Donald Trump and US politics

"
"
diablofdb wrote:
I think there is a real radicalisation in the left. I used to be a liberal progressive, I always voted for the liberals in Canada. But one thing that turn me off and many other is the extreme mesures they are now taking. I do not recognize myself in the liberals anymore, I think the left has became so hostile to anyone who slightly disagree with them, it just turn of many of their moderate followers. Calling names and labeling anyone who have a different set of ideas is wrong. I know many people who have voted twice for Obama and now ended up voting for Trump.

I think the left has to stop what they are doing and think. Reform their ideas and go back to what they used to be.


I'm curious, did you see the same from the right at all? Because I recall, back in 2010, it wasn't just people being "called names" and "labeled" (although there certainly was a lot of that); anyone who didn't pass ideological purity tests got primaried, including the house majority leader, Eric Cantor, in 2014. Many of them were replaced by more ideologically pure hardliners.

Meanwhile, having spent quite a bit of time on forums with a large population of right-wingers, I see quite a bit of the right being hostile to anyone who slightly disagrees with them. Maybe it's just accepted at this point that if you support abortion in any way, you're a child murderer, or if you support progressive taxation you're a communist, or if you support trans rights you're a danger to children. Show any sign of anger or outrage at hateful or bigoted statements, or any form of respect to women, and you're a "beta cuck". And that's not even getting into the really nasty shit you see swirling around the alt-right.

It's pretty easy to nutpick both sides, and name-calling is by far one of the mildest things to come out of this. If I call you an anti-intellectual moron, what does that actually do? Hell, at this point I doubt it even makes you feel bad. You don't care. Meanwhile, Milo Yiannopolous calls out an actress and she gets harassed by a fairly massive group of racist, misogynist trolls. But whatever, the issue is, it's really hard to call out the left in particular for this when it's clear both sides do it. We have the tumblr set, you have the chantard and gamergate set. And while I will admit that our group is an annoyance and a hindrance to progressive discussion, perhaps it would be better to remove the shiny golden tower with 68 floors from your eye before you criticize the mote in ours. Address the rational content, not the insane demands of a tiny minority of loonies.

Or, to put it another way... Our last president explicitly called out the people you're complaining about. Meanwhile, your president's top advisor is pretty much the leader of the alt-right.



again.... because you disagree with them you label them as the "alt-right" like I've said.... labeling name calling. Very long text just to push up more of the same. You first play a mix of victim card and shaming card, then you end into labeling and name calling. I'm not saying the right is right, but I can tell you this, I support them now because they are not what the liberals became. Liberals became everything they used to fight against.


lol just check the bill M103 in Canada. This is the closest you can get to fascism.


Edit: out of context but I just wanted to share

Last edited by diablofdb on Feb 20, 2017, 8:54:13 AM
"
diablofdb wrote:
"
ScrotieMcB wrote:
Spoiler
I don't consider the kind of asshats who would burn Berkeley down to prevent Milo from speaking to be liberals. I get that they pose as liberals, try to blend in with liberals, want you to think they're liberals... but they're not. They're fascists — the real ones.

The problem with the contemporary Left is not that liberalism has become a fascist ideology which has abandoned arguments in favor of insult and violence. The problem with the contemporary Left is that it has been infested with corruption. Major portions of the Democratic Party are loyal to Wall Street and war profiteers, not the people; they offer their liberal constituency nothing but empty words. Such practices cannot persist in the light of truth and require an environment of illusion; therefore, they seek to replace thoughts with feelings, debate with intimidation, information with indoctrination, issues with identity. But even as these traitors act upon the Left (and, make no mistake, the Right as well), they are separate from it; imposters, not the real deal.

As an abstract ideology, liberalism is just as strong as it's ever been. As a real-life movement, the so-called Left is plagued by fascist posers. When you see someone like Rubin talking about leaving the Left, it's very clear that he's still a liberal, that he personally hasn't shifted right; instead, his entire argument is that his so-called allies on the Left have become something else, something which he can no longer in good conscience stand with.

We are approaching a moment where both the Left and the Right call the Republican Party home, and all that remains of the Democrats is cancer. That party will die off unless it cleanses itself of its disease (as the Justice Democrats hope and plan), but ideological liberalism most certainly shall not perish, regardless.
I agree with that, people who riot like that in the streets are the real fascists, but I think it go further than just that. I think there is a real radicalisation in the left. I used to be a liberal progressive, I always voted for the liberals in Canada. But one thing that turn me off and many other is the extreme mesures they are now taking. I do not recognize myself in the liberals anymore, I think the left has became so hostile to anyone who slightly disagree with them, it just turn of many of their moderate followers. Calling names and labeling anyone who have a different set of ideas is wrong. I know many people who have voted twice for Obama and now ended up voting for Trump.

