What are some indirect "tells" that you've picked up that tell you that someone (offline especially) is politically sus amogus?
For me the easiest tell is the up front, unprompted, and unsolicited declaration of nonpoliticalness. When someone takes the time and expends the breath to announce how nonpolitical they are, what follows is almost always a rant about how everything/everyone else is too political these days, and that of course leads into something between status quo advocacy and outright reactionary/regressive sentiments for some fabled time before those wicked politics were visible to the nonpolitical ranter.
People that are hostile to service workers. Some just want to take some ideological stand against tipping when the service worker doesn't really have a choice and needs those tips to survive in the current unjust system in a way where ideological purity gestures toward that service worker just look like being a greedy and sanctimonious asshole. The worst of such people will actually declare, shamelessly, that they believe that service workers don't deserve a living wage. The implications of that are worthy.
I may get shit for this, but I'll say it anyway: this hair and beard combo, seen on living people. I have yet to meet anyone in person with that look that wasn't a chud.
(If one of you is a comrade with that look, I am sorry in advance for the prejudice and if I ever meet you in person I will atone by buying you a drink or something.)
A fash dude in person tried to get into a group I was organizing with. We went on a day there, day back roadtrip with him before we really knew him and by the end of it we cut him out completely.
Two biggest red flags were:
He had a paranoid obsession with societal collapse, kept repeating stupid shit like "we're nine missed meals from murdering each other in the streets"
Pretty much the first thing he asked was our ethnic background, and he had a bit too much of an "interest" in ethnic cultural differences and the like
It didn't take long for the full fash ideology to be on display and as soon as we dropped him off we blocked him on everything and never looked back.
Or they are fear mongering with the intent to sway opinion that societal collapse is imminent so that we all must be ready to use extreme measures.
"Societal collapse" in their mind is the collapse of their privileged life. "Extreme measures" meaning find ways to quietly genocide a group of people before it becomes an open power struggle.
we're nine missed meals from murdering each other in the streets
Always love to walk through that logic. Why do hungry people have a higher likelihood of murdering each other? Is it 9 missed meals for an individual or does a group of people need to experience those missed meals collectively? How long can people get by on 2 meals a day without being murdered? How long can people get by on 1 meal a day without being murder? 1 meal every 2 days? What if they’re skipping meals but their kids are fed? If it takes 3 days to reach Murdertown, what happens on days 1 and 2? Is everyone dead on day 4? Are there particular people who tend to be targets of the murder? Is the murder for meat? Is it out of anger? Is a power play? How do you prepare for The Purge But For Real? What should we do to prevent it? What can we do? Why do you think about this so often? Do you think it’s imminent? Why why why why why
Why do hungry people have a higher likelihood of murdering each other?
I imagine the argument is that they're murdering each other over the remaining scraps of food. Which doesn't seem entirely untrue considering how many wars have historically been fought over farmland and resources.
That being said the idea of most people turning into murderers doesnt seem to fit too well into what happened during actual famines.
I worked at a grocery store during Covid and I can tell you that 5 minutes without toilet paper turns about a third of the population into would be profiteers and the rest into mewling infants. I seriously doubt wide spread food insecurity would lead to much beyond despondency
If you are truly desperate you will do what you have to in order to survive which us why we should make sure people don't get into these situations. I can more easily fedd people than I can suppress hunger through police violence.
On the first part shouldn't the solution be making sure everyone has what they need to avoid people being in desperate straights? It seems more sensible to do this than try to beat everyone into submission