By David Futrelle
Over the weekend, I put up a brief post about the sudden proliferation of “NPC” accounts on Twitter — noting the small irony that right-wing trolls were using a veritable army of sockpuppet accounts all spouting identical rhetoric and posting identical memes in order to prove that liberals and leftist are soulless, robotic “Non-Player Characters.”
Naturally, my mentions on Twitter were quickly overrun by, well, a veritable army of sockpuppet accounts all spouting identical rhetoric and posting identical memes in order to prove that I’m a soulless, robotic “Non-Player Character.”. After my post was retweeted by Paul Joseph Watson, the Boy Wonder of Infowars, the NPC meme sockpuppets were joined by an assortment of other far-right trolls.
Their message? Aside from a few who insisted I had failed to properly appreciate the glorious humor of their “parady “accounts, most responded with variations of the classic argument beloved by five-year-olds: No, u! By noticing their meme campaign, they declared in unison, I had proven that I was the real NPC.
Some had slightly more sophisticated arguments than “no, u.” Some of them insisted that the fact that I was just so darn mad about the NPC memes proved that I was a soulless NPC.
Yes, they are seriously claiming that the fact that I have emotions means that I’m a robot, because of course robots are so well-known for *looks at notes again* having strong feelings about things.
That said, my post about the NPC meme army wasn’t an angry one; I was, rather, a bit bemused that so many trolls were throwing themselves so enthusiastically into a meme campaign that was such an obvious self-own, revealing them, not the SJWs they were trying so ineptly to “parady,” to be the most prone to robotically repeating the same jokes, the same memes, the same accusations, over and over and over again, many of them using sockpuppet accounts created just for that purpose.
The one aspect of the NPC meme that does make me a bit angry, and more than a bit sad, is its dehumanizing nature. As I noted in my first post on the subject, the person who got the meme going in the first place was a 4chan anon who argued, in all seriousness, that those he disagrees with have no souls. As I pointed out in a tweet, this kind of dehumanizing rhetoric has historically been used to justify violence — up to an including literal genocide — towards those deemed less than human.
Naturally, the NPC memers have a response to this, which is that anyone who points out that their dehumanizing meme is dehumanizing is, you guessed it, less than fully human. I’ve already pointed out the strangeness of this logic on Twitter:
trolls: *create NPC meme that literally denies the humanity of people who disagree with them by saying they're preprogrammed automatons*
people who disagree with them: huh, this meme that literally dehumanizes me is kinda dehumanizing
trolls: this somehow proves you're an NPC! https://t.co/p4tOTSy7YN
— David Futrelle (@DavidFutrelle) October 15, 2018
Here’s that meme in full:
And here’s a similar one that’s been tweeted at me so many times I’ve lost count: 
Needless to say, the independent-minded thinkers who mock so-called SJWs for taking offense at their dehumanizing meme get quite offended if you suggest that they might be acting a bit robotically.
Indeed, many of them seem to be nursing deep grudges at all those who may have accused them of being Russian bots — or who have simply noted that many of their favorite meme campaigns have gotten the support of actual, honest-to-goodness Russian bots.
There are so many of these guys that when I tried to fit a bunch of them in a single screenshot I ended up with this blurry, glitchy mess.
The reddest and maddest of the Russian-bot-complainers was probably this guy.
Do they have a little bit of a point here? Is being called a Russian bot equivalent to being called an NPC?
Nope.
Here’s the thing. NPCs don’t exist, at least not outside of tabletop and video games. The meme — which, as I said, was invented by someone who literally thinks his opponents don;t have souls — is intended to suggest that actual human beings are somehow less than humans.
Russian bots, on the other hand, are very much real and used to create all sorts of shenanigans on the internet, often with the help of paid Russian trolls, who are also a real thing. Numerous detailed studies have shown that Russian bots (and Russian trolls connected to an entity called the Internet Research Agency) have been involved in all sorts of social media campaigns in an attempt to influence political discussions and sow discord generally. Russian bots may have been responsible for the disastrous victories of Trump and Brexit. They’ve pushed anti-vaccine propaganda on Twitter, exploited the death of college student Mollie Tibbits to divert attention from the legal woes of former Trump pals Paul Manafort and Michael Cohen, and helped to sharpen political divisions generally.
