Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

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.

You are here: MacNN Forums > Community > MacNN Lounge > Political/War Lounge > Charlottesville

Charlottesville (Page 7)
Thread Tools
OreoCookie
Moderator
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Hilbert space
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 18, 2017, 08:11 PM
 
Originally Posted by Snow-i View Post
This is great and all, but why do violent and hateful groups need to be compared to be condemned? In what strange world in the condemnation of violent extremists qualified this way? Or are you saying the hyperpartisanship we are experience justifies all that.
In my opinion it is not a case of hyperpartisanship, Trump is intertwined with these groups because at the very least he is willing to accept their support. And that's a kind way to say it. Each part of the political spectrum has to find ways to deal with its own extremists and it is always easier to criticize the inadequacies (real or imagined) of “the other side's” way to deal with their flavor rather than keep the daemons on “your” side in check. If you see yourself on the right of the political spectrum, in my opinion you should focus on the part that you can influence.
Originally Posted by Snow-i View Post
This is my point, ya'll are so caught up with comparing them for whatever reason to the point that it has an appearance of you being unwilling to condemn the violence of AntiFa, who have been violent before at many events having nothing to do with White Nationalists or the KKK.
Don't put me in the same bucket, I was responding to people who brought the antifa into the discussion in a bout of what-about-ism.
Originally Posted by Snow-i View Post
And you see left wing websites praising Antifa and comparing them to the DDay invasion. I don't get how any of that makes my statements worthy of admonishment.
Please don't lump people together, there is no such thing as “the Left”. I certainly made no such comparison nor would I make it.
Originally Posted by Snow-i View Post
And historically, how has that worked out? Seriously, go look it up.
I'm German, you don't have to teach me about Nazis. And yes, it has worked out well in post-WW2 Western Germany where there was an honest effort to confront the demons of its past, based on scientifically sourced historical evidence. In communist Eastern Germany, one sort of propaganda was replaced by another, and when I moved to Eastern Germany after the reunification, I was shocked by the level of both, right- and left-wing extremism there. I had never experienced something like that where class mates freely listened to right-wing rock and nobody took offense. (Fortunately, my family moved away again after three years.) Currently, I live in a country (Japan) that has not done that, where the shameful parts of Japanese history are swept under the rug, and there is a resurgence of the extreme right-wing. It is a country where the Deputy Prime Minister suggests that Japan models its constitutional reforms after Nazi Germany.

So I know the difference between sweeping them under the rug as well as not confronting the underlying issues and exposing these people and their ideologies to daylight, especially when it comes to right-wing extremism. It has worked (even if all the efforts were imperfect), but we still have ways to go. Society has to exorcise its demons of the past and present.

I take your point, though, that we should be careful not to give them a platform to spread their hate, and I'll have a discussion about these nuances any day. However, I don't see that being the case here.
I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every minute of it.
     
Snow-i
Professional Poster
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Maryland
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 18, 2017, 08:17 PM
 
Originally Posted by besson3c View Post
I forgot to respond to your earlier response where you agreed with my summation. Thanks for that! We are obviously on the same page.

I don't really know what this thread is about any longer, other than I guess how easily these conversations can be misconstrued and how delicate they can become?
It is certainly a lesson in that.

I don't think anybody here really disagrees with the idea that nobody here believes that the concept of protesting the KKK/NNs is equivalent to Antifa, but Antifa in particular has made enough noise that they shouldn't be ignored completely.
Very true. Keep protesting the KKK! Let's just do it within the American value system - peacefully and united in our condemnation and rejection of their hatred.
I think we also all agree that the lead story here was the original KKK/NN rally given its size, organization, focus, fervor, and symbolism/significance in terms of what it means to have this sort of ideological belief/hatred running amok in the country. Again, if the point is that in addition Antifa should not be ignored, what else is there to say about all of this?
I think there's a lot more to say, specifically around finding ways to undermine the WNists without having to resort to violence or mob rule. We've got to take a rational approach, else we are just giving them exactly what they want. In doing so, we can prove we are immune to their provocations. These groups are merely a few thousand strong, vs the voice of a 330 million person country. If we could unite that voice against them, even if it is through silence, we are keeping them from reaching their objectives.

These are just my thoughts on it, and I'm certainly open to other methods.

Maybe I'm just getting impatient. I'd much rather talk about the underlying trends of racism and hatred rather than just doing a postmortem of Charlottesville events, especially since it seems like this thread has just become our signature MacNN bickering.
I agree this thread has become somewhat bickery, but to me all is not lost. Some of our most productive threads started out as bickerfests until enough rationality broke through the bickering and productive discourse took it's place (i'm not saying ALL our threads, but some ).

I think Charlottesville offers us insight towards the most effective ways to reach our goals, or at least a use-case for those methods. It's an imperative that we overcome the hysteria however and approach this with care, thought, and diligence for the above reasoning. Escalating the situation and giving airtime to the KKK on the national stage is highly undesirable IMO, as we give them a method and stage in speaking to the mainstream. Then again, as Dakar cited, sunlight is the best disinfectant, so there's definitely an argument for allowing them to do just that. I don't want to claim to have the answers, just some suggestions that I hope can spur more constructive discussion.
     
OreoCookie
Moderator
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Hilbert space
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 18, 2017, 08:21 PM
 
Originally Posted by Snow-i View Post
It's part of a concentrated effort by both sides to assign labels to everyone. In this new world, you can either be extreme left or extreme right. In the media's eyes, there no such thing as a moderate anymore. Moderate viewpoints just don't generate as much revenue.
This is a good and important point, and contributes. I come from a country that doesn't have a “pundit” culture, and I am amazed by the commentary-to-news ratio, and the need of many commentators to clearly identify with one of exactly two camps. Perhaps it is because in most European countries there are more than two parties in parliament (so that things are no longer binary), but I find that disturbing.
Originally Posted by Snow-i View Post
What's funny about it is that by labeling and grouping people as extremists, you're actually driving more and more extremism. It is the death of intelligent and honest discourse in politics.
I'm not sure it actually does, I think it just creates the illusion that this is so. All of the discussion of the antifa lets us forget about counter-protestors who had every intention of making their point peacefully — and I don't think they have moved anywhere closer to actual extremism.
Originally Posted by Snow-i View Post
I'm not sure everyone needs to fit neatly into any category. Doing so drowns out people's actual views, and replaces those views with an NFL-esque "root for the home team no matter what".
I would go further and say that no one fits neatly into these two imagined categories, and the attempt to do so is what is at fault. You are right that the media is playing into this, but on the other hand, they are doing that because there is a market — i. e. people tune in to listen to polarizing content.
I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every minute of it.
     
Snow-i
Professional Poster
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Maryland
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 18, 2017, 08:40 PM
 
Originally Posted by OreoCookie View Post
In my opinion it is not a case of hyperpartisanship, Trump is intertwined with these groups because at the very least he is willing to accept their support. And that's a kind way to say it. Each part of the political spectrum has to find ways to deal with its own extremists and it is always easier to criticize the inadequacies (real or imagined) of “the other side's” way to deal with their flavor rather than keep the daemons on “your” side in check. If you see yourself on the right of the political spectrum, in my opinion you should focus on the part that you can influence.
This is where I get a bit lost. I see what you're saying, but Trump has specifically condemned them. I don't see him as all that accepting of their support. Enabling? - Dakar and Subego had a really good exchange on this that I agree with. Please don't think I'm defending Trump here either, just trying to call it like I see it.

Don't put me in the same bucket, I was responding to people who brought the antifa into the discussion in a bout of what-about-ism.
You're right, my apologies. I meant the ya'll more generally, but I was certainly feeling generally attacked in writing that and should have chosen my words more carefully.

Please don't lump people together, there is no such thing as “the Left”. I certainly made no such comparison nor would I make it.
Well, I definitely don't agree there's no such thing as the left or right, but that's another debate. Definitely not suggesting you made that comparison, just trying to give context on my statements and why they included the pieces that they did. Sometimes in these discussions it is difficult to give the proper context to specific statements when engaging 1 on 1 with multiple posters.

I'm German, you don't have to teach me about Nazis. And yes, it has worked out well in post-WW2 Western Germany where there was an honest effort to confront the demons of its past, based on scientifically sourced historical evidence.
Using violent mobs? What you're saying there is exactly what I'm advocating for. I'm advocating against using violent mobs and referring to that as the strategy which makes things worse. I'm certainly not saying we shouldn't oppose them - just that we cannot sacrifice our values in the process by condoning, justifying, or even looking the other way at violent mobs showing up in force. Would you agree?
In communist Eastern Germany, one sort of propaganda was replaced by another, and when I moved to Eastern Germany after the reunification, I was shocked by the level of both, right- and left-wing extremism there. I had never experienced something like that where class mates freely listened to right-wing rock and nobody took offense. (Fortunately, my family moved away again after three years.) Currently, I live in a country (Japan) that has not done that, where the shameful parts of Japanese history are swept under the rug, and there is a resurgence of the extreme right-wing. It is a country where the Deputy Prime Minister suggests that Japan models its constitutional reforms after Nazi Germany.
By all means I am not suggesting we do nothing about it - I am suggesting that violent mobs are absolutely not the solution and counter to our aims - that's all. The methods you speak of, however, are certainly worth pursuing (save for the whole hate speech law - doesn't jive with the 1A).
So I know the difference between sweeping them under the rug as well as not confronting the underlying issues and exposing these people and their ideologies to daylight, especially when it comes to right-wing extremism. It has worked (even if all the efforts were imperfect), but we still have ways to go. Society has to exorcise its demons of the past and present.
Absolutely agreed. We will only create more demons, however, if that exorcism consists of sending violent mobs against them. Of course we will never execute our strategies perfectly, but I think it remains important above all else that we do not lower our standards and degrade the pillars of our society just because they are extra, super sprinkles on top evil.

Would you agree with this?

I take your point, though, that we should be careful not to give them a platform to spread their hate, and I'll have a discussion about these nuances any day. However, I don't see that being the case here.
I make that point also understanding that there could be other (nonviolent, of course) ways that are more effective. I am here precisely so that we can talk about them. I think that is the case here, only because they can point to the videos of the violence and spin it to their advantage for those susceptible to following in their path.
     
Snow-i
Professional Poster
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Maryland
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 18, 2017, 08:47 PM
 
Originally Posted by OreoCookie View Post
This is a good and important point, and contributes. I come from a country that doesn't have a “pundit” culture, and I am amazed by the commentary-to-news ratio, and the need of many commentators to clearly identify with one of exactly two camps. Perhaps it is because in most European countries there are more than two parties in parliament (so that things are no longer binary), but I find that disturbing.
So do I, and I'm at a loss as to what could possibly be done about it.

I'm not sure it actually does, I think it just creates the illusion that this is so. All of the discussion of the antifa lets us forget about counter-protestors who had every intention of making their point peacefully — and I don't think they have moved anywhere closer to actual extremism.
Well for one, no one is talking about the peaceful protesters. So at the very least, they've been drowned out. It's not about recruiting at the event, it's about the messages they could spin post-facto to recruit.

I would go further and say that no one fits neatly into these two imagined categories, and the attempt to do so is what is at fault. You are right that the media is playing into this, but on the other hand, they are doing that because there is a market — i. e. people tune in to listen to polarizing content.
Very good points indeed. I agree with your assessments.
     
Snow-i
Professional Poster
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Maryland
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 18, 2017, 08:54 PM
 
Originally Posted by Paco500 View Post
See below for literally the very first post I wrote about my feelings about the events of that day. And it was written as a direct response to you, so I have to assume you saw it. Quoted in full, with some relevant points in bold.

No teeth were pulled.
You're right. I was feeling attacked and that was not a fair thing for me to say in the least.


I suppose it's too much to hope you will apologise for mischaracterising my comments and views once again.
Not too much at all, Paco - I am happy to admit where I am demonstrably wrong. I apologize. I got carried away and did to you precisely what I accused you of doing to me.
     
Snow-i
Professional Poster
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Maryland
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 18, 2017, 09:04 PM
 
So can we all agree?

White nationalists are to be opposed vehemently AND (not but ) we ought to do it without resorting to violence.
     
besson3c
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 18, 2017, 09:05 PM
 
MacNN needs more hugs.
     
besson3c
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 18, 2017, 09:23 PM
 
Okay, this Tina Fey sheet cake video is pretty funny... Can we mostly agree on this?

https://www.facebook.com/OccupyDemoc...ejD_wK4qRVdOMk
     
besson3c
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 18, 2017, 09:26 PM
 
Originally Posted by besson3c View Post
Okay, this Tina Fey sheet cake video is pretty funny... Can we mostly agree on this?

https://www.facebook.com/OccupyDemoc...ejD_wK4qRVdOMk
I know this video is going to make some of you grumpy, but "who drove the car into the crowd, Hillary's emails?" made me LOL.
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 18, 2017, 09:27 PM
 
Does anyone know why they prematurely SNLed?
     
Cap'n Tightpants
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Shaddim's sock drawer
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Yesterday, 03:52 AM
 
Originally Posted by Snow-i View Post
Well for one, no one is talking about the peaceful protesters. So at the very least, they've been drowned out. It's not about recruiting at the event, it's about the messages they could spin post-facto to recruit.
To me, that's one of the saddest parts of this. Antifa has effectively stripped the peaceful protestors of their voice. I've been to dozens of peaceful protests and they're very effective. One of my favorites was of a skinhead biker bar (I have an extra special level of disgust for the Outlaws) more than a decade ago, that had opened on the outskirts of Knoxville, near a small synagogue. ~2,000 people, many of us armed, from local churches, showed up to peacefully let them know they weren't welcome, and within a week they were gone. I pride myself on the fact I've been to at least 10x more demonstrations than these Antifa jackasses, but have never thrown a punch, nor have I been arrested (came very close once in Asheville, but that was because there was a question regarding our permit being for the county and not the city).

Protests that backfire are the ones where fights break out, because the optics of the situation is that the protestors are no better than the protested. It's one reason why PETA is despised so much around here, because their demonstrations at farms and packing plants turn violent (they also throw paint and urine, like Antifa, and I suspect many of the same people belong to both).
"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
     
Paco500
Professional Poster
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Berkshire, UK
Status: Online
Reply With Quote
Yesterday, 04:18 AM
 
Originally Posted by Snow-i View Post
You're right. I was feeling attacked and that was not a fair thing for me to say in the least.



Not too much at all, Paco - I am happy to admit where I am demonstrably wrong. I apologize. I got carried away and did to you precisely what I accused you of doing to me.
Respect.
     
Paco500
Professional Poster
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Berkshire, UK
Status: Online
Reply With Quote
Yesterday, 04:20 AM
 
I thought the MSM was ignoring AntiFa and glossing over their misdeeds.

Originally Posted by Cap'n Tightpants View Post
To me, that's one of the saddest parts of this. Antifa has effectively stripped the peaceful protestors of their voice.
Can't have it both ways.
     
Cap'n Tightpants
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Shaddim's sock drawer
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Yesterday, 05:55 AM
 
The media just lumped in Antifa's violence with the WNs, lying about it all coming from the alt-Right and nazis. If it weren't for the, rather ironically-named, anti-fascists, we would have had a couple hundred morons marching through a park surrounded by 20x as many peaceful protesters, booing and laughing at them. Then the WN morons would have gone home dejected and shamed.

Now the racists are a credible threat, they're a movement that's getting attention (even negative publicity is good publicity), and even worse, they've learned that violence works better than talking, if you want more press. Turns out that "punching nazis" only creates more nazis.
"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
     
Waragainstsleep
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Yesterday, 03:12 PM
 
I've said it before but it seems to me that Antifa is essentially left wing America's Al Qaida. Its basically like an open source brand name that anyone is free to use. Lefties who agree with whatever they think Antifa is apply it to themselves, more often it seems (just as with Al Qaida), the right and the right wing media apply it with fairly reckless abandon as it suits their agendas. There was a time they mentioned Al Qaida on local news reports in the US if someone so much as heard a car backfire. It got ridiculous and Antifa is getting there faster.
If there are violent anarchists involved in these clashes, I'm willing to bet it doesn't take more than a handful of them to do the damage.
The partisan news agencies are covering Antifa in opposite extremes not just because they are partisan, but because they are each working from different definitions of what is a deliberately loosely defined brand that can mean anything from "People who don't like fascism" to "Extremely violent lefty anarchist terrorists". I'm learning these huge disconnects in definitions are a big part of the miscommunications that often fuel political debate these days.

CTP has done well in uncovering yet another tactic that the American extreme right have borrowed from ISIS though, deliberately provoking violent backlash as a recruitment too.
I have plenty of more important things to do, if only I could bring myself to do them....
     
Waragainstsleep
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Yesterday, 03:29 PM
 
Originally Posted by besson3c View Post
I know this video is going to make some of you grumpy, but "who drove the car into the crowd, Hillary's emails?" made me LOL.
"Yard Sale Barbie"

Full length version, not sped up:

I have plenty of more important things to do, if only I could bring myself to do them....
     
Cap'n Tightpants
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Shaddim's sock drawer
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Yesterday, 03:42 PM
 
The DHS is moving forward with plans to officially classify Antifa is a domestic terror organization. It's about time.
"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
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Yesterday, 03:46 PM
 
Originally Posted by Waragainstsleep View Post
I've said it before but it seems to me that Antifa is essentially left wing America's Al Qaida. Its basically like an open source brand name that anyone is free to use. Lefties who agree with whatever they think Antifa is apply it to themselves, more often it seems (just as with Al Qaida), the right and the right wing media apply it with fairly reckless abandon as it suits their agendas. There was a time they mentioned Al Qaida on local news reports in the US if someone so much as heard a car backfire. It got ridiculous and Antifa is getting there faster.
If there are violent anarchists involved in these clashes, I'm willing to bet it doesn't take more than a handful of them to do the damage.
The partisan news agencies are covering Antifa in opposite extremes not just because they are partisan, but because they are each working from different definitions of what is a deliberately loosely defined brand that can mean anything from "People who don't like fascism" to "Extremely violent lefty anarchist terrorists". I'm learning these huge disconnects in definitions are a big part of the miscommunications that often fuel political debate these days.

CTP has done well in uncovering yet another tactic that the American extreme right have borrowed from ISIS though, deliberately provoking violent backlash as a recruitment too.


Here's how one group of partisan hacks defines them.



If I'm anti-fascism I'm militant?
     
besson3c
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Yesterday, 04:01 PM
 
Originally Posted by Cap'n Tightpants View Post
The DHS is moving forward with plans to officially classify Antifa is a domestic terror organization. It's about time.

Why are you so obsessed over this group?
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Yesterday, 04:48 PM
 
Originally Posted by besson3c View Post
Why are you so obsessed over this group?
Because all the hippies who raised me taught the importance of defending free speech and not throwing the first punch.

That's what really frosts my ass. These are supposed to be core left-wing principles.
     
Waragainstsleep
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Yesterday, 05:14 PM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
Here's how one group of partisan hacks defines them.



