Jump to content

US Politics: Locked, Loaded, Fired Up and Capitalized


Kalbear

Recommended Posts

There's another argument beyond what I've been saying - and what @S John just articulated more eloquently than I have.  There's the human aspect.  I bet all the money in my pockets that there are a good number of kids holding those torches in the protests that began this discussion that have no fucking idea what they're doing.  Sure, they may be nazis now, but you know a great way to ensure they will be for the rest of their lives?  Criminalizing their protest.  

I prefer to let them try to figure this out on their own.  Maybe they go to school, maybe they get a job and interact with people that change their perspective.  Maybe they simply grow up or out of it and just thought it was cool at the time.  It's actually a thought that's far more leftist than the rigidity being argued here.  Most "neo" nazis are dumb kids, and I believe in the possibility of redemption for dumb kids.  But not if you tell them the bullshit their swallowing at 18 is against the law.  That's a great way to radicalize them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, S John said:

You are kind of proving my point though, consider a single word alteration of your first sentence  -

"Discourse does not work when Islam is the opposing ideology. If it did, wars would not have been needed to bring them down."

I changed one word and that's straight off a Richard Spencer nazi  sploogestravaganza, we have to be better than that.

the fact you guys are able to equate nazism, an ideology based wholly on the idea of white supremacy and the subjugation and/or extermination of "inferior" races with any other ideology or religion is supremely fucked up. jfc, seriously, what is wrong with you people? you are freely admitting you think there is no difference between nazism and islam?! that is the very shit they want to normalize? ffs, spencer would be way more glad to hear that argument than the "but Islam is conservative and backwards and evil". the latter simply agrees with him, while the former buttresses his position while also agreeing with him

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, r'hllor's red lobster said:

because you have repeatedly proven you are either incapable addressing my salient points or are more interested in offering up half assed neo nazi apologia, but fuck it, i'll give or a shot: people have violence visited upon them based on ideological differences almost daily in this country, without recourse. the difference is, this violence is usually perpetrated by conservative, reactionary, and/or right wing elements of our society. by defending or enhancing this status quo, and not actively working to overturn it, the centrist/moderate elements of our society lend credence to these reactionaries, and further entrench their world view as 'normal'. the right wing reactionaries now get to push their vile views as closer to 'center' and thus more mainstream. so they can now use this "you wouldn't want this to happen to you" message while providing a convenient cover to ignore the very real instance of this violence and suppression happening to marginalized, less "mainstream" groups. so when you say (sorry paraphrasing, can't seem to multi quote on my phone) "you can't commit violence against those you disagree with violence without legal repercussion" while very real physical, emotional, and economic violence is actually committed against people every day without repercussion, then yes, i am going to laugh in your fucking face. 

tl;dr-- i am not saying the idea of "rule of law" is laughable on its face; but the argument that it exists today, in any sort of fair and equitable sense (even ignoring the people out there actively working for genocide) is fucking hilarious. ell oh fucking ell

I didn't suggest it was perfect, but I do believe that it is superior to the sort of mob violence that you seem to be justifying. 

And that's quite a bit of nuance that you're expecting me to glean from "fucking LOL" 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, r'hllor's red lobster said:

you are freely admitting you think there is no difference between nazism and islam?!

No.  No one is admitting that.  The argument is pretty old, and could be used with any subjugated minorities.  Once you take Nazis out of protection of speech, what stops the majority from pressuring the courts to do the same with the next least favored minority?  This isn't an academic discussion.  It's part and parcel of how certain governments consolidate power.  It's also been demonstrated by people far smarter than I that this is how people think - moving from one taboo group to the next closest.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, r'hllor's red lobster said:

the fact you guys are able to equate nazism, an ideology based wholly on the idea of white supremacy and the subjugation and/or extermination of "inferior" races with any other ideology or religion is supremely fucked up. jfc, seriously, what is wrong with you people? you are freely admitting you think there is no difference between nazism and islam?! that is the very shit they want to normalize? ffs, spencer would be way more glad to hear that argument than the "but Islam is conservative and backwards and evil". the latter simply agrees with him, while the former buttresses his position while also agreeing with him

The argument that dmc just posited regarding radicalizing neo-nazi youth, you'd accept that same argument if the person in question was an Islamist, right?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Manhole Eunuchsbane said:

 

And that's quite a bit of nuance that you're expecting me to glean from "fucking LOL" 

you're right, i should not have had such high expectations from someone who claims "you can't commit violence in this county without legal repercussions"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, dmc515 said:

No.  No one is admitting that.  The argument is pretty old, and could be used with any subjugated minorities.  Once you take Nazis out of protection of speech, what stops the majority from pressuring the courts to do the same with the next least favored minority?  This isn't an academic discussion.  It's part and parcel of how certain governments consolidate power.  It's also been demonstrated by people far smarter than I that this is how people think - moving from one taboo group to the next closest.

