President Elon Musk
He probably deserves his own thread at this point, discuss accordingly
AFD is a reactionary part that in its brief history has often attracted extremist elements.
Critics would say the party has been steered too much by those elements. Among those critics you will find former leader of AFD Jörg Meuthen, who stepped down from his role as leader of the party, stating that extremists were now controlling the party.
As to what extent its economic policies should be analyzed when assessing whether AfD is on the far right, that shows a glaring lack of knowledge about far right politics. The far right is largely opportunistic when it comes economic policy, meaning they will grab whatever sells the best.
If you go by platform alone, it is pretty far from the Nazi party you'd think it was if you went by left-leaning social media, though it certainly attracts Nazis. I'd say it is more your standard "conservative" shitshow that talks big about being classically liberal and allowing for personal freedom, but doesn't have the guts to let people actually make their own life choices.
No. First of all you said right wing. Secondly it's very possible for Jews to be self hating or white supremacist. It's also possible for black people to be anti immigration . It is very possible for minorities to have extremist far right views.Weidel is no different and the afd would only be centrist compared to you.You're utterly wrong on this issue.
No we were talking far ri
Til jews can't be white.
On a more general note,
I really don't get why lucy is still allowed to post walls of awfull hateful content without harm.
He constantly bring in racism and eugenics in the conversation and nothing happens.
ah btw corpus btw even just on an *american* (USA) scale, AFD isn't extremist at all, being to the left of Trump (similar on the culture, to the left on the economics) , a candidate who won the popular vote (so definitionally not an extremist, in his country).
Stop being disingenuous. Are you telling me they're solely anti migration? They support blood and soil type Volkisch nationalism and are especially against Muslim immigration so don't tell me they're not far right. They're just not far right enough for your liking.
Stop being disingenuous. Are you telling me they're solely anti migration? They support blood and soil type Volkisch nationalism and are especially against Muslim immigration so don't tell me they're not far right. They're just not far right enough for your liking.
being anti immigration in Germany (and in general in continental Europe) is being pro "blood and soil nationalism" because without immigration in the last 40 years that's what is left.
and being nationalist isn't being right-wing worldwide and historically, it's literally the only option of everyone everytime in history EXCEPT the western left recently. like it is normal for all people to be pro your etchnic group and pro your nation ffs. it's basic human beings doing human beings.
the danish left is the same just looking over the border. yes, the same. they even paid advertising in media in Africa to tell people from there not to come to Denmark ffs.
they have sky high refusal rates for "asylum seekers".
and btw AFD is against Muslim migration because the poor uneducated people they get in Germany in enormous quantities were from mainly turkey recently.
but you can be confident they would despise black poor and uneducated African immigration the same even if it came from christian countries. and they would despise Laotian immigration if it was poor and uneducated people from there en masse.
that's normal, normal people don't want masses of alien poor people coming in their countries
I said volkidch nationalism and if you're going to persist in debating dishonestly then we're done here.
The AFD aren't centrist regardless of you and Elon's gaslighting.
Going by Lucioms words, Hitler wasn't extreme because he was popular. Yet so, so many people are scary, extreme leftists now.
Why is anyone replying to this guy?
and being nationalist isn't being right-wing worldwide and historically, it's literally the only option of everyone everytime in history EXCEPT the western left recently.
Saying something has been the same for centuries isn't exactly a strong argument.
Civilisations, traditions, knowledge, etc...
We are constantly evolving.
Going by Lucioms words, Hitler wasn't extreme because he was popular. Yet so, so many people are scary, extreme leftists now.
Why is anyone replying to this guy?
he wasn't particularly extreme as a platform in germany when he got elected yes exactly. Not at all, and historians don't claim he was. In fact he won elections exactly because he was perceived to be less extremist than other options, by centrists as well which got allied to his party for a while.
He DID a lot of extreme things, including the holocaust (but the russian invasion insanity was absurdly extremist as well), and the holocaust *he kept hidden from the population* (which was easy given he controlled the media) because he knew very well it would have been immensely unpopular (because it was a very extremist choice).
He also hid the mass murder of disabled germans.
//
Bukele is not an extremist in his country but you can consider him an extremist on the global scale for example, because currently almost no other countries treats criminals like el salvador does.
