Trump presidency

Seen something interesting in the news or on the intertubes? Discuss it here.

Moderators: Zamfir, Hawknc, Moderators General, Prelates

User avatar
Belial
A terrible sound heard from a distance
Posts: 30450
Joined: Sat Apr 15, 2006 4:04 am UTC
Contact:

Re: Trump presidency

Postby Belial » Wed Aug 16, 2017 7:57 pm UTC

In case you hadn't noticed the government is also riddled with nazis so people aren't talking about law they're talking about morality.

Punching nazis is still assault. It's just good, good assault
addams wrote:A drunk neighbor is better than a sober Belial.


They/them

User avatar
Weeks
Hey Baby, wanna make a fortnight?
Posts: 2012
Joined: Sat Aug 23, 2008 12:41 am UTC
Location: Ciudad de Panamá, Panamá

Re: Trump presidency

Postby Weeks » Wed Aug 16, 2017 8:03 pm UTC

Belial wrote:Also hey everybody should read this
um holy shit.
NieXS wrote:Oh god that smiley ruined it.
suffer-cait wrote:One day I'm gun a go visit weeks and discover they're just a computer in a trashcan at an ice cream shop.
Mutex wrote:Enjoy the shoe!

Puppyclaws
Posts: 391
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2011 7:08 pm UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby Puppyclaws » Wed Aug 16, 2017 8:05 pm UTC

As I said earlier, no one here is saying "go punch Nazis and make it legal," we're saying "punching Nazis is not a moral atrocity," and in re: where is the line, I have consistently said that advocating genocide is the line.

Netreker0
Posts: 146
Joined: Thu Jun 23, 2011 8:17 am UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby Netreker0 » Wed Aug 16, 2017 8:12 pm UTC

gmalivuk wrote:Those of us with our heads slightly less far up our own asses recognize that genocide is not a political opinion on par with "Rich people should pay higher taxes", over which reasonable people might legitimately disagree.


The test for whether "reasonable people might legitimately disagree" isn't in any First Amendment test I've seen, and even if it were, I dont' know if it would be a workable system. Now, before you accuse me of being Adolf Hitler's clone returned to finish the job or whatever escalation you have planned, let me point out that I agree--genocide is immoral, advocating genocide is immoral, and no reasonable person would advocate genocide. But how do you work that into a robust and consistent system? To me, the most compelling argument is also completely circular: The guys who advocate genocide aren't reasonable people because they're advocating for genocide. But I also find a lot of other things unreasonable. I think hypocrisy is unreasonable. I think advocating to lower the age of consent is something reasonable people can disagree on, and advocating to lower it to three is something reasonable can't, and I bet that if you ask people where the line is drawn, you'll get numerous answers. Moreover, I think that in a pluralistic society where judges and lawyers often live in their own sort of bubble, it's often dangerous to give them the power to determine what is a reasonable political position and what is not without at the very least providing explicit, concrete guidelines for making that determination.

I believe what CorruptUser is asking for, and what I would also like to hear, is what you think those guidelines might be? Is the line advocating violence? I think you could make a convincing case that--on the abstract--speech that advocates violence should be put into a special case that gets less protection. In practice, such a principle would be hard to reconcile with America's founding narrative of citizens rising up against tyranny.

User avatar
ucim
Posts: 6568
Joined: Fri Sep 28, 2012 3:23 pm UTC
Location: The One True Thread

Re: Trump presidency

Postby ucim » Wed Aug 16, 2017 8:13 pm UTC

Weeks wrote:Yes they are a tribe but not one that anyone should feel loyalty to and comparing them with other tribes is varying levels of disrespectful (as ucim keeps comparing them with muslims, which is completely unacceptable).
I'm not comparing them so much as contrasting them. I think we all agree that violence towards Muslims just because they are Muslims is reprehensible, despite there being some people who are Muslims who have done reprehensible things in their name. Yet there is a lot of Muslim hatred in the world.

It's too easy to slip into that if you use poor reasoning.

Swapping "Nazi" for "Muslim" does not change the reasoning, therefore if you get a different answer, the reasoning is flawed. If you want to get that different answer (justification for punching Nazis), you need to use different reasoning.

Reasoning that can't be turned against you by those who think your kind are a scourge on the earth (of which, no matter who you are, there are some). That reasoning has to be based on what they are doing, not who they are, and directed at the folk who are doing those things.

Jose
Order of the Sillies, Honoris Causam - bestowed by charlie_grumbles on NP 859 * OTTscar winner: Wordsmith - bestowed by yappobiscuts and the OTT on NP 1832 * Ecclesiastical Calendar of the Order of the Holy Contradiction * Please help addams if you can. She needs all of us.

User avatar
Belial
A terrible sound heard from a distance
Posts: 30450
Joined: Sat Apr 15, 2006 4:04 am UTC
Contact:

Re: Trump presidency

Postby Belial » Wed Aug 16, 2017 8:14 pm UTC

Again. Ideologies aren't blank tokens.
addams wrote:A drunk neighbor is better than a sober Belial.


