If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above.
You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed.
To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
GEORGE SOROS is invoked for everything, like BEETLEJUICE BEETLEJUICE BEETLEJUICE. People, he's not an all powerful bogeyman behind everything. :eyeroll:
GEORGE SOROS is invoked for everything, like BEETLEJUICE BEETLEJUICE BEETLEJUICE. People, he's not an all powerful bogeyman behind everything. :eyeroll:
You know who would want people to think that? George Soros.
I can't to speak to every action they've ever taken but they exist for a legitimate reason. People who don't acknowledge that, who call them terrorists or just yell "All lives matter" fall on a spectrum where the best you get is 'hugely ignorant'.
I have plenty of more important things to do, if only I could bring myself to do them....
I clearly said in that post and the one previous I don't condone the violence. You're entire reply is a strawman where you read every point or statement as if I'm talking about or advocating violence. Try again.
but I'm also glad there's a group showing up to take a stand against these racist ****s
"be glad they are there taking a stand" is specifically endorsing the violence that occurred, because that's what they went there to do. You're glad they are there taking actions you don't condone?
Originally Posted by dakar
By using 'both sides' rhetoric, you degrade those that stand in opposition to those unamerican ideals to the same level of the nazis, supremacists and nationalists. You must separate condemnation of the act with condemnation of the belief.
So it should just be understood that some violence is ok, because it's being levied at people that are worse than the ones perpetrating the violence? If the belief is what leads to the act, there is no distinction. If the belief that violence is acceptable in these situations, again there is no distinction.
Way to lower your standards. The ends do not justify the means.
I am not glad there are people there escalating the situation. Infact that's the exact opposite of what we want to happen.
Their reporter made a statement about how violent both sides were, but the tweet was quickly scrubbed for some strange reason.
Now let me be unequivocal again. White nationalists have no place in our society or culture. None, whatsoever. Groups that turn a blind eye towards or perpetrate violence themselves have no place in our society either. Those beliefs are not in comparison to one another, nor are they mutually exclusive.
One side espouses racial superiority and/or ethnic or civil homogeneity. The other espouses opposition to fascism, sexism and racism. I don't endorse that they both are prone to violence, but I'm also glad there's a group showing up to take a stand against these racist ****s and letting them know society isn't tacitly behind them.
My observation has been right-wing extremists spew a lot of hateful rhetoric, and many will get violent if they can successfully provoke someone into throwing the first punch. In other words, mostly talking like Nazis.
On the other hand, Antifa are roving bands of masked thugs who beat up their political opponents... that's actually being like Nazis.
Is this what's necessary for society to show tacit rejection?
Someone I talked w/ tonight brought up a great point.
Here's an excellent rule of thumb: If a group hates Jews, blames them for their problems, and/or uses them as a scapegoat for their issues, then they're evil and wrong.
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
Someone I talked w/ tonight brought up a great point.
Here's an excellent rule of thumb: If a group hates Jews, blames them for their problems, and/or uses them as a scapegoat for their issues, then they're evil and wrong.
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
Right, it was Obama's fault that all the racists came crawling out of the woodwork to insult, resist, obstruct and make ridiculous claims about him. How dare he be a black guy.
How are you not too smart to think the way you do about this stuff?
My observation has been right-wing extremists spew a lot of hateful rhetoric, and many will get violent if they can successfully provoke someone into throwing the first punch. In other words, mostly talking like Nazis.
On the other hand, Antifa are roving bands of masked thugs who beat up their political opponents... that's actually being like Nazis.
Is this what's necessary for society to show tacit rejection?
Do you have anything to go by that makes it clear that Antifa are usually the ones throwing the first punch? Its the kind of thing the media would often get wrong even if they were making an effort.
I have plenty of more important things to do, if only I could bring myself to do them....
That so overboard and ridiculous it's actually funny.
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
Try what again? Snopes can't know that. What a load of bullshit. They have no clue what in the past influences future events. Are you trying to say they're Nostradamus?
Hell, Farrakhan's speeches, where he calls for blacks to slaughter police, could just as well be the cause. Most likely, though, it's the combination of it all that's taken racial tensions to the boiling point.
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
Try what again? Snopes can't know that. What a load of bullshit. They have no clue what in the past influences future events. Are you trying to say they're Nostradamus?
Hell, Farrakhan's speeches, where he calls for blacks to slaughter police, could just as well be the cause. Most likely, though, it's the combination of it all that's taken racial tensions to the boiling point.
Did you read the Snopes article? If you did you'd know that what was debunked was the dead cops claim originating from BLM. As far as what inspired what, who knows, but my original motivation behind responding to this was Chongo putting BLM in the same sentence with the KKK and neo-nazis, which is pretty disgusting.