He isn't in the historical sense, that was the normal way to treat criminals historically (that, or you just kill them).
Saying something has been the same for centuries isn't exactly a strong argument.
Civilisations, traditions, knowledge, etc...
We are constantly evolving.
It's also a misrepresentation of history.
Nations are a young phenomena. We see early nation-forming during the the Renaissance, but the ideal of the nation as basis for the state is younger than that, and would gain traction during the early 1800s. Some contrarian historians seemingly disagree, but they're mostly just playing a game of taxonomy and definition.
For that matter, the idea of the state as a sovereign region is also young and also arose during the 1500s. Prior to this, state or "status" referred to the right to rule.
Of course, in the Romantic era a lot of artists portrayed earlier times such as medieval era or antiquity in a very reverent and idealized way, and also mistakenly instilled a very "modern" (for the time) understanding of what those societies were like. It is typically these very rosy-hued, pretty and woefully incorrect representations of past history that gets picked up by nationalist ideology.
It's also a misrepresentation of history. Nations are a young phenomena. We see early nation-forming during the the Renaissance, but the ideal of the nation as basis for the state is younger than that, and would gain traction during the early 1800s. Some contrarian historians seemingly disagree, but they're mostly just playing a game of taxonomy and definition.For that matter,
the fact that current European borders are a fairly recent, romantic era invention is true, but it isn't a counter to the idea that historically people always tended to prefer the members of their own ethnic and cultural groups over every other human being lol.
I mean the Aeneid itself is just a long list of justifications as to why roman blood has (what we today would call) a manifest destiny to conquer the world given every other group is morally culturally and religiously inferior.
Chinese literature is basically the same with the added element of the leader/king/emperor of their own race and culture being basically the divine incarnate.
Records of the Grand Historian by Sima Qian (the Shiji) does that. We even keep calling the Chinese ethnicity Han because of that book lol.
the dynasty giving the name literally to their race.
being nationalistic (in the sense we mean now) IE considering your polity, your group, superior inherently, morally, value-wise to all other groups of human beings is as common for our species as erections are for our species males.
and that's obviously for biological reasons, being a very social species where the individual is very weak alone, our own very survival is predicated on the success of our group and so it's obvious that for the same reason individual self pride exists and is necessary to some extent to motivate individuals throughout life, group+based self pride exists and is necessary to some extent to motivate groups throught their own collective existence.
only the anti-human, very recent ideology of modern liberal leftism, predicated almost entirely on a denial of basic human biology and pulsions, can deny the existence of such an omnipresent force in history fully rooted in very evident biological, genetical elements.
the fact that current European borders are a fairly recent, romantic era invention is true, but it isn't a counter to the idea that historically people always tended to prefer the members of their own ethnic and cultural groups over every other human being lol.I mean the Aeneid itself is just a long list of justifications as to why roman blood has (what we today would call) a m
You are libertarian right ?
Going against biology .
Some are. England has existed as a kingdom since 927 AD (with a republican interregnum 1649-60) and its Parliament dates from 1265. There are probably some older ones around.
This really sounds quite recent in the span of history
The rogue employee (Stolen from twitter)
We want to update you on an incident that happened with our Grok response bot on X yesterday.
What happened:
On May 14 at approximately 3:15 AM PST, an unauthorized modification was made to the Grok response bot's prompt on X. This change, which directed Grok to provide a specific response on a political topic, violated xAI's internal policies and core values. We have conducted a thorough investigation and are implementing measures to enhance Grok's transparency and reliability.
What we’re going to do next:
- Starting now, we are publishing our Grok system prompts openly on GitHub. The public will be able to review them and give feedback to every prompt change that we make to Grok. We hope this can help strengthen your trust in Grok as a truth-seeking AI.
- Our existing code review process for prompt changes was circumvented in this incident. We will put in place additional checks and measures to ensure that xAI employees can't modify the prompt without review.
- We’re putting in place a 24/7 monitoring team to respond to incidents with Grok’s answers that are not caught by automated systems, so we can respond faster if all other measures fail.
https://x.com/xai/status/192318362060661...