They/them

User avatar
DaBigCheez
Posts: 834
Joined: Tue Jan 04, 2011 8:03 am UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby DaBigCheez » Wed Aug 16, 2017 8:17 pm UTC

Netreker0 wrote:I believe what CorruptUser is asking for, and what I would also like to hear, is what you think those guidelines might be? Is the line advocating violence? I think you could make a convincing case that--on the abstract--speech that advocates violence should be put into a special case that gets less protection. In practice, such a principle would be hard to reconcile with America's founding narrative of citizens rising up against tyranny.

Are you familiar with the Brandenburg test? Which stems from a Supreme Court decision that inflammatory speech can be punished (by the government directly, no less) if it is "directed to inciting or producing imminent lawless action and is likely to incite or produce such action"?

Where exactly the line is drawn can be up for debate, but there *is* precedent for limiting free speech in cases of, among other things, incitement to violence.
existential_elevator wrote:It's like a jigsaw puzzle of Hitler pissing on Mother Theresa. No individual piece is offensive, but together...

If you think hot women have it easy because everyone wants to have sex at them, you're both wrong and also the reason you're wrong.

User avatar
Angua
Don't call her Delphine.
Posts: 5811
Joined: Tue Sep 16, 2008 12:42 pm UTC
Location: UK/[St. Kitts and] Nevis Occasionally, I migrate to the US for a bit

Re: Trump presidency

Postby Angua » Wed Aug 16, 2017 8:20 pm UTC

So, you don't see a difference between a cultural, religious belief that most people have grown up with and advocates peace that gets occasionally coopted by fanatics, and a group of people who are literally bound together by the belief that they are the one, true race and all others should be got rid of?

Like, again, show us the majority group of non-hateful Nazis who are around and actually doing wonderful things with their lives and are ashamed of their fanatic brethren. Once you demonstrate them then maybe you get to compare them to Muslims, but only maybe.
Crabtree's bludgeon: “no set of mutually inconsistent observations can exist for which some human intellect cannot conceive a coherent explanation, however complicated”
GNU Terry Pratchett

User avatar
Quercus
Posts: 1756
Joined: Thu Sep 19, 2013 12:22 pm UTC
Location: London, UK
Contact:

Re: Trump presidency

Postby Quercus » Wed Aug 16, 2017 8:21 pm UTC

Belial wrote:Also hey everybody should read this

Yep. That definitely counts as copious quantities of shit hitting the fan. For those who didn't read that here's a summary from the guardian.

Virginia governor Terry McAuliffe revealed on Monday that the far right activists had hidden caches of weapons around the city. “They had battering rams and we had picked up different weapons that they had stashed around the city,” McAuliffe told civil rights campaigner DeRay Mckesson on his podcast Pod Save the People.

Asked about the police response, which has been criticised as too passive, the governor said: “They were on very heightened alert because of the amount of weapons that we had been told [were coming in]. These folks came armed and our biggest concern was that shots would be fired and we would have a melee.”

He added: “If you see people yesterday walking down the street, DeRay, with semi-automatic rifles strapped on their body, I mean they had better armour than my state police and national guard had.”


When you're hiding weapons caches and outgunning the national guard you're not a protest group, you're an insurgency. An insurgency still "testing the waters", but an insurgency all the same.

P.S. you should still go and read the twitter thread that Belial linked - it emphasises some highly disturbing similarities with the early stages of the Rwandan genocide.

speising
Posts: 2283
Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2012 4:54 pm UTC
Location: wien

Re: Trump presidency

Postby speising » Wed Aug 16, 2017 8:27 pm UTC

Isn't that what this wonderful 2nd amendment is for? I thought weapons caches in the US are just called "basement".

User avatar
Sableagle
Ormurinn's Alt
Posts: 1905
Joined: Sat Jun 13, 2015 4:26 pm UTC
Location: The wrong side of the mirror
Contact:

Re: Trump presidency

Postby Sableagle » Wed Aug 16, 2017 8:29 pm UTC

KnightExemplar wrote:Its a rapidly changing situation. If the alt-right becomes less timid about their viewpoints in public, then they may become proud to lose their jobs / whatever when they're unmasked. But for now, it seems like taking pictures of these people has given the group some amount of pause.
For now. Let them carry on for a little bit longer and they'll be confident that those pictures can't get them fired, or rather that if they do they'll be collecting four years' pay as compensation.


