US Politics: flaking out and coming uncorked

[ThinkerX]

6 minutes ago, Seli said:

The question is what moderates? Nothing that is happening now is really unexpected given GOP attitude in the last decades. The people who have voted GOP (and to a large extent third party and non-voters) in national and state elections since basically Cheney are fully complicit in the disruptions caused by the current GOP government and congress.

Their apathy is more relevant a characterization than any moderacy. And if they look at the current state of the US, and think GOP can still offer a solution. I am sorry to see I cannot see how they could be called moderates.

Did you somehow miss my posts about the local level runoff election I recently voted in?

To recap: This is a heavily conservative area.  There was *never* any doubt that the office - Borough Mayor - was going to go to a conservative.  The only questions were 'how conservative?' and 'how much of a oil industry toady?'

My initial pick - somebody who could be taken as a moderate republican if you squinted hard enough - lost the first election.  That left us with two candidates: the republican backed former natural gas company manager; and the slightly more liberal part owner of a car dealership with a dubious reputation.  In what passed for the debates, the gas company guy was straightforward in his answers, plus he and I agreed on various ballot propositions.  The car dealership lady kept talking around the issues when questioned, and we differed on the ballot issues.

In the end, I voted for the gas company guy.  Does that make me a Nazi? 

[Seli]

6 minutes ago, ThinkerX said:

Did you somehow miss my posts about the local level runoff election I recently voted in?

To recap: This is a heavily conservative area.  There was *never* any doubt that the office - Borough Mayor - was going to go to a conservative.  The only questions were 'how conservative?' and 'how much of a oil industry toady?'

My initial pick - somebody who could be taken as a moderate republican if you squinted hard enough - lost the first election.  That left us with two candidates: the republican backed former natural gas company manager; and the slightly more liberal part owner of a car dealership with a dubious reputation.  In what passed for the debates, the gas company guy was straightforward in his answers, plus he and I agreed on various ballot propositions.  The car dealership lady kept talking around the issues when questioned, and we differed on the ballot issues.

In the end, I voted for the gas company guy.  Does that make me a Nazi? 

No I did not miss it, there is a reason I stopped at state level positions. Even if even there there are some hardly contested elections as far as I am aware. 

[DMC]

3 hours ago, larrytheimp said:

I mean fuck, my shithead republican boss believes that on Nov 4 some massive left-wing uprising is coming so he's holding up on his house with all his guns ready because some right wing nutjob Facebook post told him Black Lives Matter is coming for him.  

Wow that's really stupid.  You should make sure he reads something like that on facebook like, monthly, so as to get him fired and take his job.

21 minutes ago, Seli said:

The question is what moderates?

I know it's insane to believe considering what most are exposed to (or this board), but there still are measurable moderates.  Again, Pew even categorizes them.

[DMC]

4 hours ago, Mexal said:

NBC now confirming.

Was about to say I hope they leak names of the indicted tomorrow, but Mueller's already catching shit for his team leaking this "bombshell" information that there will be news on Monday.  What a bunch of whiny special snowflakes.

[Darth Richard II]

53 minutes ago, OldGimletEye said:

All aboard the conservative crazy train.

Next stop: Nutville.

Oh, I got a similar story except it was a friend of a friend and he pretty much stayed holed up in his house out in the middle of like the California desert because he though any minute gang bangers were going to try and rape his family. No facebook needed.

[karaddin]

5 hours ago, Dr. Pepper said:

I only vaguely knew who Bonesy was, but it seems to me that he wouldn't have been impressed with attempts to shield him from the truth in order to change his political views.  The truth is what changed my mind.  The truth here is that Trump has been declared the leader by nazis and he has done little if nothing to disavow that.  

That was actually referring to an older boarder we lost, EHK, who made a very visible transformation in his views and wasn't shy about articulating it. Personally I think if he were still here he'd have a few things to say on the subject of labelling Nazis and all of them would include"fuck". Probably followed by "Nazis". 

[Rippounet]

4 hours ago, Manhole Eunuchsbane said:

Now that is interesting. The idea of quasi-nazis and jews uniting against muslims? What a world we live in, eh?