*handclap* NAZIS *handclapARENT A *handclapPROCTECTED *handclapCLASS! *handclapITS *handclapVERY *handclapEASY *handclapTO SEPERATE *handclapDISAGREEABLE handclapBELIEFS *handclapFROM *handclapOUTRIGHT *handclapGENOCIDAL handclapIDEOLOGIES! *handclap*STOP DEFENDING *handclapFACSISTS! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Manhole Eunuchsbane said:

The argument that dmc just posited regarding radicalizing neo-nazi youth, you'd accept that same argument if the person in question was an Islamist, right?

an islamofacsist? the same way i have been arguing about christian ethnofacscists and not christians as a whole? of course. the fact that wasn't obvious to you just shows how shitty your false equivalence is

oh and guess what the u.s. already does that to radical islamofacsists. why is that ok but not suppressing nazis?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, r'hllor's red lobster said:

*handclap* NAZIS *handclapARENT A *handclapPROCTECTED *handclapCLASS! *handclapITS *handclapVERY *handclapEASY *handclapTO SEPERATE *handclapDISAGREEABLE handclapBELIEFS *handclapFROM *handclapOUTRIGHT *handclapGENOCIDAL handclapIDEOLOGIES! *handclap*STOP DEFENDING *handclapFACSISTS! 

No, legally it's not so easy to distinguish between "disagreeable" and "genocidal" ideologies.  No matter how many times you clap your hands.  The Old Testament is arguable genocidal.  The Quran too.  Hell, one could make a compelling argument John Foster Dulles was genocidal towards communists, let alone McCarthy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, dmc515 said:

No, legally it's not so easy to distinguish between "disagreeable" and "genocidal" ideologies.  No matter how many times you clap your hands.  The Old Testament is arguable genocidal.  The Quran too.  Hell, one could make a compelling argument John Foster Dulles was genocidal towards communists, let alone McCarthy.

lol if you think i'm gonna say those two ghouls shouldn't have been packed onto a tiny boat and set adrift in the Atlantic...

but again, if you donuts want to play this "everyone gets treated equally" bullshit, y'all need to start addressing how and why these nazi rallies get better treatment from the police (let alone commentators in this very thread) than other radical activists

also, want to shout out to @Sword of Doom for coming out the gate strong with some real principled and cogent arguments. welcome, comrade :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, r'hllor's red lobster said:

but again, if you donuts want to play this "everyone gets treated equally" bullshit, y'all need to start addressing how and why these nazi rallies get better treatment from the police (let alone commentators in this very thread) than other radical activists

Never argued against that (or for it? ...fuck, you know what I mean) - in spite of my dumbass statement earlier trying to be funny.  I think I've been pretty clear where in which our back-and-forth originated.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, dmc515 said:

Never argued against that (or for it? ...fuck, you know what I mean) - in spite of my dumbass statement earlier trying to be funny.  I think I've been pretty clear where in which our back-and-forth originated.

maybe, but I've been going on with three different people for 5 hours, so maybe i missed it. i don't really know. think we're talking past each other at this point

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nazism wants to wipe out a good portion of the worlds population. The disabled dead, the LGBT community dead, Jews dead, people of color dead, anyone with a "defect" dead. It's a combination of eugenics and white supremacy achieved through mass extermination. We've seen it before, and going by how some people think you can reason with those that follow such an ideology or that we should let them have platforms, it's only a matter of time before it happens again. 

It's really time for some to wakes up and realize there are actual neo nazis in the White House. Two of them set policy (Bannon and Miller) and another has something to do with national defense and has ties to Austria's Nazi party (Gorka.) And there's also a white supremacist filling the role of attorney general (Sessions). It's pretty evident that this administration empowers the white supremacists and neo nazis  to this country. It's also evident discoure doesn't work since a good portion of the country heard all the bigotry and still went with it, either because the hey agreed with it, or they're selfish and didn't care since it wouldn't impact them.  This party heavily appeals to the Richard Spencer and David Dukes of the world are currently setting policy and attempting to go even harder with voter suppression and rig the system to be even more in their favor by suppressing the votes of people of color. 

