting with everyone that wrote the least amount of code. I only want to see overly complex code for hello world!