I had to check.
A Google search for maga-hats and MAGAts brings up no hits. That is to say, the two terms can be found in a single document, but only separately, without MAGAt being an abbreviation.
I’ve posted this before, but think it fits here:
There is no large-scale equivalent to the kind of existential threat that the right paints the left as being. There is no equivalent to the smear that inherently exists in calling somebody (and I mean directly, not by implication) a pedophile.
2/3rds of the country directs their antipathy toward Donald J. Trump – a single person. Donald Trump, and – by proxy – his ardent followers direct their bile, hatred, and stochastic terrorism at the other 2/3rds of the country, in stereotypical cult fashion.
Though our Courts confer a presumption of innocence, public opinion does not. When you call the other side monsters – Socialists, Communists, and Marxists who are a threat to your kids and your very existence – you have created a harm that basically cannot be undone.
Was Maxine Waters out of line by suggesting a bullying campaign? Of course. Was Joe Biden calling half the country fascists? No. He used the term “semi-fascism” to describe a very specific and very narrow group of people for whom the actual term fits.
Do we aim to be ‘better than’ those folks? Maybe. But I think it bears considering that the only reason we don’t see that bile and dehumanizing invective spewed endlessly here, and by the loyal Trump supporters, is because of the rules and the excellent enforcement by the tireless moderators.
Beware the likely false equivalence…
Did you try “MAGA hats”?
December 2017
~Max
Well, yeah. There’s a big difference between referring to a group of people from the safety of a left-leaning message board and speaking to an individual human being in person.
That said, if someone were to call me face-to-face what MAGAts typically say on social media about Democrats, I would have no problem calling them a despicable, stupid and disgusting maggot.
My question was about the board rules, that was answered in post #2. It’s allowed with a clear explanation as to why. So all good there and probably end of this thread.
The rest is just Why is it allowed, or broader, why are people fine with doing it? Happy to continue this conversation here or elsewhere.
I think MAGAt is objectively dehumanizing. I didn’t initially think that so strongly until I looked at the definition (which there are many). But essentially referring to people as less than human, a maggot, is dehumanizing them.
I think calling them out for their beliefs and actions, even using derogatory language to do so (fucking idiots, etc), is fine and not dehumanizing. I don’t think dehumanizing them is ok (a specific subset of derogatory language I think). My personal line I guess. Others disagree and I respect that.
Appreciate all the responses.
Late: just realized I misspelled supporters in the topic. What else have I missed…
I didn’t get the “maggot” thing until just now, but I find derisive political nicknames incredibly tiring, particularly the way every third poster here has their own pet nickname for Trump.
And I do mean tiring in a literal sense; it’s a constant low-grade effort to parse one hundred terms for the same thing over and over again.
Maggots are useful. MAGAts are not.
Maybe we should not disparage the half of that equation that actually brings a real, tangible benefit to society by associating then with the other half…
MAGAts is not so bad, but I dont like things like “Orange shit gibbon” or “couch fucker”.
Your search - “maga hats” +MAGAts - did not match any documents.
If Turek is apparently inventing a term that nobody had heard of in 2017, that’s not much evidence it was widely used in 2016.
Agreed. It’s become such a strained brand of semi-clever, regardless of which side is doing it. I’m guilty of “MAGAt”, so I’ll be trying to eliminate that from my own commentary.
I seem to recall the brief Maga-hat era.
My results are notably different.
“No results” is downright strange.
Unfortunately, the term “traitorous fucking morons” is not acceptable in polite company, and referring to them as “deluded followers of a cult of personality” doesn’t really capture just how hate-filled and dangerous their obsession with blatantly fabricated propaganda is.
Stranger
If I could make one rule for this board, it’d be that. No derisive political nicknames for any person or group. They’re not original, they’re not funny, they’d be banned if they were about anything else about a person or group, and it often makes the people on and running this board to be a bunch of hypocrites.
Well, post them then.
You and me both, friend. Must be a Chicago thing.
When you need “slap my head” use one of those.
(They are all “facepalming” emojis.)
Or this gif:
