As you say. You see what you want to see. 

Colin and Greg are known to be mostly Sony centric, and Tim was the third main guy from the cast, and he's openly fanboyish towards Nintendo.

That was 2 out of 3 favoring Sony. With Colin gone, how does it make it more a Sony circle jerk than it was when Colin was a part of it?

You simply don't make sense.

They are still getting 25,000 dollars a month from Patreon. They are doing good

What? KGB? Marxist? Russia? Why is Russia America's bogeyman. Anything bad happens it's Russia's fault. USA should stop blaming Russia for everything, take a look at yourselves and think where you have fine wrong don't put the blame on a concept and yes American perception of Russia is a concept, far removed from reality

It was a womens protest day, so all over the country women where chooseing to not show up for work, to prove how much they matter to the work force.

Collen tweeted "Ah, Peace & Quiet", its kinda a typical mom&dad joke.

You ever watched "Married with children" or a 100 other sitcom tv series, you ve heard it, your mom&dad have probably made it many times too.

So not really offensive at all, from my point of view.

Also Im pretty sure Collen didnt mean for it to be offensive.

What happend is a few SJW didnt like it, and his "team" of co-workers jumped on him, and threw him under the bus.

What was actually offensive to me, was seeing his "friends" and co-workers all attacking him.

I have to explain what I meant since I wasn't talking about "weaponised Marxism," which actually encompasses quite a lot more than what I mean.

What I really mean is something that tends to be referred to as "Cultural Marxism," which is also a misleading term given that Marx didn't really have anything to do with it. However, if Marx lived to see the conclusion of World War I and the Polish-Soviet War, he too would agree with the basic premise.

edit: I found a proper encompassing term for this, and it's "Critical Theory." Now that I think about it, it does fit and is still widely recognised, go figure. Post continues below...

"Cultural Marxism" may be referred to as an implicit admission by some Marxists (this is normally associated with an insititution called the Frankfurt School) that Western Civilisation contains within it institutions (the church, for instance), as well as symbols and such (how do you think were Austria-Hungary the Ottoman Empire still alive by 1914, much less 1917?) that serve to hinder (what was perceived as) the inevitable march of the proletariat to wage revolution by lines of class and perform an overthrow (like that achieved in The Russian Empire). As always, they thought that these were utilised by the Capitalists to maintain hegemony over the general populace.

To follow up on this logic, if communism (the end goal) is to be attained, then these insitutions and symbols and cultural constructs have to be either taken over or undermined. Thus, the weakening of the role of (Christian) religion by any means necessary; the weakening of social mores and kindred ties to those of his own ethnicity, and so on.

This is why I pointed to Antonio Gramsci in particular, and if you haven't read (and understood) his Prison Notebooks in particular, I dare say that you are unenlightened in terms of the Modern Left* movement. This (in part) is why Modern Leftists tend to be as focused on race, religion, sexual identity, etc. as the plight of the working (debt-laden) classes; though, in retrospect, this is also partially due to the fact that the Upper Middle-Class tends to be drawn like in thanks to the fact that the Left is nigh-unassailable on University/College campuses virtually everywhere...

*note - I don't know of a proper enough term for this, so I'd appreciate if someone tells me of one

One last word of note: It thoroughly astounds me to see that Gramsci, despite being one of the most influential Marxist thinkers (at least with respect to how the movement is going in modern times), is practically unheard of. I don't think I've seen his name uttered once before I brought it up, in the past few weeks. Huh.

One more one more note: He said "weaponised form of Marxism," not necessarily "weaponised Marxism." Last time I checked, Form of X != X itself.

I understand that this is satire, but what has gone so wrong with Americans and Marxism? Has anyone even sat down to read Marx seriously or is the general attitude as if he wrote the Satanic Bible?

It bums me out how anxious we seem to be to completely destroy anyone who says something remotely outside of what the most aggressive and emotional members of Twitter currently consider to be acceptable.

While "SJW" are certainly the most active (or perhaps the most successful) in this regard, it works similarly in the reverse as well, I'm just not sure what to call the anti-SJW's. Everyone seems eager to see a person's presence buried and life derailed if they disagree with them.

No such thing as weaponised Marxism - although parts of Marxist thought are militant (eg Althusser's  structural Marxism whose only escape is violent revolution). Have you read Laclau's Hegemony and Socialist Strategy? If you are into Gramsci you are going to find this interesting. Heretical and post-Marxist (and anti-structuralist) but groundbreaking. 

"To follow up on this logic, if communism (the end goal) is to be attained, then these insitutions and symbols and cultural constructs have to be either taken over or undermined. Thus, the weakening of the role of (Christian) religion by any means necessary; the weakening of social mores and kindred ties to those of his own ethnicity, and so on."

This is not Gramsci's war of position. Not all positions are anti-communist. Christianity in particular stands out for its communitarian origins and does not pose a serious challenge to the proletariat.

But anyway, old-school orthodox Marxism is so outdated that we might as well be commenting on 19th century views on women and hysteria. 

Post-structuralism on the other hand...

People really got mad over that harmless joke?