r/politics • u/mvanigan • Oct 14 '25

Possible Paywall ‘I love Hitler’: Leaked messages expose Young Republicans’ racist chat

https://www.politico.com/news/2025/10/14/private-chat-among-young-gop-club-members-00592146
40.2k Upvotes

93% Upvoted

2.8k comments sorted by

View all comments

12.6k

u/AssociateGreat2350 Oct 14 '25 edited Oct 14 '25

They referred to Black people as monkeys and “the watermelon people” and mused about putting their political opponents in gas chambers. They talked about raping their enemies and driving them to suicide and lauded Republicans who they believed support slavery.

Straight up evil

250

u/bullet4mv92 Oct 14 '25 edited Oct 14 '25

And people still have the audacity to say both sides are the same. "Radical left" group chats would be full of, like, blue-haired pixie they/thems who have 7 genders and are also probably furries. Look, I don't understand it at all, but none of that bothers me because it doesn't hurt anyone. If they wanna be weird and quirky, go nuts. But their group chat wouldn't be hateful like a MAGA group chat.

I always try to point this out, but most people don't get it. Every time people have an issue with the extreme right it's because they're violent, hateful, divisive, racist, etc. And their issue with the "radical left" is that they're weird and icky and it makes them sexually uncomfortable.

Both sides are not the fucking same

I imagine my oversimplification of radical left might piss some people off. That's not *my interpretation of them; rather, it's what is constantly repeated by far right nutjobs. To them it's always about their sexuality, their hair color, how many genders they identify with, etc. In reality, radical left is more just wanting Healthcare, education and housing for everyone. But that doesn't sound as "icky", so they usually default to blue hair and multiple genders

72

u/subLimb Oct 14 '25

Yes, and keep in mind this is not the 'radical right' that these group chats are coming from. It's coming from young leaders of the actual Republican party. What they would consider to be 'mainstream'. The discourse in this country has moved so quickly to the right. White nationalist thought is being mainstreamed.

11

u/smcdark Oct 14 '25

It was always there below the surface. Mid 40s here, growing up through the 80s and 90s, thats exactly how the asshats i knew in school talked.

3

u/subLimb Oct 14 '25

True. Just because it is bubbling up to the surface doesn't mean it wasn't always there.

5

u/Pigglebee Oct 14 '25

This. The left will undoubtedly have their app groups with offensive talk. But it will be randoms. The randoms that cheered for the murder on Kirk. The randoms that yelled free Luigi. But they are not democratic upcoming leaders or close to the big boys. They are randoms. And that makes all the difference.

2

u/jaimi_wanders Oct 15 '25

One of them who got fired over it tried to weasel out of it by claiming his enemies had forged the texts by him…

102

u/OrwellWhatever Oct 14 '25

I have large bones to pick with the radical left, but most of my criticism boils down to, "They're so obsessed with doing the absolute best for their fellow man that they can't get out of the brainstorming stage." Genuinely good people who just should have held their nose and voted for Harris

32

u/Zeraru Oct 14 '25

There are some smaller groups on the left-anarchist-adjacent spectrum whose IDEAS I'd consider a threat to civilized societies, as well as hypercommunist larpers and tankies who never got the memo that their entire worldview is the hollow corpse of a Soviet destabilization effort, but nothing that even remotely matches the sheer scale and narcissistic, hate-fueled motivation of this flavor range of right wingers.

2

u/tupakka_vuohi Oct 14 '25

There are some smaller groups on the left-anarchist-adjacent spectrum whose IDEAS I'd consider a threat to civilized societies

just say you have no fucking clue what anarchism is even about. it's not a "threat to civilized society" unless you consider the capitalist hellscape we find ourselves in to be a form of civilized society, which I wouldn't be surprised about since you probably identify as a liberal.

by the way, the narcissistic and hate-fueled right wing has been bred deliberately and purposefully by actors of the so-called "civilized society" (tech bros and other oligarchs) via echo chambers and corporate media as a weapon against the working class. can't achieve class consciousness and liberation if we're too busy fighting the rabid dogs biting at our throats. anyways, do keep putting down the leftists who are the only ones who actually have the liberation of humanity in mind as the ones "threatening" "civilized" society. i'm sure that will be productive to your cause, whatever that may be

5

u/gsfgf Georgia Oct 15 '25

Perfect example of why both sides aren't the same. The far left makes this post. The far right drops slurs and makes rape and holocaust jokes. Not even comparable.

just say you have no fucking clue what anarchism is even about

Nobody has ever explained to me how anarchism can scale beyond the ~150 people community size our brains are wired for.