KnightExemplar wrote:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4xs_-J3BhUM

Jason Kessler wrote: I disavow anything that led to folks getting hurt
I did not have sexual relations with that woman. The Catholics are plotting to kill Charles II. I am not a crook. Jews engaged in the ritual killings of Christian children and used their blood in the unleavened bread eaten at Passover. I hurt my back falling off the elevator. This object in my hand is a small, Czechoslovakian traffic warden. I'm black. The helicopter I was travelling in was struck by enemy fire. Planned Parenthood are harvesting babies' brains. Our diesel engines comply with all emissions standards.
Image
Crime statistics show blacks kill 81 percent of white homicide victims. I was in Jersey City, where thousands and thousands of people were cheering as the World Trade Center collapsed. The Obama administration wants to take in 250,000 Syrian refugees. 25 percent of Muslim Americans condone violence against other Americans. Parts of London are so radicalized that the police are afraid for their own lives. Republicans in the past have allowed Democrat presidents to have their nominees voted on up or down, and for the most part, when you go back through President Obama or President Clinton, Republicans have joined with Democrats to allow people who are qualified to go onto the court. The GM Corvair is safe. Abeer al-Janabi was 26 years old. I'm from Compton. There is no sex tape.

KnightExemplar wrote:He's not calling for people to die, he's calling for... well people to be white. Which is definitely deplorable but a far cry from supporting violence. In my experience: White Supremacists know that people think that they are violent. A lot of them will tell you that they aren't for violence first up as you talk with them. I think we all can agree here that their viewpoints are fucked up, but I am confident to say that they don't want innocent blood on their hands as a whole.
No need for bloodshed, of course. Marching them into the desert with no food, water or shelter and leaving them there or pushing them off boats into the Med works too.
Spoiler:
http://www.armenian-genocide.org/genocide.html
Demands by Armenian political organizations for administrative reforms in the Armenian-inhabited provinces and better police protection from predatory tribes among the Kurds only invited further repression. The government was determined to avoid resolving the so-called Armenian Question in any way that altered the traditional system of administration. During the reign of the Sultan Abdul Hamid (Abdulhamit) II (1876-1909), a series of massacres throughout the empire meant to frighten Armenians and so dampen their expectations, cost up to three hundred thousand lives by some estimates and inflicted enormous material losses on a majority of Armenians.

In response to the crisis in the Ottoman Empire, a new political group called the Young Turks seized power by revolution in 1908. From the Young Turks, the Committee of Union and Progress (CUP), Ittihad ve Terakki Jemiyeti, emerged at the head of the government in a coup staged in 1913. It was led by a triumvirate: Enver, Minister of War; Talaat, Minister of the Interior (Grand Vizier in 1917); and Jemal, Minister of the Marine. The CUP espoused an ultranationalistic ideology which advocated the formation of an exclusively Turkish state.

Through the spring and summer of 1915, in all areas outside the war zones, the Armenian population was ordered deported from their homes. Convoys consisting of tens of thousands including men, women, and children were driven hundreds of miles toward the Syrian desert.

The deportations were disguised as a resettlement program. The brutal treatment of the deportees, most of whom were made to walk to their destinations, made it apparent that the deportations were mainly intended as death marches. Moreover, the policy of deportation surgically removed the Armenians from the rest of society and disposed of great masses of people with little or no destruction of property. The displacement process, therefore, also served as a major opportunity orchestrated by the CUP for the plundering of the material wealth of the Armenians and proved an effortless method of expropriating all of their immovable properties.

The genocidal intent of the CUP measures was also evidenced by the mass killings that accompanied the deportations. Earlier, Armenian soldiers in the Ottoman forces had been disarmed and either worked to death in labor battalions or outright executed in small batches. With the elimination of the able-bodied men from the Armenian population, the deportations proceeded with little resistance. The convoys were frequently attacked by bands of killers specifically organized for the purpose of slaughtering the Armenians. As its instrument of extermination, the government had authorized the formation of gangs of butchers—mostly convicts released from prison expressly enlisted in the units of the so-called Special Organization

The government had made no provisions for the feeding of the deported population. Starvation took an enormous toll much as exhaustion felled the elderly, the weaker and the infirm. Deportees were denied food and water in a deliberate effort to hasten death. The survivors who reached northern Syria were collected at a number of concentration camps whence they were sent further south to die under the scorching sun of the desert. Through methodically organized deportation, systematic massacre, deliberate starvation and dehydration, and continuous brutalization, the Ottoman government reduced its Armenian population to a frightened mass of famished individuals whose families and communities had been destroyed in a single stroke.

Worked. Worked too. Past tense. Past tense. Their boat broke down.
Oh, Willie McBride, it was all done in vain.

User avatar
Belial
A terrible sound heard from a distance
Posts: 30450
Joined: Sat Apr 15, 2006 4:04 am UTC
Contact:

Re: Trump presidency

Postby Belial » Wed Aug 16, 2017 8:30 pm UTC

No but seriously quit comparing minority religions to genocidal ideologies
addams wrote:A drunk neighbor is better than a sober Belial.