It makes a lot of sense, strategically speaking.
The far-right has been pushing hard for a narrative about a "clash of civilizations" for some time now, arguing that the West is facing a threat of Muslim radicalism (both domestic and foreign) to its values and economic interests.
In this perspective, Israel is part of the West and is a useful ally (especially since the end times are coming). In fact, right-wing Israeli leaders have been pushing the clash of civilizations narrative themselves (for obvious reasons) and are content to support those who might be of use to them. Trump himself is quite popular in Israel.
This is why I'm a bit wary of the nazi label. I fear that it could be too easily turned against those who use it.
Ironically, it seems the rank and file of the alt-right doesn't always understand all this. For them, liberal Jews are responsible for the mass immigration coming from Muslim countries and seek to dilute the purity of the white race (they still believe in the Jewish arch-conspiracy).
Yeah, I know, I'm fun at parties.

[Horza]

7 hours ago, dmc515 said:

Ok, I've tried to avoid being hostile but fuck it. 

That was you trying?

Quote

So some Nazis have prioritized being antisemitic over anti-Islam.  That's your point, right?  Who gives a shit?  Does that make defending Jews more important than defending Muslims?  Like, seriously, what's your point here?  What policy implications are we supposed to stop that are particularly aimed at Jews?  Because I'm at a loss - especially in terms of foreign policy.  Your efforts thus far are not adequate, all you've done is assert one religion is more persecuted than another among Nazis, which is a pretty damn pointless argument considering they hate virtually everybody.

I have no idea why this observation has brought you to this place and I am not terribly interested in unpicking it given the absense of good faith that has characterised your responses (why does no one ever follow through with their opening rhetorical commitments "not to be an [x]").

You can't seem to summarise my position accurately and from the start I don't think you wanted to. Your efforts not to grasp the point that ideological differences produce differing priorities, which in turn produce conflict between nazi organisations have been herculean and I'll leave you to bask in the accomplishment.

[DMC]

1 minute ago, Rippounet said:

In this perspective, Israel is part of the West and is a useful ally (especially since the end times are coming). In fact, right-wing Israeli leaders have been pushing the clash of civilizations narrative themselves (for obvious reasons) and are content to support those who might be of use to them.

Yeah this strange alliance has been going on for quite some time now, long before Trump or even Dubya.

[DMC]

2 minutes ago, Horza said:

You can't seem to summarise my position accurately and from the start I don't think you wanted to. Your efforts not to grasp the point that ideological differences produce differing priorities, which in turn produce conflict between nazi organisations have been herculean and I'll leave you to bask in the accomplishment.

Maybe instead of talking about your position state it with clarity.  You repeatedly mention differentiated foreign and domestic political implications for the "within" schism among the far right/Nazis, but what exactly you mean by that has never been articulated.  Precisely what ideological differences produce precisely what differing priorities?  It's funny you characterize my efforts "not to grasp [your] point" when all I've been doing is trying to understand it with little aid.

[The guy from the Vale]

Netanyahu has been quite a central figure in this development, too. Notice how he seems to have despised Obama while buddying up to "'Jews will not replace us' Neonazis are actually good people" Trump. Those seem some very... strange bedfellows, personal connections going back to the 1980es notwithstanding. In some sense even stranger than the Trump-Putin thing, which is at least understandable in the sense that Trump seems to be a total Putin patsy while Obama didn't seem to be particularly fond of giving Vlad all that much leeway.

[Bonnot OG]

Another big nazi rally, this time in Tennessee. Same chants that were chanted in Charlottesville, blood and soil, jews will not replace us. But yea, they aren't an issue. It shouldn't constantly be brought up since they are constantly looking to have rallies to recruit and normalize their views.

This country will cave to fascism. 

[IamMe90]

17 minutes ago, Horza said:

That was you trying?

I have no idea why this observation has brought you to this place and I am not terribly interested in unpicking it given the absense of good faith that has characterised your responses (why does no one ever follow through with their opening rhetorical commitments "not to be an [x]").

You can't seem to summarise my position accurately and from the start I don't think you wanted to. Your efforts not to grasp the point that ideological differences produce differing priorities, which in turn produce conflict between nazi organisations have been herculean and I'll leave you to bask in the accomplishment.

I don't think I'd characterize prioritizing hating Muslims over hating Jews as an "ideological difference," so much as a pragmatic one. What's the difference in core ideology here? That being said, it is a difference that I think has implications for policy and diplomacy.

[Darth Richard II]

8 minutes ago, Sword of Doom said:

Another big nazi rally, this time in Tennessee. Same chants that were chanted in Charlottesville, blood and soil, jews will not replace us. But yea, they aren't an issue. It shouldn't constantly be brought up since they are constantly looking to have rallies to recruit and normalize their views.