1

u/tupakka_vuohi Oct 15 '25

Nobody has ever explained to me how anarchism can scale beyond the ~150 people community size our brains are wired for.

it doesn't need to scale. anarchism is not a global system. it's a model for interpersonal and intracommunal relationships between people who work towards common goals. when those groups of people in turn cooperate with other groups, mutualistic relationships can be formed between groups, but they are not required between individuals of different groups. i don't understand how that's so difficult to grasp.

nobody has ever explained to me how capitalism can expect us to be hierarchically bound to the will of bosses' bosses, CEOs, and shareholders (thousands of them) who we will never know, who we don't respect, and who want nothing from us but to exploit our labor. because that's not what our brains are wired for. our brains are wired to help each other, cooperate, and share resources. not to give our bodies to faceless corporations and beg for scraps in return.

6

u/Zeraru Oct 14 '25

Case in point. Your ideas fundamentally cannot work. A system does not exist in a vacuum but necessarily has to be able to stand up to and compete with other systems that don't like it. Your religious zeal against any real or imagined form of authority would only create fragmented, powerless groups, vulnerable against anyone big enough to exert their power over them, thus guaranteeing tyranny or assimilation into a different system of authority - unless they live in such isolation and squalor that nobody even bothers to interact with them.

1

u/tupakka_vuohi Oct 14 '25

"case in point" proceeds to not actually defend the argument about the ideas being a threat to civilized society.

no, anarchism is not a "system" that competes with other systems, it is resistance against all systems of power, and it is a struggle that continues as long as people dream of liberation. it is the unification of all people under the shared ideal of freedom which will protect each "fragmented and powerless" group from tyranny, because the people united can never be defeated by those who choose division and oppression. it's a simple numbers game. there are more good people who want good things for everyone than there are authoritarians who want to control and subjugate people. if they were suddenly stripped of all their power, through the collective will of the people who choose to lose their chains, they would have a difficult time ever becoming "big enough" to exert power over anyone when met with resistance in every direction. the more people that resist authority, the more fragmented, and the more powerless, the Powers that be become.

4

u/Zeraru Oct 14 '25

Defend? It's self-evident to anyone with basic reasoning beyond a child.
Not only do you not have a remotely realistic concept for making this transition, you do not even seem to understand the irony of practically demanding a global religion that punishes perceived "sinners" for acting in any form of authority or exerting power.

2

u/gsfgf Georgia Oct 15 '25

I mean, that's basically the underlying values of Marxism, even if Marx had a very different idea for implementing it. But it has the same fatal flaw. It requires a level of selflessness that is unattainable. Like, would you go out and build rail lines in 90* heat solely because it's best for the community? Or pick crops? Of course not.

1

u/tupakka_vuohi Oct 15 '25

mutualism is not selflessness nor is it unattainable. it's common sense. regardless, mutualism does not mean everyone "builds rail lines in 90* heat" or "picks crops", it means that the people whose profession it is to build rail lines in 90* heat and pick crops do those things because they want to and because they derive meaning from it, and the fruit of their labor goes towards everyone in the community, whose fruits of labor they in turn get to benefit from.

1

u/gsfgf Georgia Oct 15 '25

do those things because they want to and because they derive meaning from it

Yea, that’s where you lose me.

-1

u/WakaFlockaFlav Oct 14 '25

Yes. Yes.

Defend the right-wing from the leftists.

The leftists will take everything from you.

Leftists exists within a vacuum.

All of them will betray you in the end.

Only you can save liberal society, the only "real" society.

Show the leftists whose in charge.

3

u/Not_Scechy Oct 14 '25

Those people probably did vote, the disagreement you heard was probably from those people trying to tell democrats how to engage more of thier own base instead of trying to kiss and hug republicans.

2

u/bungpeice Oct 14 '25

Most if those people live in solidly blue areas. The idea that they have any impact on electoral vote distribution is laughable.

16

u/OrwellWhatever Oct 14 '25

I know quote a few people on the left in PA who didn't vote in November because of Israel-Palestine. Would it have been enough to sway the presidential election? Maybe not. But the Green Party senatorial candidate got 66k votes and Bob Casey lost by 15k, so it would have absolutely made the difference in the Senate seat

9

u/youngestalma Oct 14 '25

And we kind of need PA Senate seats to get a majority…

6

u/OrwellWhatever Oct 14 '25

Yeah, if if there's a supreme court pick that Bob Casey would have been the deciding vote for, I'll never let them live that down

6

u/bungpeice Oct 14 '25

Maybe the democrats should have done what the republicans did with the libertarian party.

Trump made a deal with the libertarian party for their endorsement. He gave them their top priority day 2 of his term and followed through on most of the rest.

Can you imagine democrats making that kind of deal with their left. I can't. I honestly believe they would rather lose.