Do you think that BLM is at the same level as the KKK and neo-nazis?
(
Last edited by besson3c; Aug 15, 2017 at 10:10 AM.
)
Well, I see the problem here. I said I didn't know anything about Antifa except some negative buzz on the last page but what you guys are saying is they're way worse than I know.
So let me flesh out the 'take a stand' comment. To me, taking a stand was showing in person, with numbers, and making the opposition be heard.
If what subego says is accurate, and Antifa is incapable of taking a stand without resorting to violence, then I retract my condemnation of their actions and flat out disavow them. What I'm looking for from counter protestors is a symbol of widespread opposition to hate, not opportunistic submission to their violent desires.
Hopefully this puts my previous posts in better context.
Dear Quote Investigator: The famous populist Huey Long and British leader Winston Churchill have both been credited with a bold prediction about political deception. Here are two versions:
When the United States gets fascism, it will call it anti-fascism.
The fascists of the future will be called anti-fascists.
Well, I see the problem here. I said I didn't know anything about Antifa except some negative buzz on the last page but what you guys are saying is they're way worse than I know.
So let me flesh out the 'take a stand' comment. To me, taking a stand was showing in person, with numbers, and making the opposition be heard.
If what subego says is accurate, and Antifa is incapable of taking a stand without resorting to violence, then I retract my condemnation of their actions and flat out disavow them. What I'm looking for from counter protestors is a symbol of widespread opposition to hate, not opportunistic submission to their violent desires.
Hopefully this puts my previous posts in better context.
What group showed up and tried to burn down Berkeley because Milo was going to speak? They weren't there to "counter protest"
Do you have anything to go by that makes it clear that Antifa are usually the ones throwing the first punch? Its the kind of thing the media would often get wrong even if they were making an effort.
I'm only going by my observations, however I'll note the incentive gradients are in opposite directions.
Firstly, these types of rallies are an exercise in free speech, and free speech is often invoked as a defense for reprehensible rhetoric. They throw the first punch, they lose that cover.
Secondly, the optics of Nazi types throwing the first punch are horrible. They know this.
Lastly, they don't wear masks, which means it's far more likely they'll face criminal charges if they throw the first punch.
By contrast, AntiFa...
Is explicitly "**** free speech".
Has better optics... a Nazi gets punched first the instigator is seen as a hero (q.v. Richard Spencer).
Did you read the Snopes article? If you did you'd know that what was debunked was the dead cops claim originating from BLM. As far as what inspired what, who knows, but my original motivation behind responding to this was Chongo putting BLM in the same sentence with the KKK and neo-nazis, which is pretty disgusting.
"In 2014, hetero-patriarchy and anti-Black racism within our movement is real and felt. It’s killing us and it’s killing our potential to build power for transformative social change. When you adopt the work of queer women of color, don’t name or recognize it, and promote it as if it has no history of its own such actions are problematic. When I use Assata’s powerful demand in my organizing work, I always begin by sharing where it comes from, sharing about Assata’s significance to the Black Liberation Movement, what it’s political purpose and message is, and why it’s important in our context."
Please read the entire article, it's a very sobering view on how the upper leadership of BLM views race issues. The typical BLM member has no idea their group is rooted in terrorism, hate, and black supremacy.
Do you think that BLM is at the same level as the KKK and neo-nazis?
On the same level? No, the typical BLM member isn't like a neo-nazi or KKK member. But then, the typical alt-Right person isn't on the same level as a neo-nazi or the KKK either. BLM = alt-Right > Afro-centrists = white nationalists > AntiFa and = neo-nazis. It's all a progression down into a dark, nasty, identitarian rabbit hole, filled with bigots and racists aplenty, on both sides, and they're the ones shoving the pile back and forth.
(
Last edited by Cap'n Tightpants; Aug 15, 2017 at 12:38 PM.
)
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
It's completely irritating because "AntiFa" should apply to me, because I'm anti-fascist.
In a similar vein, "alt-right" should also apply to me because my right-wingedness is pretty alternative to the norm.
Of course, neither term does.
Same here. I'm on the other end of the scale from fascism and pro-individualist, even to a fault, but economically I'm right of center. However, I won't back any group that communicates with violence, racism, or even threats, no matter their perceived effectiveness, because "****ed-up means creates ****ed-up ends".
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
Location: Iowa, how long can this be? Does it really ruin the left column spacing?
Status:
Offline
Aug 15, 2017, 12:34 PM
Originally Posted by Cap'n Tightpants
Please read the entire article, it's a very sobering view on how the upper leadership of BLM views race issues. The typical BLM member has no idea their group is rooted in terrorism, hate, and black supremacy.