These Russian bots and trolls have something of a symbiotic relation with right-wingers and channer shitposters generally — amplifying the complaints of both groups and having their own disinformation campaigns assisted by both groups in return.
It’s true that some liberals area bit too quick to cry “bot” when faced with right-wing Twitter trolls who are more likely assholes of the human variety.
But when people call right-wing trolls “bots” they aren’t saying that the people who disagree with them are less than human, They’re suggesting that certain twitter accounts are so predictable and unimaginative and repetitive that they might just be Russian bots. Given that thousands of accounts like these have in the past been unmasked as actual Russian bots, it’s really not an unjustified accusation at all.
But I’m not going to accuse any of those who descended upon my post of being literal bots, though for all I know some of them might be. I’m going to pay them the great compliment of treating them as human beings — albeit some of the shittiest and most pathetic human beings on planet earth, the sort of people who make me sometimes wonder if maybe the inevitable robot takeover of planet earth might turn out to be, well, something of an upgrade.
We Hunted the Mammoth, which is not written by robots, relies entirely on readers like you for its survival. If you appreciate our work, please send a few bucks our way! Thanks!
@Jane Done, Jenora Feurer
Don’t get me wrong, I understand it can be a powerful tool for building communities, but the issue is that the people who should be working to ensure that said communities are not composed of hatemongers, bullshit peddlers, and other assholes are too lazy, greedy, incompetent, or any combination thereof to actually do so.
And if those lax overseers are held responsible for allowing said vitriol to flourish via their inaction (as they should be- it’s criminal negligence), the general public will likely try to rally to the social media executives’ defense despite the fact that their obstinate refusal to take the appropriate measures needed to keep their sites from being flooded by extremists has gone on long enough for them to be considered accessories in spreading hate speech. And if you view the mass Russian attempts at shit-stirring as an attempt at undermining the US…well, I am not sure which law the Russians are breaking by trying to actively foment instability and division throughout the Western world as part of some harebrained revenge for its role in getting Yeltsin into power, but I’m pretty sure that it’s not exactly something that the government would allow.
(On that note, if Putin is so fixated on gaining respect from the rest of the world for himself and Russia, then perhaps he should consider acting in a manner worthy of that respect first instead of being hung up about things that happened nearly 30 years ago. Preferably before he dies and leaves a power vacuum that an even worse despot might end up filling. )
And of course everyone who tries to defend their need to spout nonsense with “freedom of speech” needs to learn this: Freedom of speech does not equal freedom from the consequences of said speech. Sure, I can walk up to some random person and use that freedom of speech to call him every horrible thing that pops into my head, but if I tried to claim his justifiably punching my face in was an attack on my freedom of speech I’d be considered a fool. Why some version of “talk shit, get hit” isn’t regularly taught nowadays, I’ll never know.
@Bakunin – Thanks for sharing that tidbit. I didn’t know that about the incumbent/challenger color-coding before – I assumed it was random. The only thing I’d add is that it was in the wake of the 2000 US election that I remember the media starting to use the terms Red State/Blue State to refer to communities/populations – as in, instead of doing those compare/contrast things in terms of rural/urban or conservative/liberal or whatever, they just started packaging it all by saying ‘Red State voters/Blue State voters’. I wasn’t terribly engaged in news/politics before that (my bad, I know….), but that was the first time I noticed that shift in terminology.
Oh, I almost forgot. If social media does become so unsalvageable that eliminating it is the only option, I believe more traditional forums with clear rules that are consistently enforced would be a better way to allow minorities to stay in touch with one another.
While it would not be as effective at proving discrimination or creating accountability, that would be a small price to pay to ensure such communication systems can avoid being compromised by the very thing they were intended to combat.
Cheers for that info Bakunin.
The last right-wing troll I tried to engage with on Twitter actually sent me a link to an article on Sputnik News (Russian-government-controlled propaganda outlet) when I challenged him/her to find an actual legitimate sourced for their claim that George Soros personally bankrolled the fight against Kavanaugh. (This was after I refused to accept the Washington Times and NewsBusters as legit news sources.)
Now, I’m reasonably certain that this person was an actual human being with a Twitter account. But when Sputnik News is your go-to news source, you might as well be a Russian bot.
Given Twitter’s (and Jack’s) propensities, and that it usually takes a ton of time before Russian bot organizations and outright Nazi activity are dealt with…wouldn’t it be hilarious if they were getting nuked so fast because Twitter’s moderators were mistaking them for actual left-wing bot activity?