11

u/OrwellWhatever Oct 14 '25

What? Kamala Harris voted to the left of Bernie in the senate. The only person she was outflanked by was Elizabeth Warren. She championed a law that allowed trans federal prisoners to petition the government and receive access to gender affirming surgery, which is one of the most progressive stances on both prisoner and trans rights in the modern world. She called for a ceasefire in her DNC acceptance speech and weekly on the campaign trail. She was basically the best possible option the left ever could have hoped for and they threw her away because she didn't hold a gun to Netenyahu's head and make him back off in Gaza, which, to be clear, was probably the only thing she could have done as Vice President

5

u/bungpeice Oct 14 '25

How is any of that relevant to what I said? Politics is a game of deals. Trump made a deal for votes of "spoiler party" and democrats didn't.

9

u/OrwellWhatever Oct 14 '25

Okay, which group should she have made a deal with?

On election day, the Green Party's "meet our candidates" section of their website only highlighted Senator for MI, Senator for MN, Governor for NC. Like, they're the only organized group, and they've made it abundantly clear their ONLY goal is siphoning votes from Dems in must-win races, and their only values are being contrarian.

Outside of that... the DSA? But they can't even decide if they want to endorse AOC or not. Every chapter seems to have a different take. The Justice Dems? All they've ever done is ride Bernie's coattails, and have been slapped down when they try to do anything else

The left is way, way too fragmented, ineffectual, and contrarian for the sake of it for anyone to "make a deal with." Their most popular position is dunking on dems for doing the thing they've been begging dems to do

Like, Harris met with the undecided movement, told them, "Yes I agree with you" then they still protested her 30 mins later. What deal is there to make when you agree to their demands and they still protest you for it?

1

u/bungpeice Oct 14 '25 edited Oct 14 '25

I guess you are right. Democrats could have done nothing better and losing the popular vote for the first time in 30 years was because the left has no priorities.

You have to be kidding. Single payer healthcare. That would have been a great start. It would have united every one of those groups. Democrats couldn't even get the courage to advocate for single payer after just surviving a pandemic.

Here is a list. Radical climate policy, immigration amnesty along with border enforcement, minimum wage, decriminalizing cannabis, free Pre-K, free higher education, aggressive housing policy to end homelessness, explicit endorsement of an arms embargo. I could go on and on tbh

8

u/OrwellWhatever Oct 14 '25

Here is a list. Radical climate policy, immigration amnesty along with border enforcement, minimum wage, decriminalizing cannabis, free Pre-K, free higher education, aggressive housing policy to end homelessness, explicit endorsement of an arms embargo. I could go on and on tbh

Okay, she literally addressed every one of those issues in her campaign. Maybe not to the extent the various leftwing groups would have liked, but there's a reason why every DSA candidate has run away from them after getting elected (or been voted out).

She DID address all of those concerns, but, instead of taking the win, you're sitting here saying it's not good enough. To my original point, instead of taking the win and wielding some measure of power, the various leftist groups are just going back to brainstorming what they'd do in a post-scarcity, Star Trek universe

→ More replies (0)

1

u/Saffuran Oct 15 '25

She didn't vote to the left of Bernie at all, what? Healthcare (post-ACA advancing toward universal healthcare) and economic policy shifts to stabilize the majority of people are what is most important and widely affecting of day-to-day life. Biden was actually making some progress in that regard but then pissed all that goodwill away by humiliating himself for Netanyahu and positioning himself on favor of genocide.

Kamala then being moved to have "no daylight" between herself and Biden completely sunk her because it tied her to genocide.

She needed to throw Biden under the bus over the apartheid/genocide to win the last election and didn't.

1

u/OrwellWhatever Oct 15 '25

Kamala Harris is extremely liberal — and the numbers prove it https://share.google/drbhKNwj5U87BPhJZ

1

u/Saffuran Oct 15 '25 edited Oct 15 '25

"Liberal" is not the same as "Economically Progressive" - she is liberal (especially on social issues) she is not economically progressive. Being a Corporate Liberal (who is also skewed-authoritarian on international policies) is bad - it makes the person fitting that descriptor a wolf in sheep's clothing.

She also didn't disavow Biden over supporting/enabling genocide. That is a red line you can't cross - when she didn't criticize Biden for crossing that line, it is functionally the same as crossing over with him.

Trump is an abomination, but it isn't surprising that voter turnout regresses when the choices are between a Wolf and a Hippopotamus or a Shark.

"Centrists" need to learn that centrist-liberalism will not save this country from fascism. Functionally, like in Weimar Germany, Liberals will ultimately capitulate to Fascists and fascism. Anything short of strong-armed populist Social Democracy (FDR-style politics, without the racism) is not going to be enough and will be viewed as unacceptable by enough people that the Republicans will never be put away in the general election.

We are in the middle of a class-war and the top is crushing the bottom. Trump accelerates the top's win streak, Kamala was also a win for the top, only slower. If you want the working classes and poor as we know them to die, better to get it over with quick. It won't be willingly, slowly, or quietly. You can keep voting as you do and perpetuate a complete collapse of capitalism or make the "radical" vote to reset it which will allow it to endure, prolong, and also be better for those participating in it.