They/them

User avatar
SlyReaper
inflatable
Posts: 8015
Joined: Mon Dec 31, 2007 11:09 pm UTC
Location: Bristol, Old Blighty

Re: Trump presidency

Postby SlyReaper » Wed Aug 16, 2017 8:30 pm UTC

Image
What would Baron Harkonnen do?

User avatar
ucim
Posts: 6568
Joined: Fri Sep 28, 2012 3:23 pm UTC
Location: The One True Thread

Re: Trump presidency

Postby ucim » Wed Aug 16, 2017 8:31 pm UTC

Quercus wrote:When you're hiding weapons caches and outgunning the national guard you're not a protest group, you're an insurgency. An insurgency still "testing the waters", but an insurgency all the same.
... and what are you when this insurgency has the backing of the leader of the country?

Jose
Order of the Sillies, Honoris Causam - bestowed by charlie_grumbles on NP 859 * OTTscar winner: Wordsmith - bestowed by yappobiscuts and the OTT on NP 1832 * Ecclesiastical Calendar of the Order of the Holy Contradiction * Please help addams if you can. She needs all of us.

User avatar
Belial
A terrible sound heard from a distance
Posts: 30450
Joined: Sat Apr 15, 2006 4:04 am UTC
Contact:

Re: Trump presidency

Postby Belial » Wed Aug 16, 2017 8:34 pm UTC

ucim wrote:
Quercus wrote:When you're hiding weapons caches and outgunning the national guard you're not a protest group, you're an insurgency. An insurgency still "testing the waters", but an insurgency all the same.
... and what are you when this insurgency has the backing of the leader of the country?

Jose


Brownshirts
addams wrote:A drunk neighbor is better than a sober Belial.


They/them

User avatar
gmalivuk
GNU Terry Pratchett
Posts: 26529
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:02 pm UTC
Location: Here and There
Contact:

Re: Trump presidency

Postby gmalivuk » Wed Aug 16, 2017 8:39 pm UTC

ucim wrote:
Weeks wrote:Yes they are a tribe but not one that anyone should feel loyalty to and comparing them with other tribes is varying levels of disrespectful (as ucim keeps comparing them with muslims, which is completely unacceptable).
I'm not comparing them so much as contrasting them. I think we all agree that violence towards Muslims just because they are Muslims is reprehensible, despite there being some people who are Muslims who have done reprehensible things in their name. Yet there is a lot of Muslim hatred in the world.

It's too easy to slip into that if you use poor reasoning.

Swapping "Nazi" for "Muslim" does not change the reasoning, therefore if you get a different answer, the reasoning is flawed. If you want to get that different answer (justification for punching Nazis), you need to use different reasoning.

Reasoning that can't be turned against you by those who think your kind are a scourge on the earth (of which, no matter who you are, there are some). That reasoning has to be based on what they are doing, not who they are, and directed at the folk who are doing those things.

Jose
Of course swapping one group for another changes the reasoning. What the fuck planet do you come from that you think it doesn't?

You're not swapping out a term in all the sentences of a formal logical proof, you're changing the wording of a single natural language statement and ignoring all the rest of the relevant context. And sometimes when you change the words of a sentence, you also change the truth value.
Unless stated otherwise, I do not care whether a statement, by itself, constitutes a persuasive political argument. I care whether it's true.
---
If this post has math that doesn't work for you, use TeX the World for Firefox or Chrome

(he/him/his)

Netreker0
Posts: 146
Joined: Thu Jun 23, 2011 8:17 am UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby Netreker0 » Wed Aug 16, 2017 8:50 pm UTC

DaBigCheez wrote:
Netreker0 wrote:I believe what CorruptUser is asking for, and what I would also like to hear, is what you think those guidelines might be? Is the line advocating violence? I think you could make a convincing case that--on the abstract--speech that advocates violence should be put into a special case that gets less protection. In practice, such a principle would be hard to reconcile with America's founding narrative of citizens rising up against tyranny.

Are you familiar with the Brandenburg test? Which stems from a Supreme Court decision that inflammatory speech can be punished (by the government directly, no less) if it is "directed to inciting or producing imminent lawless action and is likely to incite or produce such action"?

Where exactly the line is drawn can be up for debate, but there *is* precedent for limiting free speech in cases of, among other things, incitement to violence.


Yes, and the Supreme Court has been very consistent about interpreting that exception very strictly, particularly with respect to the "imminent" requirement precisely for the reason I gave above. Specifically, it has been found repeatedly that advocating breaking the law, on the abstract, as a means of political protest doesn't pass the test. I actually read the opinion a few years ago for one of the more extreme cases, but I can't remember the citation or case style, where essentially some right wing nut job was publishing statements arguing the legitimacy of specifically killing several specifically named public officials if they continued to push certain policies that were allegedly tantamount to tyranny. I don't remember how the case came down, but I do remember that in the opinion was clear that this was considered an edge case. Like I said before, we arose as a nation from civil disobedience and armed revolt, and it remains in the very DNA of our government that we should always keep that option in our back pocket.

