US Politics: flaking out and coming uncorked

[Darth Richard II]

Nazis are evil. Why is this even a question.

[Isalie]

Who in the holy fuck said Nazis weren't evil? I don't even care how you guys label your sworn enemies (though I think it's truly moronic to think that you can gain any ground by pushing the moderates into the arms of your enemies). But the same people are hijacking every single US politics thread and I try to just scroll past it, but right now it's like 70% of the content.

[DMC]

26 minutes ago, Horza said:

Why would that be stylistic? It's a difference with clear implications for domestic and international political priorities.

Because I think you're granting far too much nuance on behalf of those that choose to hate Jews over Muslims or vice versa.  What "priorities" differentiate hating Jews over Muslim (or agin, vice versa) in terms of policy implications?  Their political priorities are clear at that point, it's just a point of emphasis in propaganda.  Tell me why it's not.

[DMC]

16 minutes ago, Mikael said:

Who in the holy fuck said Nazis weren't evil?

Good question.

[DMC]

1 hour ago, Rippounet said:

Are you guys really ok with erasing all subtelty and nuance from political discourse though? You have to realize it's a two-way street. 

That's what underlies a lot of what I read on here.  Like there's a shibboleth I've yet to deserve nor understand.  It's too bad, because I think there's a lot of very smart people around that are ensconced in a very tiny realm of political discourse.

[Horza]

22 minutes ago, dmc515 said:

Because I think you're granting far too much nuance on behalf of those that choose to hate Jews over Muslims or vice versa. 

You keep saying that, but I'm still mystified as to why. And as you're clearly a very clever guy, I can't understand why you're being obtuse with regards to the direct political implications of such a distinction.

 

 

 

[DMC]

4 minutes ago, Horza said:

You keep saying that, but I'm still mystified as to why. And as you're clearly a very clever guy, I can't understand why you're being obtuse with regards to the direct political implications of such a distinction.

Thanks for the compliment, but the question remains.  I guess you mean in terms of hating Muslims more has more clear policy implications?  Yes, I suppose I can infer that in terms of the travel ban.  But that's the extent my cleverness can muster in terms of seeing a distinction, and I don't see it as a big one when we're talking about such an ideology.

[Horza]

12 minutes ago, dmc515 said:

Thanks for the compliment, but the question remains.  I guess you mean in terms of hating Muslims more has more clear policy implications?  Yes, I suppose I can infer that in terms of the travel ban.  But that's the extent my cleverness can muster in terms of seeing a distinction, and I don't see it as a big one when we're talking about such an ideology.

That's all you can think of in terms of far right domestic and international politics? Well ok then.

[LongRider]

5 hours ago, Manhole Eunuchsbane said:

 I have to say that outside of the breaking news aspect of this story, the coverage has been dry as all hell. Parade of legal wonks describing the process of a Grand Jury with a sprinkling of speculation as to who the indicted party might be. I guess it's a confirmation of just how tight a ship Mueller runs, which is a good thing, but this story is going to be a slog, methinks. 

Ah but the sideshows as Trump and his crew panic. 

Hillary paid for the dossier because Bill likes pee-pee tapes!   Hillary ate uranium and puked it up for the Ayatollah.  Hillary and Weinstein really, really did run child actor porn pizza pony parties.  Mueller is working for Soros (gotta have a little Soros with your CT's, or why bother 'eh?)

good times   

[DMC]

38 minutes ago, Horza said:

That's all you can think of in terms of far right domestic and international politics? Well ok then.

Was about to ETA...I can see what you're saying in terms of "international politics."  The religious right has always wanted the Jews in Israel because that's where they're supposed to be when the world ends.  The Nazi right probably did adopt this stance, as well as Huntington's "Clash of Civilizations" which dictates a virtual world war against the Islamic world.  So, fair enough on that.  I just don't know how much that bullshit is "in" with modern Nazis - Bannon's message is pretty damn isolationist.  And in regards to domestic policy, yes, I'm still at a loss where the ideology differentiates between Muslims and Jews beyond the travel ban and thinking the latter run the banks, Hollywood, and the weather.