Context: for some hours grok talked about the white genocide in south africa even when answering completly unrelated questions
Yeah it was pathetic and they will learn to be more covert and eventually they will have a perfect little propaganda bot that will say exactly what they want it to say on certain topics.
Grok was being used against right wing nonsense and now they are corrupting that
Some of its responses that I saw yesterday were really weird, a bit creepy, and were borderline manipulative
The rogue employee (Stolen from twitter) We want to update you on an incident that happened with our Grok response bot on X yesterday.What happened:On May 14 at approximately 3:15 AM PST, an unauthorized modification was made to the Grok response bot's prompt on X. This change, which directed Grok to provide a specific response on a political topic, violated xAI's internal pol
Rehiring old employees ?
Yeah it was pathetic and they will learn to be more covert and eventually they will have a perfect little propaganda bot that will say exactly what they want it to say on certain topics.
Grok was being used against right wing nonsense and now they are corrupting that
Some of its responses that I saw yesterday were really weird, a bit creepy, and were borderline manipulative
Well Gemini and chatgpt had their analogous moment to push leftist narrative and made us laugh as well, like when Gemini depicted historic popes as black or chatgpt refused to write a poem in favor of trump but did write it for biden
Well Gemini and chatgpt had their analogous moment to push leftist narrative and made us laugh as well, like when Gemini depicted historic popes as black or chatgpt refused to write a poem in favor of trump but did write it for biden
This was because it searched its banks of evidence and found him lacking in character to the point that it can't objectively praise him. Thats not leftist narrative, hes just a ****ing awful piece of **** with mountains of evidence to support it.
This is the type of confirmation of reality that people like you despise that is also incredibly important
You guys literally corrupted the one thing that Trump got right, which was operation warp speed and the vaccine. Whoops!
That's a pretty risible (and quite hilariously false) summary of that so-called study you posted. Are you hoping that everyone forgot that dumb **** so you can just lie about it unchallenged?
I might just have to find that again and post it here for shits and giggles, so everyone can point and laugh at the guy who wrote it and at you.
That's a pretty risible (and quite hilariously false) summary of that so-called study you posted. Are you hoping that everyone forgot that dumb **** so you can just lie about it unchallenged?
I might just have to find that again and post it here for shits and giggles, so everyone can point and laugh at the guy who wrote it and at you.
the study you are referring to is a different thing. Examples of grotesque anti-republican bias was all over the internet and everyone knows about that.
And the black vikings and popes generated by gemini (when ased to depict *historical figures*) made headlines in financial media because it costed dearly for google in the market back then.
This was because it searched its banks of evidence and found him lacking in character to the point that it can't objectively praise him. Thats not leftist narrative, hes just a ****ing awful piece of **** with mountains of evidence to support it.This is the type of confirmation of reality that people like you despise that is also incredibly importantYou guys literally corrupte
Coordie, chat gpt wrote praises for mao zedong if asked to do that.
Stop defending the utterly undefensible. Normal AIs are monstrously skewed pro liberal. Musk is trying to skew Grok pro republicans but he is hilariously failing for now. Even if he manages to, he just accomplished what liberals already accomplished.
I was and am a fan of warp speed, take the antivaccinism to the antivaxers. I don't answer for other people mistakes. I am not a ****ing collectivist unlike you guys
the study you are referring to is a different thing. Examples of grotesque anti-republican bias was all over the internet and everyone knows about that.
And the black vikings and popes generated by gemini (when ased to depict *historical figures*) made headlines in financial media because it costed dearly for google in the market back then.
Weird, because that "study" was specifically about asking different chat bots to make up limericks about Trump and Biden, and that was exactly the example you used to which I responded. Is asking chat bots to make up rhymes a common method of assessing their purported bias?
Coordie, chat gpt wrote praises for mao zedong if asked to do that.Stop defending the utterly undefensible. Normal AIs are monstrously skewed pro liberal. Musk is trying to skew Grok pro republicans but he is hilariously failing for now. Even if he manages to, he just accomplished what liberals already accomplished.I was and am a fan of warp speed, take the antivaccinism to the
They skew left because the rights whole philosophy is based off lies and misinformation. We have been telling you that for years now and you either refuse to internalize it or are on the payroll
Its ****ing hilarious watching conservatives crash out over the facts presented unbiased