In the cases where incitement is upheld, the crime is generally quite immediate, and I think the reasoning is somewhat like that used distinguish entrapment: It's generally uncontroversial to say that it's illegal to say something intended to cause a guy to commit a crime quickly, without time for consideration or measured decision-making. In general, the courts don't want to split hairs between, "Let's kill all the Jews" and "God thinks we should kill all the Jews" and "if and only if the Jews do this, we should kill them" and "I'm not arguing that we should make it legal to kill the Jews, but if someone did, would that be a huge moral atrocity?" because, with calm, measured thought and serious inquiry, many things could potentially convince a crazy enough person to be violent, while hopefully a reasonable person would be able to conclude that violence is a bad idea once removed from the urgency of a situation. Instead, they take a very limited approach. The limits are slightly greater than "heat of the moment"--I've seen a prosecution that charged incitement for someone getting another person to commit a crime several hours later (IIRC, the facts were shaky on solicitation or conspiracy for some reason)--but not much.

Another consideration is that, for these quasi-political arguments, no matter how abhorrent, it's too easy to put a fig leaf on things. Under a more generous standard, "Let's commit genocide!" might be incitement, but then what would you do about, "Let's take power so that we can legalize genocide, and then commit genocide under color of law"?

User avatar
sardia
Posts: 6544
Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2010 3:39 am UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby sardia » Wed Aug 16, 2017 8:53 pm UTC


Jesus, you guys had me scared for a while.

User avatar
Weeks
Hey Baby, wanna make a fortnight?
Posts: 2012
Joined: Sat Aug 23, 2008 12:41 am UTC
Location: Ciudad de Panamá, Panamá

Re: Trump presidency

Postby Weeks » Wed Aug 16, 2017 9:00 pm UTC

sardia wrote:

Jesus, you guys had me scared for a while.
Yeah that was in the twitter thread Belial linked. Very reassuring...
NieXS wrote:Oh god that smiley ruined it.
suffer-cait wrote:One day I'm gun a go visit weeks and discover they're just a computer in a trashcan at an ice cream shop.
Mutex wrote:Enjoy the shoe!

User avatar
ObsessoMom
Nespresso Bomb
Posts: 754
Joined: Sun Sep 29, 2013 5:28 pm UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby ObsessoMom » Wed Aug 16, 2017 9:11 pm UTC

Weeks wrote:
sardia wrote:

Jesus, you guys had me scared for a while.
Yeah that was in the twitter thread Belial linked. Very reassuring...


The governor of Virginia just irresponsibly sparked unnecessary fear at a volatile moment, and fed President Trump's Fake News hobbyhorse. I don't find that reassuring, even though I'm glad there were no actual weapons caches found.

User avatar
Quercus
Posts: 1756
Joined: Thu Sep 19, 2013 12:22 pm UTC
Location: London, UK
Contact:

Re: Trump presidency

Postby Quercus » Wed Aug 16, 2017 9:14 pm UTC

ObsessoMom wrote:
Weeks wrote:
sardia wrote:

Jesus, you guys had me scared for a while.
Yeah that was in the twitter thread Belial linked. Very reassuring...


The governor of Virginia just irresponsibly sparked unnecessary fear at a volatile moment, and fed President Trump's Fake News hobbyhorse. I don't find that reassuring, even though I'm glad there were no actual weapons caches found.

Do we know at this point that there were no actual weapons caches found? We have the word of the governor against the word of the state police. I don't feel that that's conclusive either way.

Also to be noted is that the state police are under considerable criticism for not being active enough in their response. They have motive for downplaying evidence that they should have been way more active than even their critics were suggesting. They also have motive for downplaying notions that they were outgunned.

Of course he governor might equally have ulterior motives for saying what he said, I've heard that suggested on twitter, but I don't know enough about Virginia politics to say how credible that is.
Last edited by Quercus on Wed Aug 16, 2017 9:22 pm UTC, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Weeks
Hey Baby, wanna make a fortnight?
Posts: 2012
Joined: Sat Aug 23, 2008 12:41 am UTC
Location: Ciudad de Panamá, Panamá

Re: Trump presidency

Postby Weeks » Wed Aug 16, 2017 9:15 pm UTC

Quercus wrote:
ObsessoMom wrote:
Weeks wrote:
sardia wrote:

Jesus, you guys had me scared for a while.
Yeah that was in the twitter thread Belial linked. Very reassuring...


The governor of Virginia just irresponsibly sparked unnecessary fear at a volatile moment, and fed President Trump's Fake News hobbyhorse. I don't find that reassuring, even though I'm glad there were no actual weapons caches found.

Do we know at this point that there were no actual weapons caches found? We have the word of the governor against the word of the state police. I don't feel that that's conclusive either way.
this is what meant.
NieXS wrote:Oh god that smiley ruined it.
suffer-cait wrote:One day I'm gun a go visit weeks and discover they're just a computer in a trashcan at an ice cream shop.
Mutex wrote:Enjoy the shoe!

