Does Elon still share that AI anime corn bot thing?
I've had him blocked since he started sharing that monstrosity, but if he hasn't shared it in a while I'd love to unblock him?
Do you say "gross-rees" or "grosh-er-ees?"
I really want to be a "gross-rees" person because it seems like the correct one, but alas I am not.
If that's you, though, what's it like?
What's it like to be cool?
The thing that immediately comes to mind after listening to this:
"The love of money is the root of all evil."
youtu.be/dMBBOawFy_4?is=MKc6…
Kaley Whitton retweeted
My dad read a chapter of Proverbs every day for all of his life that I recall, and one thing he warned us about repeatedly were folks who “sow discord among the brethren” (6:19). This was all I ever needed to know about Meg Basham.
Kaley Whitton retweeted
I feel like I should explain my participation in this expose of bad behavior.
I have known Megan to some degree for around four years and have been friendly, even distantly, professionally friends. She did what looked like very good work in 2022 on issues of Woke in Christianity, and I was impressed and grateful.
Later, skipping ahead a bit, I met Megan in person, and at a dinner with five or six of us at the table, we got to know each other some. We were pretty quick friends. I'm trying to remember what year this was--2024, I think--and it was in West Palm Beach.
In between, like several other associates of mine, I saw Megan being pulled into the recruitment of the very Christian Nationalists and New Right guys I was dedicated to warning about, upon which I have been strongly vindicated. I spent some time, but less than others, in long conversations with her (overwhelmingly by text/DM), trying to explain why I thought these guys were trouble and would lead her to playing into a deceptive dialectic. One such frustrating conversation was in early spring 2023 while I was in the St. Louis airport waiting for a flight.
I spent much of that time, if you can believe me, trying to explain to her what the dialectic is, and my explanations were simply inadequate. Some of the spiral graphics you've seen me and others share about the dialectic were ones I created specifically for her to communicate what it is and how it works.
I watched her drift further and further into this, more to the frustration of my Christian associates than my own, but I found it disappointing. Later, when I met her, I found her likable, despite the disagreement, which was not significant between us.
Some time later, she shared with me that she considered me a friend but was "done" with the others at one point because of their attempts to talk to her about the issues, her colleagues, the path she was on, and problems in her book. I kept communication open, though it was always infrequent, like normal.
Her accusation was always the same when it came up: these people, who were trying to steer her away from the path she was on with those colleagues, were trying to ruin her career, which is simply untrue and unfair. It might have been the case that the people who had made her would destroy her if she changed course (ask me how I know), but the intentions were never malicious or harmful like that.
Later, however, she got further into this line of thinking than I could tolerate, but she had also fallen seriously sick. I had no intention of criticizing a friendly while she was dangerously ill, so I didn't. I was distantly supportive but made no particular efforts one way or the other. She said many things I normally would have said something about, but I left it out of respect, even though it kept getting beyond my own tolerance.
Finally, though, the behavior documented in this thread, which has been a constant for many months and especially through the last month, crossed enough of a line where I said something. Thus, I became implicated. I tried to be firm but gentle and respectful, maintaining a solid boundary: no misrepresentation. That's it.
The reason I stepped in was, in fact, that. She would frequently pile on smaller accounts, many who respected her, many others who had become critical but who are good people doing good work, and go full attack-dog. I abhor unfairness. It was extremely frustrating to watch, but I stayed out of it, trying to maintain friendship and peace.
The moment I stepped in, which was in response to further vigorous misrepresentation of people she was arguing with online--again, mostly good people with small accounts--it was immediately my turn. The public record is available. I set the boundary in advance and asked her not to do it with me. She said something to the effect of "we're going to do this." Ok.
Since then, I have been questioned many times, in person, on the phone, and my message, about why I "attacked" Megan, which means someone is telling that story because I most certainly did not attack her. Another misrepresentation. It's intolerable.
When this thread appeared, I therefore shared every one of the posts and many of the posts by people who have chimed in. That's my story and my explanation.
I tried to dissuade her from taking a bad path, but it failed. I made a friendship and kept it, and I tried to keep the peace for a long time, even after it crossed several red lines. The moment I said anything, I became the bad guy. Like I said, ok. So be it.
That's my piece.
Look, there is no right time to post this series I'm about to post. Before the midterms was definitely not the right time, and immediately after isn't either, but it's less wrong. So, without further ado, here we go…
𝗠𝗲𝗴𝗮𝗻 𝗕𝗮𝘀𝗵𝗮𝗺 (@megbasham) 𝗶𝘀 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗤𝘂𝗲𝗲𝗻 𝗼𝗳 𝗠𝗼𝗿𝗮𝗹 𝗜𝗻𝗰𝗼𝗻𝘀𝗶𝘀𝘁𝗲𝗻𝗰𝘆.
Does anyone need the backstory?
