Why is the right on the internet full of so many shysters in the form of grifters, and sophists...

"The largest recent study of political beliefs, published in 2014 in Behavior Genetics, looked at a sample of more than 12,000 twin pairs from five countries, including the U.S. Some were identical and some fraternal; all were raised together. The study reveals that the development of political attitudes depends, on average, about 60 percent on the environment in which we grow up and live and 40 percent on our genes.

“We inherit some part of how we process information, how we see the world and how we perceive threats—and these are expressed in a modern society as political attitudes,” explains Peter Hatemi, who is a genetic epidemiologist at the University of Sydney and lead author of the study.

The genes involved in such complex traits are difficult to pinpoint because they tend to be involved in a huge number of bodily and cognitive processes that each play a minuscule role in shaping our political attitudes. Yet a study published in 2015 in the Proceedings of the Royal Society B managed to do just that, showing that genes encoding certain receptors for the neurotransmitter dopamine are associated with where we fall on the liberal-conservative axis. Among women who were highly liberal, 62 percent were carriers of certain receptor genotypes that have previously been associated with such traits as extroversion and novelty seeking. Meanwhile, among highly conservative women, the proportion was only 37.5 percent.

“Perhaps high-novelty seekers are more willing to entertain the idea of change, including in the political sphere,” says the study's lead author, Richard Ebstein, a molecular geneticist at the National University of Singapore. He admits, however, that the dopamine genes are undoubtedly just a small part of the story of how we inherit political attitudes, with hundreds of other genes equally involved.

These genetic findings are in line with the many psychological studies that have suggested that political attitudes are related to personality traits. Openness to experience, for example, predicts a liberal ideology; conscientiousness often goes with a conservative stance. Yet the evidence suggests that political attitudes are not entirely explained by personality; the two are more likely independently rooted in what Hatemi calls a “common psychological architecture.” Hatemi and his colleague Brad Verhulst, a political scientist at Pennsylvania State University, published a study in 2015 in PLOS ONE showing that changes in personality over a 10-year period do not predict changes in political attitudes.

Ultimately these early genetic results lend weight to the hypothesis that political beliefs may depend heavily on very basic processes in the brain—our ancient instincts to avoid danger and filth, which we experience as fear and disgust. Psychologists at the University of Warwick in England recently proposed a theory along these lines in a January paper published in Topics in Cognitive Science.

Using a computer simulation, they showed that when our ancestors met groups of strangers, they had to make choices among potential opportunities, such as new mates and trade, and risks, such as exposure to new pathogens. In areas with high levels of infections, their model showed that the driving force of evolution was fear of outsiders, conformity and ethnocentrism—things that in modern times we would call social conservatism."

Hardly seems realistic to think there's common parenting among all those correlations (other than informed by genetics itself)

The audience for right-wing politics is not as big as you'd think and a lot of these various shows are not profitable. The Daily Caller, the "popular" right-wing website, is not profitable and is kept afloat by donor money. A really fantastic example is Turning Point USA with Charlie Kirk and Candace Owens which is entirely a creation of billionaires.

I forget who it was, but someone knew a bunch of these people like Shapiro, Rubin and Peterson and said they were all frauds who were giving her advice on how to play the "game" (grift).

I think the basic reason for the fundamental dishonesty of all this is that the right won, more or less. They got their neoliberal economy under Reagan and Thatcher and were so successful the center-left parties followed suit. But this governing status quo is becoming untenable and they have grown intellectually fat and lazy. Back in the 1960s the conservatives had to be sharper because they were really trying to change the political economy in a pretty radical way. They've become fat and rotten, and lazy.

I'm not sure I really buy that, I imagine they were just as bad then, but otherwise I see your point. It's not just Rubin et al though, even just regular conservative posters you talk to online use troll-like logic. And surely when you have a big corporation paying you so you don't have to make money you can afford to have higher standards? Who knows.

this study stills ignores epigenetics.

which right-wing youtuber do you hate the most?

tough choice between ben shapiro and PJW. probably PJW.

As someone who spent a lot of time on the right beforehand; most of it is ignorance rather than active malevolence. This isn't to say the left isn't equally as shit online either; you have to peel back layers of liberals, ☭TANKIE☭s, and smashies to find the actual core of left-wing thought, and by then you'll likely be so insulted by then most good graces you'd have towards it would be filtered out by the previous layers.

You have to remember the right-wing mindset: there are those who give orders and those who obey them, and if people are too stupid to realize they're being fleeced than good, fuck 'em, natural selection son.

From this foundation stems an infinite smorgasbord of psychopathy.

Molyneux, he's a cunt

The openly right wing youtubers don't bother me that much since they're at least honest about their faggotry. Watson basically admits he's a spitting image of the limp-wristed beta cuck he claims liberalism has turned society into.
Sargon is living proof that there is no limit to intellectual dishonesty.

...

A thing I've been doing in my free time recently is getting high from the weed and listening to them rant about their retarded problems the shit they are mad about is so fucking petty and trivial like comic books movies and video games being progressive that it's funny

75% of this shit is over women and blacks in their vidya

"Associated" means it's still a correlation though.
Also, I don't understand the point of having a twin study, if they've all been raised together. Maybe they did it for genetic reasons and having the same environment in the womb? Idk.
Also, the "fear and disgust" dichotomy has always seemed weird to me. It seems like there are probably a lot more environmental factors that mediate that than they're letting on. For instance, even if people feel fear and disgust a certain way, how we appraise that feeling and what it's directed toward could be more strongly influenced by other variables. It makes me question the degree to which it's genetic. My guess is it's probably much less.