KnightExemplar
Posts: 5494
Joined: Sun Dec 26, 2010 1:58 pm UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby KnightExemplar » Wed Aug 16, 2017 9:16 pm UTC

gmalivuk wrote:
KnightExemplar wrote:
Weeks wrote:
KnightExemplar wrote:But that's not what a lot of people were talking about in this topic. People seem to be talking about offensively taking on the next Neo-Nazi rally.
Yeah! Carry some rocks or something, and drive them the fuck out. As noted above, the police should do that, but they wont so its up to the civilians edit: ninjad by Belial


People have a 1st Amendment right to assembly in this country. Frankly, if we start pushing away the 1st Amendment, its Mr. Trump who benefits the most.

So no, I don't condone offensive violence vs the next group of white supremacist marchers. Intelligently building blockades and counter-protests makes sense. Grabbing rocks and throwing them... seems counterproductive (unless shit hits the fan of course. But I hope it doesn't come to that)
How much more violent do Nazi mobs have to be before you'll admit there's fecal matter on the fan?


Dunno. But each time the leftist echo-chamber creates a fake-news item, it gets harder and harder for me to believe that side unilaterally.

Depends on where this current "Weapons cache" stuff goes.
First Strike +1/+1 and Indestructible.

User avatar
gmalivuk
GNU Terry Pratchett
Posts: 26529
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:02 pm UTC
Location: Here and There
Contact:

Re: Trump presidency

Postby gmalivuk » Wed Aug 16, 2017 9:18 pm UTC

Which piece of caught-on-video Nazi violence is fake news?
Unless stated otherwise, I do not care whether a statement, by itself, constitutes a persuasive political argument. I care whether it's true.
---
If this post has math that doesn't work for you, use TeX the World for Firefox or Chrome

(he/him/his)

KnightExemplar
Posts: 5494
Joined: Sun Dec 26, 2010 1:58 pm UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby KnightExemplar » Wed Aug 16, 2017 9:20 pm UTC

gmalivuk wrote:Which piece of caught-on-video Nazi violence is fake news?


Depends where this goes.

EDIT: Fucked up the link the first time. Apologies.
First Strike +1/+1 and Indestructible.

User avatar
gmalivuk
GNU Terry Pratchett
Posts: 26529
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:02 pm UTC
Location: Here and There
Contact:

Re: Trump presidency

Postby gmalivuk » Wed Aug 16, 2017 9:22 pm UTC

KnightExemplar wrote:
gmalivuk wrote:Which piece of caught-on-video Nazi violence is fake news?


Depends where this goes.

EDIT: Fucked up the link the first time. Apologies.

Which piece of caught-on-video Nazi violence is that relevant to?
Unless stated otherwise, I do not care whether a statement, by itself, constitutes a persuasive political argument. I care whether it's true.
---
If this post has math that doesn't work for you, use TeX the World for Firefox or Chrome

(he/him/his)

User avatar
Belial
A terrible sound heard from a distance
Posts: 30450
Joined: Sat Apr 15, 2006 4:04 am UTC
Contact:

Re: Trump presidency

Postby Belial » Wed Aug 16, 2017 9:23 pm UTC

"If a governor is wrong about a weapons cache, beating a black man into a concussion with sticks in a parking lot on video becomes fine"
addams wrote:A drunk neighbor is better than a sober Belial.


They/them

KnightExemplar
Posts: 5494
Joined: Sun Dec 26, 2010 1:58 pm UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby KnightExemplar » Wed Aug 16, 2017 9:25 pm UTC

Belial wrote:"If a governor is wrong about a weapons cache, beating a black man into a concussion with sticks in a parking lot on video becomes fine"


Politically speaking? Yes.

Being wrong about news stories and spreading fake news muddles the point. I'm not sure if you recognize the importance of these political battles. A Democratic Governor who is a representative of the left spreading fake propaganda is troubling.

Obviously, morality in the real world is a bit different. But the goal is to win the public perception. And the left cannot afford high-profile mistakes like that.
First Strike +1/+1 and Indestructible.