On October 7, the Fantastic Four delivered some highly problematic speeches at NatCon Jerusalem, for which they were rightly criticized. One of the speakers was Amanda Milius (@AmandaMilius), who is friends with Megan. Over the following weeks, Megan went on an X crusade to defend, among other things, her friend's speech. In doing so, she repeatedly demanded that others adhere to moral standards that she herself failed to uphold in the slightest.
𝗘𝗫𝗔𝗠𝗣𝗟𝗘 𝟭: 𝗧𝗵𝗲 "𝗢𝗽" 𝗘𝘃𝗲𝗿𝘆𝘄𝗵𝗲𝗿𝗲…
Megan repeatedly criticized people for seeing an "op" behind every disagreement, arguing that accusing others of being part of an op simply because they hold different opinions is paranoid and conspiratorial. Yet she herself suggested that people creating divisions within the right-wing coalition ahead of the midterms were part of an "op."
𝗠𝗲𝗴𝗮𝗻:
"I think the people who are suddenly very interested in creating massive fights within the rightwing coalition right before the midterms are the people you should suspect of being an 'op.'" [1]
𝗔𝗹𝘀𝗼 𝗠𝗲𝗴𝗮𝗻:
“I am so sick of people who don’t know how to debate any policy or election result without calling things an “op.“ It’s the last refuge of idiots and grifters.” [2]
“Yes, I’m sure Mollie and Matt and me and everyone else who is saying that he is behaving out of his mind with this stuff are ops of some fashion.” [3]
“They’re not running a dialectical hegemonic op or whatever.” [4]
“And they call anyone who doesn’t agree with them part of an op.” [5]
“Everything ends up in an 8000 word insane rant about ops and dialectics and not just a normal discussion.” [6]
“Just because people disagree does not mean its an ‘op’.” [7]
“The problem is you. Not secret ops.” [8]
“I have to have been bought. I have to be part of an op.” [9]
“Exactly.” (Reply to: “…denouncing everyone who disagrees with them as secret Marxists or ‘woke right’ ops.”) [10]
Pros/Cons for moving to Florida:
Cons:
-All of my family is here in AR.
-I don't feel like messing with hurricanes.
-Mold. Mold everywhere!
-I actually like getting snow in winter.
-I love the Ozarks
Pros:
-I would actually get to own my property.
This is a tough one.
This is actually very helpful. I'm debating on sharing this with my fb friends, but I feel they don't have enough background knowledge to understand any of this. Those innocent little summer babies.
Replying to @ConceptualJames
The Woke Right have many factions, making them hard to succinctly describe. Here are some:
Groypers
Claim to be traditional Catholics, hate Jews, blame Jews for most things, seek power eagerly, trolls online.
Christian Nationalists
This is a fraught category because there are reasonable uses of the term, but the ones who bend toward theocracy and forcing people into their assessment of God's Law, perhaps through upending the Constitution are Woke Right. In particular are certain postmil eschatologists, for those who know what that means.
Post-liberals
These are the most intellectual of the Woke Right, claiming deep philosophical reasoning for why Classic American Liberalism has failed, allowed Communism, or became Communism. They are "post-Liberal" meaning they want a government system based on something other than the U.S. Constitution and the full securing of individual rights. There are several kinds of post-liberals depending on the schools of thought they are drawn to.
Schmittians
Schmittians are a particular kind of post-liberals who have taken up with significant amounts of the political philosophy of Carl Schmitt, who was the Crown Jurist of the Third Reich (a Nazi). They don't like it being pointed out that Schmitt was a Nazi because Schmitt was also a subtle thinker. His philosophy makes politics a zero-sum conflict enterprise ("friend/enemy distinction") and calls for an "unbound executive" (much more powerful chief executive/executive branch).
Fascists and semi-fascists
This group supports or trolls in support of fascist regimes as the only path to anti-Communism, including particularly Franco, Pinochet ("helicopter rides"), and sometimes Mussolini, and more rarely Hitler himself. Much of this support is presented in an intentionally ironic, playful, trolling way (that is, through postmodernist methods, so Woke approaches).
Neoreactionaries
The neoreactionaries are also a relatively philosophical branch who are against the Constitutional Republic model and instead favor a Constitutional Monarchy, or more rarely an absolute monarchy. They tend to promote traditionalist values in an openly postmodern, semi-ironic way, like you can pretend your way into traditions.
These groups overlap through their "dissidence" against the existing order which they sell as dissidence of the existing regime. Some people are members of more than one of these categories, which are not fixed (nor is this list exhaustive). Most participants in the Woke Right do not realize they are in the Woke Right too fully and have been drawn into their hardlining programs out of desperation. Young men who are Christian and especially recent return converts are the most susceptible to the Woke Right propaganda, as reports across the country from pastors have told me.
Democrats can steal my country, but they can't steal my joy.
Good morning, Saints! Let's fall down and worship our God and our King!
It shouldn't be a tough decision, but somehow I imagine the GOP will find a way to make it tough.





















