[Cletus.D.Yokel]

This PsyOp is done by the right, too.
Don’t question [super patriots] or their publications.
If you do, you are implied to be a supporter or partaker of the lefty-action.
Have you seen it happen on FR?

[Melinda in TN]

This PsyOp is done by the right, too. Don’t question [super patriots] or their publications. If you do, you are implied to be a supporter or partaker of the lefty-action. Have you seen it happen on FR?

Daily and multiple times.

[Worldtraveler once upon a time]

--- "This PsyOp is done by the right, too. Don't question [super patriots] or their publications. If you do, you are implied to be a supporter or partaker of the lefty-action. Have you seen it happen on FR?"

Sadly I think that apt, albeit less so. In an argument over "this or that," there is so often three and more stances / options which might be considered, which the "two choices" game cannot allow.

One watched it thought the Covid "event" wherein being skeptical of the mRNA was declared to be "anti-vax" in order to obscure the possibility in discussion over "anti-THIS-PARTICULAR-INJECTION."

Ditto now, with the whole Ukraine/Russia mess, wherein not validating one side or the other so annoys the partisans of "this-or-that" who refuse any notion that "neither" is an alternative stance.

But the game is really the postmodern "oppressor-opposed" structure, wherein "maybe neither oppressor or oppressed" is the better stance. That cannot be allowed when the "let's you and someone else fight" game is pushed.

[smileyface]

chuckle