I thought that this was interesting, and is a sneak preview for November: the Left can't even stop manipulating numbers for a video game vote, for Pete's sake.

This one is also interesting: a "Sweet Baby" employee explicitly saying they want to burn the video game industry to the ground. Really, the reason for the square-jawed lesbian characters is to subvert the "male gaze"-- it's an intentional thumb in the eye. Their customer base is something like 90% white, male, and straight-- meanwhile, their Cultural Marxist cult's ideology tells them to hate whites, straights, and men.

The same thing is happening in other industries, such as in car punditry where half the "journalists" actively hate cars and the culture around them.

The other thing I was thinking about the other idea is the Left's notion of "debunking". A friend sent me this body of theorizing that the flooding of African aliens into Europe was to intentionally replace white people with a more amenable voting bloc-- a theory which is probably correct, incidentally. I looked up the name of this, and every single hit in Bing's index-- via "DuckDuckGo"-- was "It's a deboooonked far-right radical conspiracy theory!"

If I say to you, "Gravity repels things from Earth", you could "debunk" my specific scientific claim by showing me the mathematical equation, proving the physics otherwise. Similarly, if I were to say "Susan has brown eyes" when she in fact has blue eyes, you could "debunk" my claim by introducing me to the person. "Debunking" applies to specific claims which can be proven or disproven via the scientific method.

Conversely, let's say there is a guy named Fred, and he's constantly berating people and tearing them down. I could issue conjecture: "I think Fred is kind of an asshole." It's my opinion, my interpretation of Fred's behavior. You can't then reply to me and say, "Aaaaactually, that's been deboonked!" Logically, you can't "debunk" a subjective interpretation of someone's behavior. You can offer alternative conjecture: "I think Fred is playing 4D chess and is a jackass, manipulating people into the best forms of themselves." But only God can see into a man's heart: so any interpretation we put forth is not a factual, hard, scientific matter. The realm of "debunking" doesn't apply here.

Back to the illegal aliens situation then: the politicians are letting in millions upon millions of totally unvetted illegal aliens, unabated. They have celebrated numerous times in the past that one day whites will be a minority. We also know that they know that whites are much less likely to vote for them than African or South American aliens. Ergo, it's reasonable to assume that these policies are being instituted intentionally.

Now, maybe my theory is off the mark-- ok, fine. And you can have a different opinion, that's also fine-- but you can't "debunk" hypothetical conjecture: the whole concept doesn't make any sense. None of us knows what's truly in Kamala Harris's heart, or Keir Starmer's heart-- the best we can do is guess. And anyone who says that an opinion has been "debunked" is almost certainly just trying to shut down the conversation, and is not acting in good faith.