Wait - is BLM Black Lives Matter or Black Liberation Movement? I assume the Venn diagram of the two groups has some overlap, but it's not clear which one you're talking about here.
Location: Iowa, how long can this be? Does it really ruin the left column spacing?
Status:
Offline
Aug 15, 2017, 12:36 PM
Originally Posted by Cap'n Tightpants
Same here. I'm on the other end of the scale from fascism and pro-individualist, even to a fault, but economically I'm right of center. However, I won't back any group that communicates with violence, racism, or even threats, no matter their perceived effectiveness, because "****ed-up means creates ****ed-up ends".
Per Spencer's quotes posted on the last page, he firmly believes that his racist movement has Trump's full support. What's your interpretation of that?
Wait - is BLM Black Lives Matter or Black Liberation Movement? I assume the Venn diagram of the two groups has some overlap, but it's not clear which one you're talking about here.
Did you read the first paragraph?
I created #BlackLivesMatter with Patrisse Cullors and Opal Tometi, two of my sisters, as a call to action for Black people after 17-year-old Trayvon Martin was post-humously placed on trial for his own murder and the killer, George Zimmerman, was not held accountable for the crime he committed. It was a response to the anti-Black racism that permeates our society and also, unfortunately, our movements.
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
Per Spencer's quotes posted on the last page, he firmly believes that his racist movement has Trump's full support. What's your interpretation of that?
He's kinda wrong, no? Same with Duke.
Certainly friendlier than other administrations, but "full support"?
Per Spencer's quotes posted on the last page, he firmly believes that his racist movement has Trump's full support. What's your interpretation of that?
He's full of shit and trying to represent support that doesn't exist. Despots like Spencer need to believe they have the approval of authority figures. The editors at The Daily Stormer, and other white nationalists like them, play that game too. Despite Trump having a daughter who openly converted to Judaism.
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
Anyone even remotely equating the Black Lives Matter movement with neo-Nazis and the KKK is quite simply disingenuous at best. From an ideological and historical perspective it's such unmitigated nonsense that it's really not worthy of serious debate. Some around here have a history of misrepresenting what the sources they cite actually say in order to twist them to fit their own narrative. This instance is simply more of the same.
He's full of shit and trying to represent support that doesn't exist. Despots like Spencer need to believe they have the approval of authority figures. The editors at The Daily Stormer, and other white nationalists like them, play that game too. Despite Trump having a daughter who openly converted to Judaism.
Do not forget Ivanka's three children are Jewish as well. Then there is the other target of white power hate, Catholics, which Melania is as are Conway, Bannon, Kelly, Gorka, and others in the inner circle.
Well, I see the problem here. I said I didn't know anything about Antifa except some negative buzz on the last page but what you guys are saying is they're way worse than I know.
So let me flesh out the 'take a stand' comment. To me, taking a stand was showing in person, with numbers, and making the opposition be heard.
If what subego says is accurate, and Antifa is incapable of taking a stand without resorting to violence, then I retract my condemnation of their actions and flat out disavow them. What I'm looking for from counter protestors is a symbol of widespread opposition to hate, not opportunistic submission to their violent desires.
Hopefully this puts my previous posts in better context.
Thank you for the clarification, Dakar. I hope it also gives context to the "both sides" rhetoric I've been using. It's not to compare the left to the white nationalists, but to illustrate that extremists perpetrating violence for whatever reason is not something anyone should support in any capacity.
Trust me when I say these hateful piles of human debris do not represent the right in any capacity, the same way that Antifa's violence does not represent the mainstream left at large.
If you really want to know what the mainstream right is thinking on this, Ben Shapiro had a really good podcast yesterday - I'd suggest you give it a listen, as I would imagine you'll find a great deal of comfort in hearing what the right is actually thinking and advocating right now.
Shapiro is only #2 to Oprah on iTunes podcasts at the moment.
I'm going to edit and clarify my old posts to better represent what I was trying to say, including non Antifa thoughts. Probably won't be coming today. Thanks for your patience.
I'm going to edit and clarify my old posts to better represent what I was trying to say, including non Antifa thoughts. Probably won't be coming today. Thanks for your patience.
of course.
And just so you know, I am glad there are people willing to stand up and be heard in opposition to the white nationalists as well and make it clear we reject their views from our society - in a nonviolent way, of course.. I consider myself one of them. You too, obv.
"Condone" doesn't jibe with "reluctant condemnation", but that's a quibble. I get what you're saying.
It's still not full support though.
I'm not saying his reaction is the same every time. And one can progress from condone to condemn. Isn't that what inadvertently happened to me in this thread?
"Condone" doesn't jibe with "reluctant condemnation", but that's a quibble. I get what you're saying.
