This is my own opinions and my own pet peeves, but honestly after seeing a post unironically titled “Democratic cum guzzling” I’m kinda just done.

This applies irrespective of content, good or bad. If someone wrote the best theoretical work since Lenin but wrote it with these terms, I’d still be miffed that I had to read it.

1.Sexual things

I’m not a puritan. In fact im very sexual [probably part of why I have such an interest in the French Revolution]. But goddamn do I hate the normalizing of terms related to it being used in an argumentative sense. “Getting clapped”, “glazing,” [note:although hearing “stop glazing me Zohran” was hilarious], cucking/getting cucked, “democratic cum guzzling,” etc.

It feels just like we’ve returned to Roman times and being a bottom is the worst insult known to man [although there’s probably a tinge of homophobia/misogyny to it to, because it’s the internet. (Not necessarily in communist spaces but definitely outside of them).

It’s not a personal thing either, I just find it really immature an unsubstansive.

2. News argument terms like “blasts,” “slams,” etc.

This applies mostly to the news, but goddamn do I hate these terms. They mean nothing but they’re basically used anytime a person of interest says anything less than “I will personally beat you do death.”

“China SLAMS new US proposal”

“Trump BLASTS lawmakers”

Those two words get used so much in news articles and I hate it so much. Like before it’s just so immature. I can read a news article without some headline telling me how x person is DESTROYING their opposition or whatever.

3. “Based” and “___-pilled”

I know its hypocritical, because I do used Based a lot. But honestly it’s just really boring, and I think im gonna stop using it. Also I don’t like 4-chan. This isn’t as serious as the other ones, I just wish we had better words. [Also based? Based on what?]

That’s all. I really did just need to get this out. I think for me I just really don’t like being treated immaturely, so a lot of this stuff grates me because it treats me as some form of child who needs to constantly be hyperbolic and has no sense of maturity.

I want to point out, he could have been dismissed out of hand for being a social democrat. Even if he was the second coming of christ and lived on the street and gave all his money to the poor and had whatever, he’s still a social democrat. I mean, he basically has the same views as Mamdani, and we’ve all dismissed him, so we didn’t need all of this. [Although I guess its good to point out how shit he is to people who still don’t get it, I guess…?]

Sorry, I’m just kinda tired of hearing about him. I basically stopped caring as soon as he was introduced to me. Maybe it’s because of my personal history with the democrats and their treatment of even the DSA, but anyone tagged with them is either a grifter, spineless, or stupid.

Tldr (go watch Angela Collier’s video on him for the full story), Richard Feynmann was a really good physicist and educator, but his most popular stuff is usually him being a misogynistic asshole [going a strip club and playing bongos, speaking gibberish and saying he was simply speaking a “regional dialect” to foreigners, forcing waitresses to earn their tip by making them answer physics questions in the middle of their shift, etc.].

That really how I feel with Bad Empanada. Because his main channel is good, well sourced and does a good job at educating people on anti imperialist causes.

But I never hear about that really. All I hear from people who like him are all of his really bad takes and his constant brain rot on Twitter and bluesky.

I would much rather hear about his really well researched videos on the Iraq War and Israel’s genocide. I don’t want to hear about some tirade he made on twitter/Bsky about something or other.

Like, 90% of his videos on his main channel are good, and the ones I criticize are at the very least still professional. But I don’t see content from those, I only constantly see content from his live channel and his Twitter. And I’m like…why? Why emphasize this part so much? Sure you can’t separate the two, but there’s the really, really good part of the person, and then the part where he’s an abrasive asshole. Why are you emphasizing on the second part?

Sorry, this isn’t some in depth debunking of him on anything. Like I said, I do like what he does and I think he is mostly correct. But for some reason people [who support him and all his views] love emphasizing the bits where he’s wrong for some reason. So I just wanted to vent that out.

Edit: There’s also the flipside of this, which is Hasan. I think Hasan is very friendly, pretty mature, and someone who is all round respectable. At the same time, I think his actual work is pretty meh at best, detrimental at worst. To go back to my Feynmann analogy, I might think that Neil Degrasse Tyson seems like a pretty okay guy who I would like to have a conversation with, and not as much of an ass as Feynmann. But Feynmann was definitely a much, much better physicist and educator than Tyson

Edit 2: nvm this bit about Hasan was kinda stupid. I haven’t changed my opinion really, but the analogy is dumb and forced