I just watched a grown ass man ranting about the spiderman comic book so spiderman in the comic book wasn't presented as masculine enough with his girlfriend in the comic book the guy was saying that the communists who control the comic books wanted to make spiderman look like a cuck because of the agenda to make males cucks ge also complained about spiderman quitting from his business enterprise in the comic book and getting a low wage job because that makes spiderman look retarded in the comic book universe and people would respect him less now

It's hilarious because these same people a mere few years ago were telling feminists to stop complaining because "it's fiction lol calm down"

How sheltered are these people to the point where this pisses them off that much? Raging over black cuck Spiderman and shit reminds me of Chris Chan sperging over Sonic 's arm color change

I do think genetics plays a role in the psychology underpinning political beliefs, but these studies all have the same problem of dumbing down politic views to absurd degrees. The study you cite talks about how primal fear drives social conservatism but doesn't explain opinions in government and economics or the genetics and evolutionary background of how people can be a leftist economically but hardcore reactionary on socio-cultural issues.

Sargon, for being the most dishonest and intellectually bankrupt, and for having the most obnoxiously stupid fans.

Nerd hobbyists never used to care about minorities or women in their media until idpozzed liberal made imposing an increased number of them on their hobbies, for arbitrary reasons, the new moral crusade. The opposition of nerds to blacks and women in vidya and comic books is not actually born from a direct hatred of women or minorities, but a hatred of the fact that liberal normies are taking control of, and imposing their politics on, a subculture that they never cared for before and ostracized nerds for partaking in. I remember early on in that culture war battle when libshits first began attacked nerd hobbies for being white men's clubs as if that was the fault of nerds, and not caused by other demographics ignoring and ostracizing those activities.

there was never a politically neutral radical centrist entertainment industry. Modern entertainment is just shitty and dominated by hacks. Like for example Alan Moore is a leftist he made all the comic books that Zig Forums actually likes and he shilled leftism in them but it wasn't about shilling it was about telling good stories and since the stories were good people liked them across the entire spectrum despite Moore inserting his politics because it fit well with the story and characters. Modern hacks have a directive from the corporate head office to shill the PC, only since they are talent-less hacks with a cargo cult mentality they do the idpol first center everything around there being a gay or a sassy black women or Nazis being bad and think they did the same thing as telling a good story when they

Disdain for political correctness is reasonable, but it is not unusual for people to abuse this as a cover for their actual prejudices. I've had retards on /v/ tell me that Left 4 Dead 2 had liberal bias because two of the player characters are black, even though the game is set in the American South, which has a high black population.

The real question isn't whether people are trying to manipulate your video games for a political agenda or whatever; the real question is why this question of people manipulating video games is necessary to sustain a certain kind of politics – and what kind of politics? The moment you start trying to go "okay, sure, SJWs are manipulating it a little a bit… but let's look at it objectively…" you're sunk. The whole idea is that reactionaries need to have this pathological fear of SJWs and so on seeping into all aspects of culture to sustain their right-wing reactionary politics.

– Slavoj Zizek probably (he would be right)

Right. Of course.

Sargon.
There's worse out there, but after interacting with him personally and having him corrupt my friends, I can't think of someone who deserves more of my ire.

Steven Crowder.

The worst are the ones that aren't upfront politics channels and just funnel people in by the back door while lying about it. IE Pewdiepie.

Pewdiepie is a cultural icon, he is a reflection of the state of the Internet. Him wearing a MAGA hat is like Kanye wearing the MAGA hat.

Ok?….

The dude is definitely the alt-right Charon, the quintessential alt-lite personality that stormweenies can give to normies that "really makes them think" without revealing their power level.

Reminds me of 4chan back in the 2000's, where everything as just a "joke" but then edgy preteens actually started to believe it and led to it's current state. I also find it weird that the current young autist trend is pro-establishment, as Bush was most certainly not liked back then like Trump is by underage MAGA hat wearers; if these kids were 12 back in 2008 they'd be wearing Colbert and south park T-shirts and making fun of Bushisms.

Attached: lenin drugs.jpg (500x622, 33.72K)

Because the propaganda was spread decades ago. It was meant to fool morons and these retarded dipshits fell for it and don't realise it's propaganda. So they just repeat what they get told and don't realise it's horseshit.

...

scientiasalon.wordpress.com/2015/06/01/heritability-a-handy-guide-to-what-it-means-what-it-doesnt-mean-and-that-giant-meta-analysis-of-twin-studies/

PragerU is one. Eastern Euro anticommunists in general. Also on the whole, neoliberal pophistory and poppollitics channels(knowledgehub, visualpolitikEN, vox, etc.) are more damaging than the altright.

Astroturf. The American bourg probably finances a large number of these people. Not so sure about the non-english speaking internet though.

well they are bad, extremely selfish people with bad intentions for others. so they must resort to lies, false flags, deception, sophistry and eventually violence in order to achieve their goals. they can't argue in a sincere manner and communicate their true intentions, because their intentions are bad. it's really that simple.

we mainly just don’t want to starve to death and live freely, that’s it.

colour me surprised. why is 'ancap' even a flag? It's a joke 'ideology' for people who want to pretend to be anti-establishment and PhDs in simple economics. Those same people always, always, always join either far-right groups or vote conservative/reactionary. fuck 'em