If I'm anti-fascism I'm militant?
Author appears to be American so high chance of being partisan. Also, she's a journalist who describes herself as being skilled at driving traffic to websites by writing snappy headlines so her allegiances may not even come into play.
I have plenty of more important things to do, if only I could bring myself to do them....
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Yesterday, 05:33 PM
 
Shows what I get for trusting the MSM.
     
besson3c
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Yesterday, 05:49 PM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
Because all the hippies who raised me taught the importance of defending free speech and not throwing the first punch.

That's what really frosts my ass. These are supposed to be core left-wing principles.

Sure, they are annoying, dangerous and dumb, but emotional human beings do stuff like this. This is not new or surprising. Extremists on any side of the political spectrum tend to be emotional and excessive, and are generally not good to associate yourselves with if you want to avoid violence.

CTP just seems soooo obsessed with them which I don't understand for these reasons, but also because a lot of the shock and awe I'm feeling emotionally over Charlottesville is a general malaise over humanity and how there are still people that believe what the KKK/WN feel. Again, this is kind of the lead story in my mind.
     
Cap'n Tightpants
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Shaddim's sock drawer
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Yesterday, 06:33 PM
 
http://www.nationalreview.com/articl...-column-satire

In the New York Times, UCLA’s K-Sue Park proposes that “the A.C.L.U. Needs to Rethink Free Speech”:

"After the A.C.L.U. was excoriated for its stance, it responded that 'preventing the government from controlling speech is absolutely necessary to the promotion of equality.' Of course that’s true. The hope is that by successfully defending hate groups, its legal victories will fortify free-speech rights across the board: A rising tide lifts all boats, as it goes. While admirable in theory, this approach implies that the country is on a level playing field, that at some point it overcame its history of racial discrimination to achieve a real democracy, the cornerstone of which is freedom of expression. I volunteered with the A.C.L.U. as a law student in 2011, and I respect much of its work. But it should rethink how it understands free speech. By insisting on a narrow reading of the First Amendment, the organization provides free legal support to hate-based causes. More troubling, the legal gains on which the A.C.L.U. rests its colorblind logic have never secured real freedom or even safety for all."

Park is correct. It is high time that the ACLU moved onto the right side of History and abandoned the “narrow reading” of the First Amendment that is the result of 50 years of unanimous Supreme Court precedent. In lieu, it must focus on working toward more diverse and productive ends, such as giving Jeff Sessions and Donald Trump the robust censorship powers that they so richly and urgently deserve. The United States federal government is now run at every level by Republicans. So, indeed, are the lion’s share of the governors’ mansions, statehouses, and localities. If the ACLU really knuckles down, it can ensure that these figures — and not pernicious “neutral” principle — determine the edges and contours of America’s civil society.

Don’t bore me with your objections. Park is a smart woman, and she knows what “hate” is. We all do. Hate is hate. It is not speech; it’s hate. Sometimes hate is violence, even when no action is attached. How do I know, you might ask? I know because hate is, by definition, hateful, and that means it’s not speech. And why isn’t it speech? Because it’s hate, and hate isn’t speech. This is basic common sense, rejected only by haters. (cont.)
"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
     
Chongo
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Phoenix, Arizona
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Yesterday, 06:42 PM
 
The Rally organizer was an Obama supporter claims WND.
http://mobile.wnd.com/2017/08/setup-...pported-obama/
"The blood of the martyrs is the seed of the church" Saint Tertullian, 197 AD
     
Cap'n Tightpants
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Shaddim's sock drawer
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Yesterday, 06:46 PM
 
The alt-Left, Antifa types are great, apparently if you don't hate white people you get KTFO.

https://twitter.com/nontolerantman/s...92622420807680

Ah, it's just like the WW2 stories my granddad used to tell me.
"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
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Yesterday, 06:58 PM
 
Originally Posted by besson3c View Post
Sure, they are annoying, dangerous and dumb, but emotional human beings do stuff like this. This is not new or surprising. Extremists on any side of the political spectrum tend to be emotional and excessive, and are generally not good to associate yourselves with if you want to avoid violence.

CTP just seems soooo obsessed with them which I don't understand for these reasons, but also because a lot of the shock and awe I'm feeling emotionally over Charlottesville is a general malaise over humanity and how there are still people that believe what the KKK/WN feel. Again, this is kind of the lead story in my mind.
What concerns me is they're an insidious threat.

The exact kind of threat which becomes a problem when everyone's focus is on the more tangible threat, and isn't in the mood to disturb unity with self-criticism.

That, and again... it's my lefty principles being violated by people on the left. It's infuriating to get shot at by your own ****ing team.
     
Doc HM
Mac Elite
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: UKland
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Yesterday, 07:10 PM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
It's infuriating to get shot at by your own ****ing team.
Lenin and Trotsky must have felt just the same way.
This space for Hire! Reasonable rates. Reach an audience of literally dozens!
     