My, they certainly seem to be focused on pooh-poohing the idea of Russian interference in our social media and elections.
I can’t imagine why… 😉
A while back, some no-neck monster on Facebook tried to mock me with ‘soyboy’. My reaction was ‘oh, wow, you people are real? I’ve heard about this! Are you going to call me a cuck next?’ as if I thought he was ridiculous.* He was clearly disappointed.
*Full disclosure: I did.
If the Red/Blue divide started with the 2000 election, then did the so-called Purple states become a thing only with the 2008 election? That’s the first time I remember seeing that term being used for the swing states at least. It’s weird to think that it’s been 18 years since the Bush v. Gore election since that happened the year I turned 18. Time flies, as they say. ^_^
It seems pretty fruitless to argue with a bunch of high schoolers. They don’t have enough social experience to understand why what they are doing is stupid and total nonsense.
Or otherwise they are trolls, but it’s still pretty pointless to engage them unless you can actually get their accounts removed.
They basically have you in a no-win situation. If you don’t respond, you’re a robot. If you do, you’re a robot. They’re having fun by being psychopathic.
I can only hope they don’t bring this to the world outside of the internet. Aside from trump, I guess. Too late.
@jone – but if you have the spoons to respond, you are showing the undecided that people will, and are, pushing back against whatever bullshit is being peddled.
Ignoring the trolls really and truly doesn’t work, because often the trolls will stay to try to get a reaction, while quieter people will leave whatever platform/site this is, since the higher ups apparently don’t care about enforcing non-harassment rules.
The final result is a community that has lost out on voices who couldn’t take the abuse in yet another space.
Will pushing back fix this troll? Probably not. But it might stop someone from starting on that path.
It also might help that troll? Some of them do get convinced by discourse. Every so often. During a blue moon.
In conclusion: always remember the lurkers! They read and learn too.
@Kevin
It might have something do with how our parties switched sides in the sixties? Before that, the Democrat party was regressive and the Republican party was progressive.
But I didn’t know that the colors were the opposite of us in other countries! That’s really interesting. I like the color red so much more
Nvm, I didn’t realise I hadn’t refreshed in a few hours and Bakunin was way ahead of me with a way better answer.
@Rhuu
I’ve been getting into it with a guy who calls himself Ursus Trollkin who’s always spouting regressive nonsense when my liberal friend posts her opinions. And I do so for those same reasons; he’s a lost cause, but I want people to be able to see it. If he’s not challenged when he comments, lurkers might start agreeing with him.
But I’m kind of ruthless, and it’s wearing me out. I hate to step away because he’ll think he’s won, but he’s a goal post shifter and there’s no rules or end point and I can’t keep up with his shenanigans forever. My savage side never wants to back down, but the rest of me has chronic anxiety that wakes me up off and on throughout the night and hounds me during the day and sometimes I just need to step back for my sanity.
I’m not sure if anyone remembers a couple of weeks ago, I mentioned an extremely anti-Semitic National Republican Campaign Committee ad I saw about a Democratic candidate being a Soros puppet.
Well, it’s finally getting national attention
https://www.thedailybeast.com/gop-ad-taps-anti-semitism-to-portray-george-soros-as-puppet-master/?via=twitter_page
I noted back then that I emailed CBS affiliate WCCO to alert them that it’s anti-Semitic hate speech and they should remove it. While I haven’t seen the ad on TV since, I never got a response.
@Weird Eddie
Not too long after his failed confirmation, Robert Bork spoke at my college. He did a good job explaining the concept of Originalism, in theory the judicial philosphy embraced by himself, Scalia, and Thomas. In this philosophy, the Constitution and amendments mean exactly what they meant when drafted, never changing, like some divine edict. I was and am not convinced that’s a good way to interpret the Constitution, but that’s how he explained it.
All this is just background for the following statement: Justice Thomas, if you think that anything vaguely involving communication is protected from any legislation whatsoever, you are a shitty Originalist.
@ moregeekthan
You get an opportunity to quote this at him?
I don’t know who the original commenter was, but this quote’s a dilly. The last 6 words would make a good album name.