I think the left has to stop what they are doing and think. Reform their ideas and go back to what they used to be.
It's not really radicalization so much as substitution. I kind of glossed over it, but: promoting feelings, intimidation, indoctrination and identity means conning the populace. Fascism is being actively promoted, falsely labeled as liberalism, and suckers are falling for it and turning themselves into fascists.

Although perhaps that's what radicalization truly is. One could make the argument, for example, that true Islam is a religion of peace, and that anyone who would kill others in its name is not truly a Muslim. However, if this is true, than why are Islamic cultures disproportionately effected by this second ideology that replaces Islam with brutality? It seems the parasitic ideology is tailored to its host in such a way that increased vulnerability to it is a trait of Islam in particular (as opposed to Christianity). The same could perhaps be said of liberalism and its relationship with this new fascism.
When Stephen Colbert was killed by HYDRA's Project Insight in 2014, the comedy world lost a hero. Since his life model decoy isn't up to the task, please do not mistake my performance as political discussion. I'm just doing what Steve would have wanted.
Last edited by ScrotieMcB on Feb 20, 2017, 9:28:12 AM
"
diablofdb wrote:
again.... because you disagree with them you label them as the "alt-right" like I've said....


http://www.breitbart.com/tech/2016/03/29/an-establishment-conservatives-guide-to-the-alt-right/

"Alt-right" is, for all intents and purposes, their chosen title. Personally, I prefer not to sugarcoat a movement made up in no small part of neo-nazis and white supremacists; after all, it was Richard Spencer, an out-and-proud neo-nazi, who coined the term in the first place.

Perhaps the problem is not that the left is too hasty to "label", but that you are a bit thin-skinned? Or are you agreeing that there's clearly something wrong with the so-called "alt-right", and that bearing that label should be a sign of shame?

"
labeling name calling. Very long text just to push up more of the same. You first play a mix of victim card and shaming card, then you end into labeling and name calling. I'm not saying the right is right, but I can tell you this, I support them now because they are not what the liberals became. Liberals became everything they used to fight against.


I play the victim card? You're the one complaining about people calling you names. The "shaming" card? You mean pointing out shameful behavior as shameful? You didn't even try to address my points. Not surprising at this point, mind you...

"
lol just check the bill M103 in Canada. This is the closest you can get to fascism.


Here is the full text of "Bill" M-103.

"
That, in the opinion of the House, the government should: (a) recognize the need to quell the increasing public climate of hate and fear; (b) condemn Islamophobia and all forms of systemic racism and religious discrimination and take note of House of Commons’ petition e-411 and the issues raised by it; and (c) request that the Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage undertake a study on how the government could (i) develop a whole-of-government approach to reducing or eliminating systemic racism and religious discrimination including Islamophobia, in Canada, while ensuring a community-centered focus with a holistic response through evidence-based policy-making, (ii) collect data to contextualize hate crime reports and to conduct needs assessments for impacted communities, and that the Committee should present its findings and recommendations to the House no later than 240 calendar days from the adoption of this motion, provided that in its report, the Committee should make recommendations that the government may use to better reflect the enshrined rights and freedoms in the Constitution Acts, including the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.


Again, for someone who is so pissed off about name-calling and labeling, you sure are quick to call things "fascism"! That's another thing I see very often from the right - refer to anything aimed at inclusiveness or fighting bigotry as "fascism" or "attacking free speech". It's exactly the same kind of labeling and name-calling you object to so much on the left. Why doesn't it bother you when the right does it?

But notice anything missing from this "law"? Here's a few things:

- Any change to the law that would lead to people losing their rights
- Any change to the law that would have any effect on the general populace
- Any change to the law whatsoever

It's not even a bill. It's a motion. Motions are different from bills. It does nothing to change existing law, its sole purpose is to help clarify the priorities and goals of the parliament. And there is nothing wrong with pointing out, particularly in the wake of an islamophobic terrorist attack and a rising tide of right-wing nationalism among western nations, that islamophobia, racism, and religious discrimination are problems that should be looked into in more detail.