ETA:  How bout you actually tell me where I'm going wrong?   If there's something I'm missing I'm all there, totally interested.  But stop being vague and explicitly tell me why I'm stupid.

[Bonnot OG]

 

12 hours ago, Darth Richard II said:

Why do we need a different example? What I'm talking about is happening in real life right now.

Whataboutism as a form of deflection. It's the center right / right wing way.

[Horza]

1 minute ago, dmc515 said:

Was about to ETA...I can see what you're saying in terms of "international politics."  The religious right has always wanted the Jews in Israel because that's where they're supposed to be when the world ends.  The Nazi right probably did adopt this stance, as well as Huntington's "Clash of Civilizations" which dictates a virtual world war against the Islamic world.  So, fair enough on that.  I just don't know how much that bullshit is "in" with modern Nazis - Bannon's message is pretty damn isolationist.  And in regards to domestic policy, yes, I'm still at a loss where the ideology differentiates between Muslims and Jews beyond the travel ban and thinking the latter run the banks, Hollywood, and the weather.

To see how this plays out, look at Bannon. This is a guy who has actively worked to advance the alt-right agenda at every turn, including promoting blatantly antisemitic voices. Yet when he was in office, his priorities whiteboard included moving the Israeli capital to Jerusalem as a key foreign policy goal. Is Bannon some kind of antisemite? Almost certainly, but his flavour of white supremacy clearly looks elsewhere for its primary scourge.

For some white supremacists this is a step too far. While these creeps aren't averse to the odd bit of nudge-nudge-wink-winkery, they're bothered by Bannon and Breitbart's pro-Israel stance, which they regard as an insult everything Uncle Adolf butchered for. Is Bannon cynically using nazis to build his political empire? Are real raving nazis just hopping on the Alt-Right bandwagon? It's hard to tell, particularly because everyone's playing nice now that their preferred candidate won the highest office in the land but the bottom line is that some nazis prioritise swastika tatts over Muslim bans, and that's more than a stylistic choice.

 

 

[Mexal]

7 hours ago, Manhole Eunuchsbane said:

 I have to say that outside of the breaking news aspect of this story, the coverage has been dry as all hell. Parade of legal wonks describing the process of a Grand Jury with a sprinkling of speculation as to who the indicted party might be. I guess it's a confirmation of just how tight a ship Mueller runs, which is a good thing, but this story is going to be a slog, methinks. 

That's what happens when there is no information about who or confirmation from other networks that CNN's reporting is even true. 

[DMC]

6 minutes ago, Horza said:

To see how this plays out, look at Bannon. This is a guy who has actively worked to advance the alt-right agenda at every turn, including promoting blatantly antisemitic voices. Yet when he was in office, his priorities whiteboard included moving the Israeli capital to Jerusalem as a key foreign policy goal. Is Bannon some kind of antisemite? Almost certainly, but his flavour of white supremacy clearly looks elsewhere for its primary scourge.

For some white supremacists this is a step too far. While these creeps aren't averse to the odd bit of nudge-nudge-wink-winkery, they're bothered by Bannon and Breitbart's pro-Israel stance, which they regard as an insult everything Uncle Adolf butchered for. Is Bannon cynically using nazis to build his political empire? Are real raving nazis just hopping on the Alt-Right bandwagon? It's hard to tell, particularly because everyone's playing nice now that their preferred candidate won the highest office in the land but the bottom line is that some nazis prioritise swastika tatts over Muslim bans, and that's more than a stylistic choice.

I suppose my objection is creating some type of hierarchy between Jews and Muslims in terms of which is more hated.  I have much (much) closer personal connection to those of the Jewish faith, but I still don't know why you think it makes much of a difference.  There's enough hate to go around with these fucks, and it does not change their ideology one way or another.

[Horza]

Just now, dmc515 said:

I suppose my objection is creating some type of hierarchy between Jews and Muslims in terms of which is more hated.  I have much (much) closer personal connection to those of the Jewish faith, but I still don't know why you think it makes much of a difference.  There's enough hate to go around with these fucks, and it does not change their ideology one way or another.