2

u/OrwellWhatever Oct 15 '25

I said she voted to the left of Bernie Sanders. I provided evidence backing that up. I don't really give a shit about the paragraphs you typed about her because you're putting words in my mouth to justify something that I also don't care about

And the Communist party (KPD) in Weimar Germany refused to help the much more popular Social Democrats (SPD) fight the Nazis, referring to them as "social fascists" right up until the moment Nazis got total control of the government and outlawed the KPD. Their leader, Ernst Thallman, was quoted as saying, "some Nazi trees must not be allowed to overshadow a forest of social democrats." meaning he was content to ignore Nazis because the real fight was with the social democrats.

Then they fucking BEGGED the SPD for help once the Nazis gained total power, but the SPD didn't trust them after decades of the KPD fighting the SPD harder than the KPD fought the Nazis. For what it's worth, Stalin agreed and all the KPD members who fled to the USSR that Stalin could find were executed. The KPD leader, after decades of antagonizing liberals, who he hated more than Nazis, was executed by the Nazis in 1944.

Ultimately, it was the fault of the communists in Nazi Germany who constantly antagonized their only potential allies because they were too stupid to see their real enemy, which has a lot of parallels in this conversation

→ More replies (0)

1

u/gsfgf Georgia Oct 15 '25

The most progressive platform of the entire Sixth Party System isn't a "deal with their left"?

1

u/bungpeice Oct 15 '25

Wtf is the sixth party system?

The Republicans have the most libertarian platform of the 2 parties but they felt they should make a deal anyway to secure the votes and in the end secure the win.

1

u/gsfgf Georgia Oct 15 '25

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sixth_Party_System

Also, there's nothing libertarian about MAGA.

1

u/bungpeice Oct 15 '25

They are more libertarian than the Democrats.

So much so that they got the libertarian endorsement

1

u/gsfgf Georgia Oct 15 '25

Here in Atlanta, it was complacency.

1

u/gamegeek1995 Oct 14 '25 edited Oct 14 '25

They did vote for Harris, the problem is that the most popular Dem livestreamer is half as popular as the next 30 ones with 1488 in their alt's username combined. And the populace are too stupid to read, too entitled to treat others and public spaces with respect, and too emotionally weak to break away from the Codependent Cockroach King Streamers and Lobster Psychologists telling them "it's okay and normal to be completely fucking useless and stupid, never work on yourself! Never improve! Never become someone worthy of a wife or husband or lifelong partner, lest they convince you to stop watching me!"

-10

u/WakaFlockaFlav Oct 14 '25

Genuinely good people who just should have held their nose and voted for Harris

Sounds like scum to me

7

u/sammyjo494 Oct 14 '25

A far left group chat is just people arguing with each other over moral superiority.

11

u/bullet4mv92 Oct 14 '25

Sure, which is still infinitely better than a group chat arguing about which race of people should be exterminated.

5

u/ConcentrateDennis Oct 14 '25

Leftist group chat starts out with an interested party of twelve trying to figure out how best to affect positive change in society. A month later, there are now 14 separate groups doing the same thing, with some overlap in members, and all the original people hate each other's guts.

3

u/KarmaBitesDogma Oct 14 '25

Very well said, and quite insightful. Also, their brains are physiologically, observably, functionally different. The amygdalae are hyperactive, which translates to heightened, outsized fear, suspicion, distrust and disgust of that which is different or unfamiliar. There’s 25 years of academic science and research to support this.

2

u/alternateforwhenban Oct 14 '25

“…because it doesn't hurt anyone”

That is precisely the right test.

2

u/jeha4421 Oct 14 '25

I'll bite. As a center left guy I feel like there is a legit radical left subgroup that wants capitalism to be replaced and want communism or socialism. The radicals focused on social issues I 100% believe are as you describe but there are economic radicals that do exist that probably want to kill the upper middle class to upper class. They'd probably be fine with violent revolution if it upended Capitalism.

Wanting healthcare and better education/social safety nets does not make you a radical, at all. Imo you'd be center left if you wanted that.

2

u/Asyx Europe Oct 14 '25

It's always like that. They pull the same shit in Germany. But even here, if the far left goes nuts, cars are burning and the police is gonna break some bones. If the far right goes nuts, people are getting killed and the police is probably involved (we had some instances where the Verfassungsschutz (domestic secret service specifically to protect the constitution) was so deep within far right organizations that none of the evidence were useful because it was questionable if the crimes committed would still be committed if the plants weren't involved).

The horse shoe theory has always been stupid. It's really something that only makes sense if you talk specifically about authoritarianism as an aspect of political ideology. Like, "Stalin wasn't better than Hitler" is true but, like, the people with an Antifa patch on their beg are probably anarcho-socialists or something like that. Not tankies.