Waragainstsleep
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Yesterday, 07:39 PM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
What concerns me is they're an insidious threat.
Until the election, the white supremacists were a lot quieter and more hidden. One might say they were an insidious threat that snuck into power.

Originally Posted by subego View Post
The exact kind of threat which becomes a problem when everyone's focus is on the more tangible threat, and isn't in the mood to disturb unity with self-criticism.
They are still a minority and most on the left are condemning the worst of their behaviour. The RW media is blowing them out of proportion in terms of their numbers and their badness, like they do with everything that doesn't fit in with them. I consistently find it odd that your reasonableness often manifests itself with what look very much like opinions gleaned from RW media sources. You clearly aren't like Badkosh or Chongo who can and does believe anything at all from Fox, Breitbart of Infowars, or CTP who pretty much dies the same but then tries to hide it, but your opinions about Hillary tied pretty closely to stuff that came predominantly from those kinds of sources and now Antifa seem to following suit for you.
I'll point out that for an organisation (which they don't actually appear to be) that exists and turns up specifically to commit violence against fascists who supposedly know better than to be violent, they still managed to be the side that didn't kill anyone in Charlottesville. This alone should speak volumes.

Originally Posted by subego View Post
That, and again... it's my lefty principles being violated by people on the left. It's infuriating to get shot at by your own ****ing team.
This makes sense, its a great pity that the right don't seem to give a flying **** about their own 'principles' being violated by Nazis and the like. This is why some of us doubt they actually have real principles in case you were wondering.
I have plenty of more important things to do, if only I could bring myself to do them....
     
Waragainstsleep
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Yesterday, 07:40 PM
 
I know people on the right vastly seem to prefer a literal interpretation of words like violence, but no-one has addressed my post about violence being inherent in white supremacy and therefore white supremacy and naziism should not be protected as free speech.
I have plenty of more important things to do, if only I could bring myself to do them....
     
besson3c
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Yesterday, 09:11 PM
 
Originally Posted by besson3c View Post
Sure, they are annoying, dangerous and dumb, but emotional human beings do stuff like this. This is not new or surprising. Extremists on any side of the political spectrum tend to be emotional and excessive, and are generally not good to associate yourselves with if you want to avoid violence.

CTP just seems soooo obsessed with them which I don't understand for these reasons, but also because a lot of the shock and awe I'm feeling emotionally over Charlottesville is a general malaise over humanity and how there are still people that believe what the KKK/WN feel. Again, this is kind of the lead story in my mind.

The other lead story, which I forgot to mention here (and I know I'm repeating myself, sorry about this) is Trump not distancing himself from the support of the KKK/WN. That is unprecedented for a US president and potentially extremely dangerous.

I think many of us have grown numb to the constant raging tire fire that is the Trump admin and its weekly craziness. However, if you force yourself to stand back every once in a while and try to look at this with pre-Trump admin eyes, it is absolutely ****ing crazy beyond many wildest dreams what we are seeing now in many ways. There have been many doomsdayers predicting the fall of the US, but it often seems like we are watching it unfold in front of our very eyes, and we are weirdly getting kind of used to it.
     
OreoCookie
Moderator
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Hilbert space
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Yesterday, 10:48 PM
 
Originally Posted by Snow-i View Post
This is where I get a bit lost. I see what you're saying, but Trump has specifically condemned them. I don't see him as all that accepting of their support. Enabling? - Dakar and Subego had a really good exchange on this that I agree with. Please don't think I'm defending Trump here either, just trying to call it like I see it.
I gave quite a few examples how Trump implicitly endorsed right-wing extremists, starting from Bannon's appointment to his comment that there were “good people on both sides” of the Charlottesville protests. You see white supremacists celebrating Trump's election and Trump's comments as a victory. What kind of a message does Trump send when he vaguely condemns “violence on both sides”, is forced to read a condemnation that was written by a staffer and then walks back those statements a day or two later? Yet, Trump has been quick to single out individuals who he thinks have wronged him. I call that enabling, yes. How do you see these facts?
Originally Posted by Snow-i View Post
You're right, my apologies. I meant the ya'll more generally, but I was certainly feeling generally attacked in writing that and should have chosen my words more carefully.
Don't worry, and I didn't intend to attack you.
Originally Posted by Snow-i View Post
Using violent mobs? What you're saying there is exactly what I'm advocating for. I'm advocating against using violent mobs and referring to that as the strategy which makes things worse. I'm certainly not saying we shouldn't oppose them - just that we cannot sacrifice our values in the process by condoning, justifying, or even looking the other way at violent mobs showing up in force. Would you agree?
That was my fault, I think I missed your shift towards violent mobs in your post, and I should have made clear that I didn't say anything about violent mobs being the solution in my post, nor did I mean to imply that. I thought we were still talking about giving white supremacists a stage by covering them on the news.

