💰 Grifter Laura Loomer / @looms93 - The Conservative Taylor Lorenz

  • 🏰 The Fediverse is up. If you know, you know.
  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account
Attention is currency on the internet. Which is what I think Tim Pool was suggesting in his tweets, rather than defending Laura. She garnered a lot of attention, and even though it was mostly negative it still is a net benefit to her that her name is more well-known, even for the stupidest reasons. In the age of personal branding and celebrity activists, she's now got: more brand recognition, a better reputation with a small but potentially fruitful group of right-wing commentators that she can parlay into more media attention, and a way of keeping her name current on Twitter even when she's banned from it.

Sideshow freaks and loud assholes draw attention, which draws potential revenue streams, which encourages the whole fetid cycle. She looked like a complete moron, but as long as she keeps saying the right things her tribe won't care.
I do think Twitter handled the matter correctly. They didn't give her the attention from them she craved. They just ignored her until she got cold and bored and had to have to cops cut her loose from the door. I think she was hoping she'd be arrested so she could be a free-speech martyr. Instead, all she did was make herself look dumb. Yeah, like you said, she still got her name out there, but she's now "that weird girl who cuffed herself to Twitter HQ" rather than "that brave soul who got arrested trying to hold Twitter accountable for censorship." It's the same principle Russell Greer operates on on. He just wants recognition from the subject of his desires (Taylor Swift in his case), and even negative attention will do at this point, it still means Taylor noticed him. So far it's been radio silence from her camp, which is the correct response. Loony Laura obviously wanted to get the attention of the Twitter higher ups, especially Jack Dorsey and she got nothing except possibly a cold.
 
The door incident? Certainly. The ban? I don't think so.
If she just criticized Islam, then yeah, the ban was unwarranted. They just avoided making a stupid situation utterly ridiculous by not having her arrested. Also, it was a double door and she only cuffed herself to one side of it, so she didn't even impede anyone's entry into the building.
 
As I understand it, she was not banned for merely "criticizing Islam" but for spreading bigoted lies about a politician who happens to be Muslim (falsely claiming he supports FGM, IIRC)-- basically the equivalent of saying "Jimmy Carter supports slavery. Because he's a Christian, and ALL Christians support slavery! Their Bible even orders slaves to obey their masters, you know. That's why it's dangerous and un-American to vote Christians into power."
 
As much I'd love to care that Laura had her precious tweeting rights stomped, I can't be bothered to care . She's just an annoying bitch that never has anything of useful, insightful, funny, or interesting to say. It'd be one thing if you could at least laugh at the stupid pigshit she spews on a near hourly basis, but there's nothing. Not even a laugh. You'd get more value and hear more riveting shit from a mentally ill toddler talking about trains in a department store. Twitter's garbage, but it did the world a great service by flushing her account down the shitter. The moron could just make a sock anyway. God knows people like Laurelai Bailey can keep wishing death upon people, getting banned, and socking without problems.
 
As I understand it, she was not banned for merely "criticizing Islam" but for spreading bigoted lies about a politician who happens to be Muslim (falsely claiming he supports FGM, IIRC)-- basically the equivalent of saying "Jimmy Carter supports slavery. Because he's a Christian, and ALL Christians support slavery! Their Bible even orders slaves to obey their masters, you know. That's why it's dangerous and un-American to vote Christians into power."
It's still pretty stupid to want to ban her. If we start banning everyone who posts bullshit on Twitter, where are we going to get our lulz from?
 
As I understand it, she was not banned for merely "criticizing Islam" but for spreading bigoted lies about a politician who happens to be Muslim (falsely claiming he supports FGM, IIRC)-- basically the equivalent of saying "Jimmy Carter supports slavery. Because he's a Christian, and ALL Christians support slavery! Their Bible even orders slaves to obey their masters, you know. That's why it's dangerous and un-American to vote Christians into power."
They shouldn't be banning people for that either and I'm sure you'll find no shortage of euphoric atheists on the platform saying much more inflammatory stuff that that.
 