@LordPabu
I don’t know if it’s so much that the colors are reversed in other countries outside the US, but red is the traditional color of socialism. Hence the irony of red state conservatives, when plenty of them lived through the red scare.
re: social media, “Originalist”-ism, and… *sigh*
I’ve got some good news and some bad news… the bad news is, I really don’t have any good news.
The concept of “Originalism” in jurisprudence (as usual when talking about right-wingers, I’m using the term loosely) is a Federalist Society pet ideology. They’re the ones who gave us Gorsucks, Kave-man-awww, and 400 Nazia now being confirmed to the Federal Bench. For them, the reality isn’t interpreting the Constitution exactly as the framers thought… they can’t, as the framers had differing opinions. The Federalist Society’s aim is to interpret the Constitution exactly as the SOCIETY of that time thought. Their aim is domination, white, male, xian (preferably Protestant), moneyed people domination. The guiding principle isn’t the Constitution per se, it’s the concept of BECAUSE I CAN!
@ Lord Pabu:
THE FUCK!?!?!?!?!
Eisenhower? Goldwater?? McCarthy (Joe)???? nah… The Democrats then weren’t the most progressive in our terms, but Franklin Roosevelt was positively CONNUMIST by the standards of the time.
@ Anonymous:
Good luck with THAT… Frankly, the policing of social media by the media companies is a non-starter. All they chart is how much money (hits, etc) any given word, phrase, or word set gives them. At that point their algorithm tells the software “that’s a good word.” Only in targeted cases does any human look at it, and the media companies only target anything AFTER there’s a huge scandal involving that word set. The media companies sweat bullets to avoid any kind of human involvement, a$ human$ co$t MONEY.
…
We are in a pickle. If there’s good news, it comes in the form of “these things change over generations.” The judiciary the fascists are stacking up is very much like the judiciary the robber barons stacked up in the last decades of the 1800s. By the 19-teens, the Left (particularly unions) was pretty radicalized, and sham trials in kangaroo courts were the order of the day. The citizenry was cowed, the cops were bought and the fix was in. However, over time (generations), the people got tired of the situation. The trial of Bill Haywood is an example. What should have been a formality, resulting in the destruction of the Western Federation of Miners instead resulted in an acquittal and the eventual formation of the Industrial Workers of the World.
http://idahoptv.org/productions/specials/trial/thetrial/
I hope I’m wrong, but I fear the die has been cast. We’re in for a helluva rough ride.
On the colours, blue is definitely the colour of the Liberal party here (which politically speaking, is like the US Republicans), and red is associated with the Labor party (red = socialism, not that they have any resemblance to actual socialism).
I love that Chad up there has his doctorate in areas that these guys actively despise. There’s also something very wrong with his legs.
Political colours, well, the UK tradition is blue for conservatives, yellow for liberals, and red for socialists. Australia follows suit, except we don’t current have a major liberal party. We have a Liberal Party, but they’ve pretty much always been conservative.
@Weird (and tired of trumplings) Eddie
My point exactly. They are incapable of policing themselves, so it unfortunately falls to the government to do it for them. Perhaps massive fines for any sort of non-compliance might change their tunes, or harsher punishments for their failure to police themselves. The important thing is that if they allow the persistent abuse of their systems to go unchecked, they must be held responsible for it and therefore receive the same punishments as the hatemongers themselves.
I hate to advocate for such a dictatorial solution, but unless you’re somehow able to make them have a sudden attack of conscience or think you can force them to stop at gunpoint the only way to control their avarice and stupidity is through draconic laws meant to remind them of the price of greed. And while things might get better over generations, the way the world is going now means we might not HAVE that long. It certainly isn’t any comfort to those of us in this particular generation, that’s for sure.
We SHOULD have a Liberal – hell, a Leftist – party. You don’t name a party Labor to suggest that you’re interested in compromising on corporate tax rates. There’s a reason I tend to preference the Greens despite not being hugely into the environment as an issue (more and more so since the IPCC reports, of course).
@moregeekthan
Yeah, the first time I heard of originalism, it struck me that it’s fundamentalism. Of course, that fundamentalism then leads to power struggles over whose interpretation of what these framers meant back in the 1700s is correct.
Weirdly enough, I was taught in public schools (the People’s Liberation Unified School District — why do you ask?) that the beauty of the way the Constitution was written is that it can be adapted to different times. That’s the way the framers intended it.
@Kat
…which is great if you want to take things back to the good old days of the 1850s!