I'm not talking about violence, quite the contrary, I'm talking about not sweeping the problem under the rug, and that can (and should) take many forms:
- You show that these people exist, being careful not to hand them a megaphone. Sentiments such as “They are not America!” are misguided, they are part of America.
- History lessons at school and in publically funded museums should cover also and especially the dark parts of American history. National heroes (and “heroes”) should not be seen as black-and-white, but with shades of gray.
- Be critical of your own history because you are a patriot. That will not taint America's achievements, quite the contrary.
- Keep a sense of perspective. It makes a difference that on one side 100 % of the protestors were bad apples whereas on the other it was a fraction. Don't let that fraction represent the whole, and give proportional coverage.
( Last edited by OreoCookie; Yesterday at 11:40 PM. )
I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every minute of it.
     
OreoCookie
Moderator
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Hilbert space
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Yesterday, 11:08 PM
 
Originally Posted by Snow-i View Post
So do I, and I'm at a loss as to what could possibly be done about it.
On a societal level? I wish I knew. On a personal level, it is actually quite easy: consume a broader variety of news. It'll take a while to get away from the sensation of “hate reading”, but that will dissipate with time. You will see differences in what people focus on (e. g. on legislative chess or the content of, say, the various ACA “repeal” proposals), and that “both” sides aren't monolithic. And personally, it made people who use us-vs.-them talking points less interesting and less relevant. You don't necessarily change your opinions, but it humanizes “the other”.

Just to give you one concrete example: Ezra Klein interviewed Avik Roy, Republican health care strategist, on the Senate's repeal bill. Those were two people who mutually respected each other and were able to flesh out the differences and similarities of their approaches. I learnt much, much more of the Republican position from that interview than from countless other podcasts whose hosts (by their own account) supported Republicans.
Originally Posted by Snow-i View Post
Well for one, no one is talking about the peaceful protesters. So at the very least, they've been drowned out. It's not about recruiting at the event, it's about the messages they could spin post-facto to recruit.
I think them being drowned out is also our fault: consumers of media choose to focus on the violent portion of the counter-protestors, drama sells as you mentioned earlier, and I (as someone who, it goes without saying, supports counter-protests against Nazis) get very frustrated. It makes a huge difference when on one side 100 % of the protestors were prepared for violence — they brought guns, shields, batons (dual-use flag poles) and knives — whereas on the other side most counter-protestors had every intention to be peaceful. That's why I think we should cover violent antifa protestors completely separately after a few days or so have passed to clearly separate the two.
I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every minute of it.
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Today, 12:50 AM
 
Originally Posted by Waragainstsleep View Post
I know people on the right vastly seem to prefer a literal interpretation of words like violence, but no-one has addressed my post about violence being inherent in white supremacy and therefore white supremacy and naziism should not be protected as free speech.
"The only way to defeat the Nazis is to restrict free thought."

Am I the only one seeing the problem here? Because it's like really obvious to me.
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Today, 01:37 AM
 
Originally Posted by Waragainstsleep View Post
I consistently find it odd that your reasonableness often manifests itself with what look very much like opinions gleaned from RW media sources. You clearly aren't like Badkosh or Chongo who can and does believe anything at all from Fox, Breitbart of Infowars, or CTP who pretty much dies the same but then tries to hide it, but your opinions about Hillary tied pretty closely to stuff that came predominantly from those kinds of sources and now Antifa seem to following suit for you.
I'll point out that for an organisation (which they don't actually appear to be) that exists and turns up specifically to commit violence against fascists who supposedly know better than to be violent, they still managed to be the side that didn't kill anyone in Charlottesville. This alone should speak volumes.
Wat

I'm bitching about AntiFa because I'm worried they're going to be one of the reasons Trump wins again. I gleaned this from the right-wing?

What did I say about Hillary which I gleaned from right-wing sources?
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Today, 01:46 AM
 
If I'm an unacceptable source of criticism, is this woman?

     
Cap'n Tightpants
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Shaddim's sock drawer
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Today, 07:04 AM
 
She's great. It boggles my mind that there are people who want to create the precedent of the gov't denying free speech due to a few thousand nazis saying awful things. What's next? Do feminists get to outlaw sexist, misogynistic rap lyrics? Pics of Muhammad? Hateful speech about religion in general? Come to think of it, let's just make it illegal to say anything that hurts someone's feelings. Don't even worry about being specific, we'll just figure it out after it happens and then we'll punish accordingly.
"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
     
Waragainstsleep
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Today, 08:11 AM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
Wat

I'm bitching about AntiFa because I'm worried they're going to be one of the reasons Trump wins again. I gleaned this from the right-wing?

What did I say about Hillary which I gleaned from right-wing sources?
Your dislike of Hillary was particularly strong. There are certain lines that are seized upon and flogged to death by the RW media and most who are not on the right tend to dismiss it as being hugely overblown at worst if not utterly fabricated.
You have a tendency to take some of these claims a bit more seriously than I expect is all I'm really saying.

