Jump to content

U.S. Politics: Would You Like A Warranty With Your Magic Beans?


Jace, Extat

Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, MercurialCannibal said:

ah, come on, guys. it's only a few nazis. 

nazis are like cancer. you wouldn't write off a small tumor in an otherwise healthy body. you would see it eradicated.

and that is what is needed of this new crop of nazis. they don't get tolerance because their very stance is anything but. 

Other than Richard Spencer and his goons I can't really think of a real supremacist who's out there (feel free to add names with justification and sources)

Unless you subscribe to the internet trolls are nazis, a portion of starwars fans are nazis , republicans are nazis ...etc.

Asshole or person I disagree with =/= Nazi 

Why are so many people just eager to fight yet can't stand the idea of dialogue and compromise ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, Vin said:

...

No guaranteed freedom of speech , no guaranteed freedom of the press , no fair elections, no separation of church and state , no equality under the law , no justice system that's based on due process and the presumption of innocence, lawlessness (think cartel run areas in Mexico) ...etc. not sure if this answers your question at all .

So USA ([which in practice has] no equality under the law, no fair elections), Netherlands, UK, France, Germany etc etc(no guaranteed freedom of speech) aren't normal. What do you consider normal then?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Selibration Srbija! said:

So USA ([which in practice has] no equality under the law, no fair elections), Netherlands, UK, France, Germany etc etc(no guaranteed freedom of speech) aren't normal. What do you consider normal then?

How do we not have equality under the law in the US ? Give me an example of a discriminatory law . "In practice" is just shorthand for "I think so" . There's corruption and prejudice in certain places that needs to be addressed not some cancer that's bone deep like people like to pretend  (a good example of obvious "in practice" would be the Russian elections) 

The lack of freedom of speech in Europe as abominable and I certainly wouldn't wanna live there . The UK seems to be having issues with that at the moment .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hows come when I finally get to name a thread it gets gobbled up by this shit? Seriously? Is there a god? Because I must have pissed in its cornflakes one too many times.

I grow weary of this. Begone, creature! Go back to the shadow.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, DMBouazizi said:

This is really a cliff notes version.  The beginning of normalizing relations with the Soviets began in the 70s with Brezhnev and detente.  Than Gorbachev accelerated things with glasnost and perestroika.  But all of that was rooted in necessity - the Soviet economy was collapsing and they needed to open up to the west.

No offense, but yours is the "cliff notes version" here. The terrible state of the Soviet economy did not foreordain as much as you seem to think.
To be clear, I'm not part of the "Gorbachev ended the Cold War" school (led by Garthoff), but no serious scholar of the period would deny hat the West was incredibly lucky with Gorbachev. The economic factor alone may explain Gorbachev's rise to power and most of his attempts at reforms, but they definitely aren't enough to explain the peaceful outcome.
Fun fact... Henry Rowen once told me that in his opinion Soviet economic weakness should have been seen as a destabilizing factor. Which is really funny considering his role in the story (he met Reagan with Charles Wolf and Andrew Marshall in April 86).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, DMBouazizi said:

Funny thing is, I've been one of the few left that agrees with your point that not all Trump voters are racist.  But you're not making a very convincing argument for why thus far.

When you're saying "not racist," are you treating euphemisms like "culturally anxious" as a separate category not under the umbrella of racism?   This is a genuine question.   I'm admittedly in a very blue area, but know a fair number of Trump voters and continued supporters.  Even those who are "good people"-- people who are incredibly decent and kind when it comes to those in their "in-groups," including, for example, neighbors who aren't white-- are super racist once you scratch the surface a little in my experience, though they'd get indignant at being told their beliefs are racist.   Others I know are more garden variety Republicans who just voted for the R, but even they are pretty "culturally anxious" once you start asking pointed questions.  In my experience, even in the most charitable cases, they are wholly indifferent to people who don't belong to one of their in groups.

I mean, it's not just racism, but also misogyny, homophobia, nativism-- kind of like all these people are convinced that these "others" are hostile and taking resources, attention and specialness away from them or something.  They feel like victims, and it seems to strengthen their sense of in group sensibility, as well as sense of who's "out."  But, again, I think when you scratch the surface of that, it's bigotry.   I could be wrong.   What's your take on what motivates them other than racism (or bigotry in general)?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Vin said:

Alright I'll bite , sorry for assuming you weren't being genuine. I should've given you the benefit of the doubt. 

 

Not sure how to frame this so I'll just state things that I think indicate a country isn't "normal" or doing "well" 

 

No guaranteed freedom of speech , no guaranteed freedom of the press , no fair elections, no separation of church and state , no equality under the law , no justice system that's based on due process and the presumption of innocence, lawlessness (think cartel run areas in Mexico) ...etc. not sure if this answers your question at all .