How, exactly, does this qualify as "fascism"? And also, was a very similar motion passed in 2015 with unanimous support from the canadian parliament decrying the rise of global antisemitism also "fascist"?
Luna's Blackguards - a guild of bronies - is now recruiting! If you're a fan of our favourite chromatic marshmallow equines, hit me up with an add or whisper, and I'll invite you!
IGN: HopeYouAreFireProof
Last edited by Budget_player_cadet on Feb 20, 2017, 9:44:08 AM
By the way, when I say "fascism" what I mean is: the ideology that the use of physical violence against those who do not initiate it is morally justifiable to silence speech running contrary to one's narrative. I disagree strongly with this recent trend to use fascism as a synonym for bigotry or for bigoted government, as if Nazi Germany was fascist because anti-Semitism; no, idiots, it was fascist because brown-shirts and gestapo. The issue at play with fascism is acceptance (or lack thereof) of diversity of thought, not diversity of identity. Although trust me, failing to respect the former is a sure way to lose the latter.

That's the key concept I feel people don't get. Diversity of identity is fully dependent upon diversity of thought. You don't get slavery abolished without freedom of the press. You don't get a woman's right to vote without freedom of assembly. You don't get equal rights for LGBT without free speech on the Internet. If you think for a moment that criminalizing the ability of a person to do whatever they want, so long as they don't impose upon the similar liberties of others with force or fraud, is going to help you promote diversity, you are driving the farmer to feed the livestock. You are inviting the worst discrimination is relived in reverse, revenge bigotry.
When Stephen Colbert was killed by HYDRA's Project Insight in 2014, the comedy world lost a hero. Since his life model decoy isn't up to the task, please do not mistake my performance as political discussion. I'm just doing what Steve would have wanted.
Last edited by ScrotieMcB on Feb 20, 2017, 10:06:44 AM
>casually and vaguely mention Sweden
>the entire media gets baited into throwing a tantrum over literally nothing
>everyone starts talking about sweden
>people get redpilled as fuck on sweden

7D check mate
GGG banning all political discussion shortly after getting acquired by China is a weird coincidence.
That would make sense were it not for his representatives' previous comments about Bowling Green and Atlanta. At what point does "the President of the United States and members of his administration making up fake terrorist attacks" become disturbing? I'd say "one", personally, but that's just me.

But then again, maybe I'm just stuck in the past, where what a president had to say had any meaning whatsoever, and people speaking from a position of extreme power chose their words carefully, so as to let their allies and enemies know when they were serious and when they were not. Maybe we're in a new paradigm, where absolutely nothing the president of the United States of America says can be taken literally, and they cannot be trusted to choose their words carefully and honestly. I wouldn't call that a good thing in any context, mind you, but maybe I just read too many books. Like 1984.
Luna's Blackguards - a guild of bronies - is now recruiting! If you're a fan of our favourite chromatic marshmallow equines, hit me up with an add or whisper, and I'll invite you!
IGN: HopeYouAreFireProof
Last edited by Budget_player_cadet on Feb 20, 2017, 10:08:29 AM
"
Xavderion wrote:
>casually and vaguely mention Sweden
>the entire media gets baited into throwing a tantrum over literally nothing
>everyone starts talking about sweden
>people get redpilled as fuck on sweden

7D check mate


The president of the united states used Fox news as his source. Nice of you to forget that. Typical Trump supporter, no critique on your supreme leader but on those that critique him and his way of gathering resources.
Honestly, this whole narrative that Trump is somehow playing 11th dimensional chess or whatever is just stupid. It ignores how legitimately harmful his actions are to his own movement, his credibility, and the US abroad. What happens when the president can't be trusted to be taken seriously or literally about, well, anything? How do allies and enemies react to that? Meanwhile, Trump has had more than a few significant blunders that would seem to indicate to no small degree that he really is as thin-skinned and narcissistic as he appears to be at first glance. What possible purpose is served by turning a question by a jewish reporter about rising antisemitism into an answer about how well he did in the election?
Luna's Blackguards - a guild of bronies - is now recruiting! If you're a fan of our favourite chromatic marshmallow equines, hit me up with an add or whisper, and I'll invite you!
IGN: HopeYouAreFireProof
"
long ass post "islamophobia"



Exactly that is why people complain about that bill because of that word. We all know what it mean. Everytime someon slightly disagree with liberals values there's not even a half way word to describe it, you call them fascist. Everytime someone disagree with Islam they run to fight and call them Islamophobe.


So let's be honest, this is a law to send to prison everyone who would slightly disagree with islam.
"
diablofdb wrote:
"
long ass post "islamophobia"



Exactly that is why people complain about that bill because of that word. We all know what it mean. Everytime someon slightly disagree with liberals values there's not even a half way word to describe it, you call them fascist. Everytime someone disagree with Islam they run to fight and call them Islamophobe.


So let's be honest, this is a law to send to prison everyone who would slightly disagree with islam.


Wrong.

Report Forum Post

Report Account:

Report Type

Additional Info