Worrying that Antifa will drive voters to Trump is a legit concern, I'm totally on board with that. Wouldn't surprise me if Trump's PR machine had basically invented them for that purpose. It does sound like you are buying a lot of what the right are saying about them without questioning it as much as I would expect a sensible person to. You have never struck me as someone who hears things without questioning them pretty skeptically so it surprises me to hear you repeat things that I might dismiss out of hand.
I have plenty of more important things to do, if only I could bring myself to do them....
     
andi*pandi
Moderator
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: inside 128, north of 90
Status: Online
Reply With Quote
Today, 01:22 PM
 
Free speech does not mean getting to say whatever you want without ridicule or comment. You get to say it, you also get to be responded to.
     
Cap'n Tightpants
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Shaddim's sock drawer
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Today, 02:11 PM
 
Originally Posted by andi*pandi View Post
Free speech does not mean getting to say whatever you want without ridicule or comment. You get to say it, you also get to be responded to.
Exactly.
"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
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Today, 03:33 PM
 
Originally Posted by Waragainstsleep View Post
Your dislike of Hillary was particularly strong. There are certain lines that are seized upon and flogged to death by the RW media and most who are not on the right tend to dismiss it as being hugely overblown at worst if not utterly fabricated.
You have a tendency to take some of these claims a bit more seriously than I expect is all I'm really saying.

Worrying that Antifa will drive voters to Trump is a legit concern, I'm totally on board with that. Wouldn't surprise me if Trump's PR machine had basically invented them for that purpose. It does sound like you are buying a lot of what the right are saying about them without questioning it as much as I would expect a sensible person to. You have never struck me as someone who hears things without questioning them pretty skeptically so it surprises me to hear you repeat things that I might dismiss out of hand.
Let me be as clear as possible about AntiFa.

I stand behind people who want to protest the extreme right.
I stand behind people who arm themselves at protests as defense against the extreme right... even if their desire is to provoke the extreme right to give in to their violent tendencies in a ploy to kick the shit out of them.
I even stand by kicking the shit out of someone on the extreme right without direct provocation if the person makes no attempt to escape the legal consequences of their actions. Sometimes people need to get hit, but society isn't broken for not providing legal accommodation.

What I have a problem with are the violent actors who are none of these. Their label is irrelevant.


As for Hillary, I can't be skeptical about an argument without understanding it first, and for this to happen I am required to take it seriously.

That, and taking an argument seriously is kinda sorta basic courtesy in a discussion.

Those are my goals here, to understand, and have discussion, i.e. back-and-forth. If my only desire is to state an unyielding claim, other people aren't required.

As for Hillary, she was such a ****up, even after three decades of trying to do nothing other than work her way up to president, she lost to Donald Trump.

Who didn't even want to win.

Yes, my dislike is particularly strong.
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Today, 03:36 PM
 
Originally Posted by andi*pandi View Post
Free speech does not mean getting to say whatever you want without ridicule or comment. You get to say it, you also get to be responded to.
I think people should be able to ridicule, comment, and respond to others to their heart's content.

Because I believe in free speech.
     
Chongo
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Phoenix, Arizona
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Today, 04:26 PM
 
Originally Posted by Cap'n Tightpants View Post
She's great. It boggles my mind that there are people who want to create the precedent of the gov't denying free speech due to a few thousand nazis saying awful things. What's next? Do feminists get to outlaw sexist, misogynistic rap lyrics? Pics of Muhammad? Hateful speech about religion in general? Come to think of it, let's just make it illegal to say anything that hurts someone's feelings. Don't even worry about being specific, we'll just figure it out after it happens and then we'll punish accordingly.
Statues of St Joan of Arc and St Junipero Serra have been vandalized.


"The blood of the martyrs is the seed of the church" Saint Tertullian, 197 AD
     
Cap'n Tightpants
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Shaddim's sock drawer
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Today, 04:52 PM
 
The stupidity of these protesters knows no bounds.
"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
     
Cap'n Tightpants
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Shaddim's sock drawer
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Today, 06:30 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
     
Paco500
Professional Poster
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Berkshire, UK
Status: Online
Reply With Quote
Today, 06:35 PM
 
Originally Posted by Cap'n Tightpants View Post
The stupidity of these protesters knows no bounds.
I would have assumed you'd be ok with tearing down a monument to a trans-gender person.
     
Cap'n Tightpants
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Shaddim's sock drawer
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Today, 06:37 PM
 
Good luck with that.
"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
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Today, 06:39 PM
 
Originally Posted by Cap'n Tightpants View Post
Well, of course not.

But I give it a 9.2 as a troll.
     
 
Thread Tools
 
Forum Links
Forum Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Top
Privacy Policy
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:08 PM.
All contents of these forums © 1995-2015 MacNN. All rights reserved.
Branding + Design: www.gesamtbild.com
vBulletin v.3.8.8 © 2000-2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.,