You really have naive and pretty foolish to think you can reason with bigots, especially bigots that justify the holocaust, downplay the numbers, or flat out deny it happened. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, S John said:

If the neo nazis are marching and protesting and speaking within the legal realm of the permit granted then they should have the same right as anyone to freedom of speech and assembly.  I'm not a fan of nazis, in fact I hate them, but if they cross thier t's and dot thier i's and wanna get up there and spew thier bullshit then let them.  I want to live in a county where ideas are defeated by ideas, not one where we suppress ideas we find abhorrent.  I cannot abide the idea that something, anything, is so horrible that I need to be protected from rejecting it on my own.  That feels like the slipperiest of slippery slopes.

It would be ideal if ideas defeat ideas.  That's not always how real life works.  Others have already pointed this out, but I'll repeat.  Human history doesn't have a strong precedent of superior ideas defeating harmful ones.  And when those better ideas do seemingly win, they are often met with severe (and often violent) backlash.  Case in point - a slow shift towards superior ideas winning like equality and better healthcare has now led to the election of Trump and the rise of nazis in America as well as their apologists (who frankly should be treated with nearly as much scorn as nazi's themselves).  

 

5 hours ago, r'hllor's red lobster said:

because you have repeatedly proven you are either incapable addressing my salient points or are more interested in offering up half assed neo nazi apologia, but fuck it, i'll give or a shot: people have violence visited upon them based on ideological differences almost daily in this country, without recourse. the difference is, this violence is usually perpetrated by conservative, reactionary, and/or right wing elements of our society. by defending or enhancing this status quo, and not actively working to overturn it, the centrist/moderate elements of our society lend credence to these reactionaries, and further entrench their world view as 'normal'. the right wing reactionaries now get to push their vile views as closer to 'center' and thus more mainstream. so they can now use this "you wouldn't want this to happen to you" message while providing a convenient cover to ignore the very real instance of this violence and suppression happening to marginalized, less "mainstream" groups. so when you say (sorry paraphrasing, can't seem to multi quote on my phone) "you can't commit violence against those you disagree with violence without legal repercussion" while very real physical, emotional, and economic violence is actually committed against people every day without repercussion, then yes, i am going to laugh in your fucking face. 

tl;dr-- i am not saying the idea of "rule of law" is laughable on its face; but the argument that it exists today, in any sort of fair and equitable sense (even ignoring the people out there actively working for genocide) is fucking hilarious. ell oh fucking ell

QFT

5 hours ago, r'hllor's red lobster said:

the fact you guys are able to equate nazism, an ideology based wholly on the idea of white supremacy and the subjugation and/or extermination of "inferior" races with any other ideology or religion is supremely fucked up. jfc, seriously, what is wrong with you people? you are freely admitting you think there is no difference between nazism and islam?! that is the very shit they want to normalize? ffs, spencer would be way more glad to hear that argument than the "but Islam is conservative and backwards and evil". the latter simply agrees with him, while the former buttresses his position while also agreeing with him

QFT

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wait, we should just let these crazy kids (most are adults beyond school and actual UVA students were encircled during their counter protest) work out their mixed up feelings about race and their place in the world? And thoughts and prayers they come out the other side with a full peace, love, and equality world view? The fuck? Worked just great for Richard Spencer and Matthew Heimbach

I read a great line earlier that kinda sums it all up (and is sort of on point as it was discussing HBO and Confederate).

Quote

And from my work, I know that the Confederate rebel -- the first born of American racism is an intergenerational zombie, eagerly waiting for a host, a reason or rhyme to breathe again, rise again, and enslave again.

It's never going to die until it's put down for good. It's 2017 and yet here we are, debating the rights of torch-wielding white supremacy, and suggesting all ideas get equal time. JFC. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, kairparavel said:

It's never going to die until it's put down for good. It's 2017 and yet here we are, debating the rights of torch-wielding white supremacy, and suggesting all ideas get equal time. JFC. 

 But how do you kill it without adopting a fascistic strategy? That's my beef with antifas. At the end of the day, they are essentially anti-nazi nazis. 

   Battle not with monsters, lest ye become a monster, and if you gaze into the abyss, the abyss gazes also into you.-Friedrich Nietzsche

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Manhole Eunuchsbane said:

 But how do you kill it without adopting a fascistic strategy? That's my beef with antifas. At the end of the day, they are essentially anti-nazi nazis. 

   Battle not with monsters, lest ye become a monster, and if you gaze into the abyss, the abyss gazes also into you.-Friedrich Nietzsche

 dude,  divorce yourself from the methods and instead really think about what each group of espousing. 

one group is advocating, white supremacy,  genocide and slavery.

they don't deserve protection. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...