User avatar
The Great Hippo
Swans ARE SHARP
Posts: 7196
Joined: Fri Dec 14, 2007 4:43 am UTC
Location: behind you

Re: Trump presidency

Postby The Great Hippo » Wed Aug 16, 2017 9:27 pm UTC

Netreker0 wrote:Well, considering that I never accused you of the ad hominem fallacy, as YOU were the one who asserted, I didn't have the strict definition on hand and was trying to articulate it from memory. However, since you find it so important to clarify, why don't you state the articulation of the statement that you find more accurate for everyone's edification?
"You're an idiot" is not an ad hominem. "You're an idiot, therefore you are wrong" is an ad hominem. It's the 'therefore' that makes it fallacious. Insulting someone is just insulting them.
Netreker0 wrote:I think I understand pretty much everything you're saying. You think principles should be flexible. I disagreed. You think that you can have censorship built into a country and still have a country that is pluralistic and free (as you said, you can have some restrictions on freedom and not lose all freedom.) I disagreed, and in response cited the country you were thinking about, Germany, as a country that I find insufficiently free, and stated why, because I knew that you probably did not agree with me that Germany was insufficiently free. I also cited some countries that you (hopefully) would agree were insufficiently free, in order to make a pedantic point about what a huge range "not losing all freedoms" was, but I realize now that this was unproductive on my part.
I never said I think you can have censorship built into a country and still have that country be pluralistic and free. Outside of talking about Hitler, I never even discussed Germany -- or its censorship laws -- with you.
Netreker0 wrote:If you feel that I did that, then please, articulate some of those random assumptions.
You decided that I must have an opinion on Germany and its censorship laws -- and how these laws impact Germany's status/non-status as a free, pluralistic society. I most certainly do not have an opinion on this matter.

I'm not sure if I have the energy to bring you two more examples? It's tiring to read through your posts and try to figure out what on earth you think I think.

User avatar
DaBigCheez
Posts: 834
Joined: Tue Jan 04, 2011 8:03 am UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby DaBigCheez » Wed Aug 16, 2017 9:27 pm UTC

KnightExemplar wrote:But the goal is to win the public perception. And the left cannot afford high-profile mistakes like that.

but evidently the right can

as evidence, see Trump's twitter feed
Last edited by DaBigCheez on Wed Aug 16, 2017 9:28 pm UTC, edited 1 time in total.
existential_elevator wrote:It's like a jigsaw puzzle of Hitler pissing on Mother Theresa. No individual piece is offensive, but together...

If you think hot women have it easy because everyone wants to have sex at them, you're both wrong and also the reason you're wrong.

KnightExemplar
Posts: 5494
Joined: Sun Dec 26, 2010 1:58 pm UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby KnightExemplar » Wed Aug 16, 2017 9:28 pm UTC

DaBigCheez wrote:but evidently the right can

as evidence, see Trump's twitter feed


Agreed. Its unfair for some reason, but that's how it goes. The court of public opinion is not fair. Its best that we all recognize the political reality of the moment here.
First Strike +1/+1 and Indestructible.

User avatar
gmalivuk
GNU Terry Pratchett
Posts: 26529
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:02 pm UTC
Location: Here and There
Contact:

Re: Trump presidency

Postby gmalivuk » Wed Aug 16, 2017 9:28 pm UTC

Imagine for a moment that I asked the question before any weapons caches were mentioned and just fucking answer it instead of dodging.
Unless stated otherwise, I do not care whether a statement, by itself, constitutes a persuasive political argument. I care whether it's true.
---
If this post has math that doesn't work for you, use TeX the World for Firefox or Chrome

(he/him/his)

KnightExemplar
Posts: 5494
Joined: Sun Dec 26, 2010 1:58 pm UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby KnightExemplar » Wed Aug 16, 2017 9:32 pm UTC

gmalivuk wrote:Imagine for a moment that I asked the question before any weapons caches were mentioned and just fucking answer it instead of dodging.


Generally speaking, I avoid answering loaded questions directly. I understand what you're trying to say so I'm sufficient at leaving it there.
First Strike +1/+1 and Indestructible.

User avatar
natraj
Posts: 1848
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 10:13 pm UTC
Location: away from Omelas

Re: Trump presidency

Postby natraj » Wed Aug 16, 2017 9:32 pm UTC

y'all know they were just parading around in the streets with semi automatics, right? at occasions aiming them directly at people who were standing and praying? also beating and murdering people? but thank god they weren't hiding any, just openly threatening people in the streets with them, if they had other guns they weren't using then we might find new ridiculous excuses for these genocidal murderers get serious.
You want to know the future, love? Then wait:
I'll answer your impatient questions. Still --
They'll call it chance, or luck, or call it Fate,
The cards and stars that tumble as they will.

pronouns: they or he

User avatar
Belial
A terrible sound heard from a distance
Posts: 30450
Joined: Sat Apr 15, 2006 4:04 am UTC
Contact:

Re: Trump presidency

Postby Belial » Wed Aug 16, 2017 9:35 pm UTC

Maybe decide whether you're speaking as yourself or as some sort of meta-narrative *before* you start talking instead of dodging to whichever one will allow you to scold the left.
addams wrote:A drunk neighbor is better than a sober Belial.


They/them

User avatar
MartianInvader
Posts: 796
Joined: Sat Oct 27, 2007 5:51 pm UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby MartianInvader » Wed Aug 16, 2017 9:41 pm UTC

Belial wrote:In case you hadn't noticed the government is also riddled with nazis

Is this true? I mean, most of the arguments for punching nazis have been based on the idea that the "Nazis" means people who are openly and aggressively pushing for violence in the name of white supremacy and facism, typically while displaying swastikas and/or doing the sieg heil salute.