This country will  has caved to fascism. 

Fixed it for ya.

[Zorral]

4 hours ago, Manhole Eunuchsbane said:

Yeah that Roger Stone Tweet is brutal on a number of different levels. MegaCorps eating up media outlets is a huge problem and I don't think the government should allow these sorts of mergers or takeovers.

That said, do you really believe anything approaching that second bit could happen? No one is going to execute Hillary Clinton. Seriously.No one of importance is going to even suggest that as a possibility.

Ay-up here we go again:  Ain't nothin' happin' here, just keep movin, nuttin to see, keep movin' and sht the eff up.

Others have been arrested, convicted and jailed for not being Them and for working to protest Them and to stop Them. Women's rights, reproductive rights, environmental rights, consumer rights, etc. etc. etc. already have been and continue to be erased every single day, but nothing bad has happened and can't happen here. Because, yah, you know, people like some people here, don't think any of this matters and can't matter -- not in their lives -- even when it happens everyday to so many.

 

[Rippounet]

4 minutes ago, theguyfromtheVale said:

Netanyahu has been quite a central figure in this development, too. Notice how he seems to have despised Obama while buddying up to "'Jews will not replace us' Neonazis are actually good people" Trump.

Yep. The Israeli response to Charlottesville was rather mild (to say the least) too:
http://www.npr.org/sections/parallels/2017/08/16/543913980/israels-netanyahu-faces-criticism-for-delayed-reaction-to-charlottesville-rally
Smart neo-nazi leaders like Bannon and Le Pen are very careful to stay clear of antisemitism in public, and right-wing Israelis play along because they see the American and European lefts as more of a potential threat to their national interests.
They somehow managed to find a perfect figurehead to their movement in Trump because of Kushner. In fact, I would argue that Trump represents the maturing of this odd alliance. Trump himself very clearly believes in the clash of civilizations, which could have scary consequences for the Middle-East. And what Netanyahu and him plan for Iran is an open question.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/sep/18/trump-netanyahu-iran-nuclear-deal-united-nations-general-assembly
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2017/10/16/trump-making-history-by-seeking-changes-to-iran-deal-says-israels-intelligence-minister/?utm_term=.0dea7d73a049
http://www.latimes.com/world/middleeast/la-fg-israel-iran-deal-20171009-story.html

[Altherion]

4 hours ago, larrytheimp said:

This is what many of us have been alarmed by for awhile and have been been increasingly vocal about for the last two years.  

There have undoubtedly been many alarmed people who have been quite vocal about it for the last two years... but they've mainly been vocal and alarmed about the rise of the alt-right rather than the reasons for large numbers of people being angry. How many people concerned about the alt-right have spoken out against illegal immigration or "diversity" initiatives in hiring or the suppression of speech on taxpayer-funded campuses or any other of the topics which brought Bannon & Co. to prominence?

In fact, the people vocal about the alt-right have a tendency to label those who do speak up about these issues using various names in an attempt to remove their arguments from the public discourse altogether. It worked for a while, but, as the election of Trump demonstrated, it's not working anymore and it's unlikely to work again in the near future. If you want the effects to disappear, you have to be willing to deal with the causes.

[Darth Richard II]

Yes, lets start some ethnic cleansing, then maybe the Nazis wont be so angry.

[OldGimletEye]

Motion To File Into the Historical Record Who Is Willing To Play Footsy With Nazis

Re: Nazism As Leftwing Movement

If I recall correctly, about the mid 2000s or maybe even before, it became fashoniable in conservative circles to argue that Nazism was a left wing movement, perhaps starting with Jonah Shitbird's Liberal Facism.

And yet here we are, and whose willing to play footsy with Nazis?

It would seem to that mainstream conservatism and the donor class of the conservative movement or the Republican Party and the business community could come out and crush the Nazi movement tomorrow if they so chose.
Why don't they?

Tax cuts, maybe?

Perhaps afraid of a destructive civil war in their own party?

They think they can play with matches, and not have their fingers burned, in the process?

Anyway, I'd request that it be recognized that back in 2006 Jonah Shitbird was full of shit. And the conservatives that repeated his nonsense were full of shit too.

[TrueMetis]

19 minutes ago, Darth Richard II said:

Yes, lets start some ethnic cleansing, then maybe the Nazis wont be so angry.

And here I was under the impression that people thought Chamberlain's policy of appeasement was a bad idea.