It's still not full support though.
Originally Posted by Snow-i
I agree it was not a strong enough condemnation. I attribute that more to incompetence than actually supporting them, but that's just me.
The press was singing quite a different song after the Dallas Police sniper killings.
FLASHBACK: After Black Radical Massacred Dallas Officers, Obama Didn't Condemn Black Racism http://www.dailywire.com/news/19689/...-james-barrett
President Donald Trump is under fire from the left for his initial failure to specifically condemn white supremacy, the KKK, or the violent Alt-Right after a white nationalist drove his car into a group of counter-protesters in Charlotttesville, Virginia on Saturday. Instead of singling out white supremacy, Trump condemned "hatred, bigotry and violence on many sides." But while Democrats and the mainstream media have suggested Trump is tacitly condoning white racists by failing to call them out by name, the reaction from the same folks to President Obama's similar response to the racially motivated Dallas massacre was very different.
In the summer of 2016, at the height of the public outrage over the high-profile police shootings of Alton Sterling and Philando Castile, black nationalist Micah Xavier Johnson took his sniper rifle and shot and killed five Dallas police officers. President Obama's responses to the sequence of events was widely praised by the press.
Responding to the outrage over Sterling and Castile, President Obama said their deaths were "not isolated incidents" but were "symptomatic" of a criminal justice system plagued by "racial disparities." That evening, during a Black Lives Matter rally, Johnson opened fire on Dallas police officers, shooting a dozen officers, five of whom died from their wounds. Before the police were forced to shoot him dead, he told them that he was deliberately targeting "white people, especially white officers" and that the Black Lives Matter movement had inspired his actions.
"The suspect said he was upset about Black Lives Matter; he said he was upset about the recent police shootings. The suspect said he was upset at white people. The suspect stated he wanted to kill white people, especially white officers," Dallas Police Chief David Brown told reporters.
In his initial response, Obama, like Trump, did not single out black nationalists or the movement associated with the heinous act. Instead, Obama said that he was "horrified" by the "vicious, calculated and despicable attack on law enforcement."
"There is no possible justification for these kinds of attacks or any violence against law enforcement," said Obama. "Anyone involved in the senseless murders will be held fully accountable. Justice will be done."
Obama also used the moment as an opportunity to push for more gun control. "Today is a wrenching reminder of the sacrifices they make for us," Obama said of police officers. "We also know when people are armed with powerful weapons, unfortunately, it makes attacks like these more deadly and more tragic."
(Then-presidential candidate Trump did not mention black racists or BLM in his initial statement to the massacre either, tweeting instead, "Prayers and condolences to all of the families who are so thoroughly devastated by the horrors we are all watching take place in our country." In other words, he handled it similarly to the white supremacist terror attack in Charlottesville. As for presidential candidate Hillary Clinton, she also did not specifically mention the racial movement in her response; in fact, she made sure to include the phrase "peaceful protesters" as a nod to Black Lives Matter activists, tweeting, "I mourn for the officers shot while doing their sacred duty to protect peaceful protesters, for their families & all who serve with them. -H.")
When Obama was given more time to address the Dallas massacre at the funeral of the five officers, he not only did not condemn black nationalists or radical Black Lives Matter activists, he used the platform as a way to double down on his gun control agenda, reiterate his claim that systemic racism plagues the criminal justice system, and push for more public investment in minority communities and schools. The media largely fawned over the "Lincolnesque" speech. A few excerpts from his highly political remarks:
"I understand how Americans are feeling. But I'm here to insist that we are not as divided as we seem. And I know that because I know America.
"Centuries of racial discrimination didn't simply vanish with the end of lawful segregation. We know it. Although most of us do our best to guard against it, none of us is entirely innocent. No institution is entirely immune. That includes our police departments. We know this.
"Also, as a society, we choose to underinvest in decent schools.
"We allow poverty to fester so that entire neighborhoods offer no prospect for gainful employment.
"We refuse to fund drug treatment and mental health programs.
"We flood communities with so many guns that it is easier for a teenager to buy a Glock than get his hands on a computer or even a book.
"And then we feign surprise when, periodically, the tensions boil over.
On Monday, after being hammered for his initial response, Trump again addressed the heinous attack in Charlottesville, this time condemning white supremacists groups by name:
Racism is evil. And those who cause violence in its name are criminals and thugs, including the KKK, neo Nazis, white supremacists and other hate groups that are repugnant to everything we hold dear as Americans. We are a nation founded on the truth that all of us are created equal. We are equal in the eyes of our Creator. We are equal under the law. And we are equal under our Constitution. Those who spread violence in the name of bigotry strike at the very core of America.