I'm not aware of any government officials that have gone that far, let alone government being "riddled" with them (maybe I'm wrong? Link me some quotes/sources if so!). But if we start muddling the definition of "Nazis" to include people who merely have racist or white nationalist views then I think that invalidates a lot of the arguments made so far.
Let's have a fervent argument, mostly over semantics, where we all claim the burden of proof is on the other side!

KnightExemplar
Posts: 5494
Joined: Sun Dec 26, 2010 1:58 pm UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby KnightExemplar » Wed Aug 16, 2017 9:45 pm UTC

natraj wrote:y'all know they were just parading around in the streets with semi automatics, right? at occasions aiming them directly at people who were standing and praying? also beating and murdering people? but thank god they weren't hiding any, just openly threatening people in the streets with them, if they had other guns they weren't using then we might find new ridiculous excuses for these genocidal murderers get serious.


I dunno about that. The "Oathkeepers" generally speaking show up at protests and... idiotically... think that they're helping. I think the "Oathkeepers" are utterly idiotic and fail to grasp whats going on. But I don't know if they were on the "right" or the "left" or taking a side at all. They think that they can just come with guns to a protest and that will keep everyone peaceful.

EDIT: Hmm: seems like Wikipedia labels them as far-right. Which sorta makes sense. They're definitely anti-government and pro-guns which is definitely a far-right viewpoint. But my understanding of the group doesn't mean that they'd take a side in the confederate monument debate. The Oathkeeper's shtick was that they show up to protests heavily armed to discourage other people from fighting.

I know that the white nationalists were marching with sticks and shields... many wielding their confederate flags as weapons. I've seen those pictures. I've also seen the chemical sprays that they were armed with.

Its hard for me to make a judgment without being there. There's a lot of pictures and articles to go through here, and the story of what exactly happened last Saturday is very complicated. Maybe you've seen a Nazi-dude actually armed with a long-rifle though? So if you got a picture, I'd be glad to change my opinion.

For now, I can't tell if it was one of those "Oathkeeper" dudes or not.
Last edited by KnightExemplar on Wed Aug 16, 2017 9:49 pm UTC, edited 1 time in total.
First Strike +1/+1 and Indestructible.

User avatar
Thesh
Made to Fuck Dinosaurs
Posts: 6301
Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 1:55 am UTC
Location: Colorado

Re: Trump presidency

Postby Thesh » Wed Aug 16, 2017 9:47 pm UTC

MartianInvader wrote:
Belial wrote:In case you hadn't noticed the government is also riddled with nazis

Is this true? I mean, most of the arguments for punching nazis have been based on the idea that the "Nazis" means people who are openly and aggressively pushing for violence in the name of white supremacy and facism, typically while displaying swastikas and/or doing the sieg heil salute.

I'm not aware of any government officials that have gone that far, let alone government being "riddled" with them (maybe I'm wrong? Link me some quotes/sources if so!). But if we start muddling the definition of "Nazis" to include people who merely have racist or white nationalist views then I think that invalidates a lot of the arguments made so far.



Well, Trump is definitely siding with the Nazis. The GOP has been targeting these groups for campaign advertisements, highlighting minority violence, ignoring white supremacist violence, suppressing minority votes, attacking civil rights legislation, while right-wing news hints about how we need an uprising to suppress leftism... They have done everything they can to support white supremacist militants short of publicly calling for genocide.
Last edited by Thesh on Wed Aug 16, 2017 9:47 pm UTC, edited 1 time in total.
Summum ius, summa iniuria.

User avatar
Belial
A terrible sound heard from a distance
Posts: 30450
Joined: Sat Apr 15, 2006 4:04 am UTC
Contact:

Re: Trump presidency

Postby Belial » Wed Aug 16, 2017 9:47 pm UTC

"White nationalism" is a weasel term. It's inherently eliminationalist and it relies for camouflage on you not thinking too hard about it and assuming they haven't either.

There has never been a "<nation> for <ethnic group> only!" movement that didn't come down to, in practice, violent, murderous removal. The native American genocide is a best-case, historically.
addams wrote:A drunk neighbor is better than a sober Belial.


They/them

User avatar
plytho
¡This cheese is burning me!
Posts: 167
Joined: Sun Mar 02, 2008 6:23 pm UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby plytho » Wed Aug 16, 2017 9:48 pm UTC

Here's a video from vice by a reporter 'embedded' with the white nationalists:link. In case anyone needs to see a couple of them explain their views. There's one bit around 9 with a guy in full camo calling the cops to say he'll send 200 men with guns to go get some people that weren't allowed to move.
Pronouns: he him his
Avatar: The High Frontier by Angus McKie


Return to “News & Articles”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 15 guests