Even all that aside... the sentence structure is just a disaster, what the fuck is this person trying to say here?
It’s the perfect encapsulation of how they argue. It’s a thought and argument terminating cliche. It’s the liberal equivalent of those nork/soviet era newsreader barking about ‘the imperial running dogs of the blah blah will never harm the glorious fatherland.’
Look at it:
1. ‘It sure is wild how’ - set up your audience. I’m about to say something snarky and you need to agree with me. I won’t be giving you any coherent argument, you’ve just got to agree with me so I preface it with this statement. It’s ’it Is a truth universally knowledged’ or a ‘we hold these truths to be self evident’ ’ for redditors
2. The thing I disagree with. Just stating the thing, again not giving you any data just setting it up again for emotion.
3. The audience is stupid if you don’t agree with me
4. Snark, laugh at the stupid people who don’t agree with me.
It’s like how you’d train a dog.
1. Sit Fido! Listen!
2. Here’s the ball! See the ball!
3. Siiiit! Siiit!
4. Bad dog’ don’t fetch until I tell you! (Whack) good boy! Good! Have a treat/dopamine hit
You’ve probably seen the post that explains how shows like Saturday night live etc use this format. It’s repeating thirty second blocks of ‘opinion: that opinion’s stupid Amirite? Laugh at them!’ Again and again. The short format never allows the audience to question, or think and the repeated thought terminating cliches work. You just stop thinking, and clap like a seal.
This is the written equivalent.
There’s a bloke on my team who talks like this. I am having to be very, very careful with my facial expressions.