I think this aspect of far right recruitment is the same everywhere: Wealth disparity and a strong, negative news cycle drive people to anything that claims to be against the established order.

And despite all of this being a direct result of 40 years of ring wing policies (Reagan, Thatcher, privatization, deregulation, etc.), they successfully pinned it on liberals the the left at large and declared those to be the establishment.

It is all too easy for someone wanting to rebel against the existing system to fall into the hands of this far right “counter-culture.”

I liked that about the comic.

Our society has adopted this expectation that once a relationship has turned into love, it must remain that, and if its not eternal soul mates in total devotion, it’s not true love. You’re not allowed to dial it down, take a break from it or return to being friends, or it’s a “failed” relationship.

The message of the comic subverts this, showing that without such baggage, you could just change the relationship to something else and still be happy.

Instead, we assume from the beginning that the relationship is forever, throw our households together, and when the point would be right to return to normal friendship, we force ourselves to stick close until we can’t stand each other anymore.

That what I read out of it, too.

Disillusion with our future is setting in (and to what part it’s due to the negative news cycle, the growing gap between rich and poor, social media propaganda or other things can be argued).

But there was, and is, no large, left movement with an attractive message to pick up those people, and right wingers both own all the big media and have long been conditioned to blame liberals and the left at large for all of their problems.

During the Occupy Wallstreet days, I had hope, but what once was a movement of angry people with a good cause feels like it has since been replaced by a movement of even angrier people fighting those that want to fix things.

Man, I remember when the “Tea Party” (what became the Freedom Caucus, then MAGA) was laughed out of the room by the vast majority of people, and Sarah Palin, who, it is rumored, can still see Russia from her house in Alaska, was not idolized but ridiculed to the point where movies like “Iron Sky” spoofed her with clueless villain characters. Good times.

Um, no? You can vote and push for change at the same time.

Imagine half of the people in the room wants shrimp pizza, which you happen to detest. Yet you’re exclusively dunking on and shouting at the mushroom group to keep it shut and stop suggesting mushrooms. Well?

You could do both. Keep the fascists out and actively pressure the Democratic Party to move left. These memes don’t do that though.

So, like,

1. Still do exactly as the “don’t vote” stooges say and let the fascists win
2. But now also join them in posting anti-Democratic memes to actively aid the fascists

I believe the idea is:

1. Mention nukes and grab everyone’s attention
2. Run social media campaign (“oh noes, <insert undesirable politician or ideology> is leading us into war with nuclear power, they bad”)
3. Have bought politicians and lobbyists push to reduce sanctions or block additional sanctions
4. Profit.

.

But increasingly, I see step 2 fail and people simply hate the guy more for his destructive megalomania, as they should.

I wonder what their idea of the outcome is.

Tankie: “I convinced 20 Democratic Party voters to stay at home (and did the same for 0 Republican Party voters). Wait until Democratic politicians see that more voters favored the far right party. Then they’re going to move left and fall on their knees and beg me to forgive them.”

(Cue scene: swastika-adorned tanks rolling past the window)

“Stupid liberals, unwilling to fight the fascists like us true leftists.” (Watches tanks and twiddles thumbs.) (Fetches keyboard.) “Let’s tell everyone online that it’s their own fault and they deserve this.” (Sudden sound of harsh knocking on front door.)

At best, their actions will “only” cause another grid-locked presidency where progressives can’t get their reforms to pass (which will then be used as the reason to abandon the likely last line of non-violent defense against fascists).

Disclaimer: I wondered the same, since 2014, and this is what I puzzled together for myself, read it with that in mind!

I believe a lot of it can be traced back to the wealthy and to conservative think tanks / media control by right wing moguls.

Back in the 1960s and 1970s, conservatives were perceived as well-off business people trying to protect their own wealth (I’ve read that people used to say things like “I’m not rich enough to vote Republican” or children shouting “last one in the house is a dirty Republican”). You can even see old movies dunk on conservatives (i.e. take Stanley Kubrick’s “2010: The Year we Make Contact” (1984), at the beginning, with the satellite dish tower, the protagonist noses off about reactionaries being in control of congress, thus leading the country towards war).

This is the rather extreme election result from 1964:

Because liberals mostly were Democratic Party voters, Republicans and their wealthy donors tried to alter public perception of liberals (i.e. make it undesirable for their Republican indoctrinatees to be liberal). This included taking over the media (and Reagan conveniently cancelling the Fairness Doctrine in 1987, which gave political bias in the media some guard rails), then painting liberals as all things undesirable: arrogant, weak, clueless, leeches, etc.

Having a “hate object” worked so well that they kept capitalizing on it. Much of it was/is just slinging sh*t against the wall and looking what sticks, but think tanks are indeed looking at what sticks, so successful patterns get repeated. Some of these successful patterns I can see are: installing a victim complex in conservatives (feeling their back against the wall, they lash out easier, ensuring anyone talking about conservatives is conditioned to use very soft gloves) and the two-year bogeyman, often trying to capture, redefine and vilify some prior existing concept (thus, when the campaign hits, indoctrinatees can find lots of “proof” online of this thing existing).

For example, social justice used to be universally agreed on as a good thing, woke used to mean remaining aware of systemic inequalities, now they make conservatives pop an artery. This has been going for a while (the “hate object” over time has been rock music, hippies, metal music, supposed satan worshippers, pen and paper games, paganism+atheism, video games, social justice activists, cancel culture, black lives matter, critical race theory, wokeness, …)

And I think, yes, your perception is spot on. This is, for example, what I get when I search for “anti-conservative t-shirts” (if it’s too tiny, try it yourself - they’re all anti-liberal):

TL;DR: conservatives are intentionally made and kept angry. It keeps them unified against a bigger enemy (see Genghis Gambit), drives them to go vote and prevents voters from switching sides even if they do not like some things the conservatives are doing. Add to that Russia amplifying this division like there’s no tomorrow. They’re installing this hate for liberals both in tankies and in far-right bigots (and, as far as I can tell, anti-liberal sentiment is pushed into Russian society, too).

Q1: Select (see Q3) + F2

Q2: Same way as double-click people. A file only opens if I click, not when I press the mouse button and drag the file around.

Q3: I draw a small selection frame over it, or press the control key when clicking (I have the hand there any, especially if my next input will be Ctrl+C/X and Ctrl+V

Q4: I just do. Sometimes I relax by playing shooters with the “invert mouse” option turned on :D

I have never had a cell phone or smart phone in my life, single-click was the default when I switched to Linux, I gave it a try and I liked it.