God, the best part of that trainwreck of a livestream had to be when she started...arguing? Or something with the black guy, honestly don’t know but she was being so loud and acting like an attention whore that it was just pure entertainment to watch. She tries so hard to be Lauren southern at this point but she’s just a walking disaster, and I can’t wait for her to make a fool out of herself in the future again.
 
They shouldn't be banning people for that either and I'm sure you'll find no shortage of euphoric atheists on the platform saying much more inflammatory stuff that that.

The one complaint Loomer and her friends have which I slightly sympathize with is that Twitter bans people like Loomer, while other people like Louis Farrakhan say things just as bad but are left alone. If I had to guess, I'd say the reason Twitter is banning [some] extremely bigoted accounts is that in light of the rise of open bigotry in American society recently, they don't want to run the risk of future historians looking back and comparing Twitter (and Facebook and other social media) as the early 21st-century social media equivalent of that 1990s Rwandan radio station that goaded the dominant tribe into committing genocide against the minority tribe in that country. And also -- again, just guessing -- the reason for Twitter's double standard where bigots like Loomer get banned while bigots like Farrakhan are tolerated is demographics: Farrakhan is evil, but there is no chance the Nation of Islam will start winning elections and political support to the point where the president of the United States openly sympathizes with nuts who want the US to become a "black ethnostate," or suggests that maybe the government should maintain a "registry" of all Christian citizens. Whereas the current president of the United States did previously float the suggestion of a "Muslim registry," does appear to sympathize with "let's make America a white ethnostate" types, etc.

In the name of consistency, it would be good if Twitter applied the same standards to everyone -- don't let the Farrakhan-types get away with garbage which the Loomer-types are banned over -- but at the same time I can see why they think Farrakhan's bigotry is not a "threat" in the same way that anti-Muslim or anti-non-white bigotry is today.
 
at the same time I can see why they think Farrakhan's bigotry is not a "threat" in the same way that anti-Muslim or anti-non-white bigotry is today

I like the idea behind this, but I don't believe there's that much thought put into their process. To me, it seems like Twitter is floundering through the free speech debate, and getting banned or not banned is less a matter of weighing up effective levels of 'threat' or 'offensiveness', and instead just replying to whoever gets a lot of noise, tempered by who would they get a lot of noise about if they were banned.

So really they're just responding to differing mobs, and whichever one is loudest gets its way. There's probably an ideological aspect to particularly high-profile decisions, as well as a business aspect to, say, whether or not they'd ban Trump - but in general it appears to be entirely reactive to what 'looks good' to the most people.
 
I mean he's not wrong, Loomer is like another Mattress girl. She gets to number #1 on Twitter, but the funny thing is, people are trying to get to Number #1 on Twitter so hard, they forgot to have anything meaningful or intelligent to say when they got there.

And now they simply develop a fanbase because they got to number #1 on Twitter, that's it. It's just how humankind works unfortunately.
The thing is, almost no one ever gets to personally be Twitter #1 for an actually good reason, All social networks are about the superficial, not the nuanced, and Twitter is arguably the worst of them all at this.

A lot of those political slacktivists and grifters add literally nothing to the discussion except inane shrieking and retardation. I don't see why anyone would ever miss Laura Loomer, aside from the hilarity factor.

Also, it was a double door and she only cuffed herself to one side of it, so she didn't even impede anyone's entry into the building.
That is the most hilarious part of all this, everyone literally went on with their lives as normal, but they got to laugh at a chained-up human goop of silicone while they did. :story:
 
That is the most hilarious part of all this, everyone literally went on with their lives as normal, but they got to laugh at a chained-up human goop of silicone while they did. :story:

This is literally why Twitter didn't press charges. They were like "can people still get into the building?" and the police said yes, so Twitter was like "lol, fuck it then, let her be crazy"

Edit:
The left thinks Islam is literally cool. They think it's the best religion ever.

You're right. Everyone on the left, like me, has nothing but the highest opinion of Islam. Inshallah, Akh.

Just like everyone on the right thinks Laura Loomer is a galaxy brain and upstanding first amendment warrior.
 
More attention-whoring allegedly in the works, while Twitter and Facebook executives surely cower in fear of the Loomering threat:

upload_2018-12-3_23-35-2.png
 
Back
Top Bottom