 

I don't really get where this objection is coming from. If one set of nazis construes their nazi ideology in such a way that prioritises hating Jews over hating Muslims that's an observation about nazis, not Muslims or Jews. If it affects their respective political activity then that's also worth noting. Neither observation changes the fact that both sets of nazis are nazis.

[DMC]

7 minutes ago, Horza said:

Neither observation changes the fact that both sets of nazis are nazis.

That's all I was saying.

8 minutes ago, Horza said:

If it affects their respective political activity then that's also worth noting.

Good point and totally agreed, but has it?  When, where, how?

[Horza]

Just now, dmc515 said:

That's all I was saying.

 

I said that right at the start.

Quote

Good point and totally agreed, but has it?  When, where, how?

Why did I even bother?

[Rippounet]

1 hour ago, dmc515 said:

And in regards to domestic policy, yes, I'm still at a loss where the ideology differentiates between Muslims and Jews beyond the travel ban and thinking the latter run the banks, Hollywood, and the weather.

Let's put it this way. Shit comes in various colors and consistencies. On some level it doesn't matter because it's still shit in the end but if you're serious about removing it from your floor you might end up using different tools to achieve that and avoid shitstains.
As a European, and as a Frenchman, I know that today's political racists do their best to avoid talking about racial or ethnic purity and present their case as a defense of secularism (well, "laïcité"). Sometimes, as a defense of specific values and traditions.
Of course, in the long run, the objectives are the same, and one shouldn't be fooled by the new face of nazism. Yet, in the short-term, if you want to nip it in the bud, it does help to understand the subtle links between anti-semitism and islamophobia. The latter is about very specific laws that amount to religious discrimination and a twisted view of what constitutes state security.
Also, and as much as I don't like being the one to write this, at the root of islamophobia are concerns that can't and shouldn't be dismissed out of hand. Paris has seen some very traumatic events in the last years. Coincidentally, the National Front has cozied up to the Jewish community and tried to establish some form of working relationship with Israeli organizations. Calling these people nazis might help exposing them for what they truly are ; or it might play right into their hands since they have indeed taken their distance with antisemitism.
Most importantly, depending on who you're talking to, exposing the blatant racism of some proposed laws and measures might help... Or not at all. Sometimes it's simply more efficient to discuss whether the measures in question will actually make people safer. If you're serious about preventing the spread of despicable ideologies, it's best to have as many items in your toolbox as possible.
I guess what I'm trying to say is that it does not help calling everyone hating on Islam a nazi. A lot of people simply don't understand Islam and have no historical perspective on current events. They're scared and a bit dumb, and it's easy to reject everything that's a bit too alien and different. Dismissing their concerns and insulting them is likely to be counter-productive. Frankly speaking, I think many of these people don't actually want a white ethno-state, or at least, would never condone what is necessary to achieve one ; what the actual nazis are trying to do is precisely to convince them to move in that direction. But if you don't distinguish between the people who are advocating (openly or not) for a white-ethno state and those who are the targets of the arguments, you are pretty much conceding defeat as far as the battle of ideas goes.
And the battle of ideas is never over. This is the lesson of what we're seeing these days. The American Civil War did not end with the abolition of slavery and the defeat of the South. The Second World War did not end with the death of Hitler and the surrendering of nazi Germany. I would argue that it still is and always has been about convincing the majority of what is right. It's hard, it requires patience and skill. Unfortunately, today, when confronted with people defending some measures, it actually matters why they are doing so. Some are bona fide racists and nazis. Others are just fools. And while it's easy to think fools have become nazis these days, I do not think we're quite there yet.

[DMC]

1 minute ago, Horza said:

Why did I even bother?

I don't know.  You seem to think previous links demonstrate your point when they don't.  Or that I'm fundamentally against your point which I'm not.  Or that I'm supposed to figure it out on my own event though I can't.  So, yeah, Nazis hate Jews.  They also hate Muslims.  Why this is controversial I don't know, but feel free to tell me why in the future.

[DMC]

10 minutes ago, Rippounet said:

I guess what I'm trying to say is that it does not help calling everyone hating on Islam a nazi.

Of course not.  Never meant to suggest such.  I just legit do not understand exactly what the argument is.