That helps me frame your views, but I was interested, especially as you travelled around, in how racism in the US (you brought up normalcy to refute the idea the US was culturally very influenced by the white supemacy ideas) compared to other countries, and which, on those criteria, would not have normal people, and which would (you did not write about normal countries but of normal people).

Additionally, you seem to conflate government with people ruled by that government, is it on purpose? If a nazi got into power in the US and tried to shut down freedom of press, justice fairness, etc, would you say still that the US had normal people? In that case, even if they are subject to an abnormal government (freedoms lacking etc) is there a country on earth with non-normal people?

Additionally again, wouldn't you consider people choosing democratically nazi sympathisers as ruler less normal (from your definition, pro-justicr, pro press, etc) than people living under dictatorial rules, with no choice?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, Vin said:

How do we not have equality under the law in the US ? Give me an example of a discriminatory law . "In practice" is just shorthand for "I think so" . There's corruption and prejudice in certain places that needs to be addressed not some cancer that's bone deep like people like to pretend  (a good example of obvious "in practice" would be the Russian elections) 

The lack of freedom of speech in Europe as abominable and I certainly wouldn't wanna live there . The UK seems to be having issues with that at the moment .

What issues is the UK apparently having with our lack of US style freedom of speech?  and what is so abominable about banning hate speech?    I'm from the UK and genuinely curious.  I really do not see how my ability to speak is in any way curtailed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Pebble said:

What issues is the UK apparently having with our lack of US style freedom of speech?  and what is so abominable about banning hate speech?    I'm from the UK and genuinely curious.  I really do not see how my ability to speak is in any way curtailed.

I am assuming they are talking about Tommy Robinson to be honest. Which is hilarious.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, DMBouazizi said:

The problem is B.  I don't know how else to get this through to you:  Protesting is going to block the road, that's the fucking point of protesting.

No, we've seen videos of a couple of dicks beating a neo-nazi at Berkeley compared to a neo-nazi killing a woman at Charlottesville.  That's the definition of a false equivalency.

james hodgkinson was protesting when the establishment shot him down.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, lessthanluke said:

I am assuming they are talking about Tommy Robinson to be honest. Which is hilarious.

Hilarious how?

It's not just Tommy Robinson btw. It's the media ban about his arrest (now lifted), it's the whole trial of Count Dankula, it's the banning of Lauren Southern, Martin Sellner and Brittany Pettibone from entering the country, it's the conviction of Alison Chabloz. These are just the ones that gained some publicity, I'm sure there are many more. The UK is very far from having free speech. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, lessthanluke said:

Are we? 

 

39 minutes ago, Pebble said:

What issues is the UK apparently having with our lack of US style freedom of speech?  and what is so abominable about banning hate speech?    I'm from the UK and genuinely curious.  I really do not see how my ability to speak is in any way curtailed.

Well , gag orders are something I'll never understand for one . Convicting comedians over a pug video taken out of context on YouTube is another . Policing twitter and facebook as well . And as far as I can tell there's been a few sizable demonstrations in London over the imprisonment and sentencing(within 5 hours ) of some right wing wannabe journalist (I think there was another gag order about this as well ) I wouldn't presume to tell you how to run your country but I wouldn't be happy about these .

41 minutes ago, Errant Bard said:

That helps me frame your views, but I was interested, especially as you travelled around, in how racism in the US (you brought up normalcy to refute the idea the US was culturally very influenced by the white supemacy ideas) compared to other countries, and which, on those criteria, would not have normal people, and which would (you did not write about normal countries but of normal people).

Additionally, you seem to conflate government with people ruled by that government, is it on purpose? If a nazi got into power in the US and tried to shut down freedom of press, justice fairness, etc, would you say still that the US had normal people? In that case, even if they are subject to an abnormal government (freedoms lacking etc) is there a country on earth with non-normal people?

Additionally again, wouldn't you consider people choosing democratically nazi sympathisers as ruler less normal (from your definition, pro-justicr, pro press, etc) than people living under dictatorial rules, with no choice?

Interesting , I like this discussion . 

Let's try to go through these now 

I do believe I said a normal country as well as normal people so I'm not sure what you mean by this part "(you did not write about normal countries but of normal people)."  But if I had to say how racism compares I'd say that there are differences and similarities for example the in group preference in the middle east was less heard towards skin color and more towards religious status and wealth with a large emphasis on tribalism . I didn't have much contact with local women in the middle east which I think is in itself a bit telling. 

In Japan the xenophobia was more like they treated foreigners like impolite curious children , they're very homogeneous so they just don't bother with foreign concepts much . Again,I'm not sure if this satisfies what you were looking for and it is oversimplified of course but here it is .

 

If I did conflate them then it definitely wasn't on purpose but I kinda think they're connected (not equivalent but relevant to each other I guess) since I believe the people and the government play a role in shaping each other so to speak .

Well I think when a leader starts unraveling the seams of democracy and tries to establish a tyranny (which is not even close to what's happening in the US )it becomes duty to throw off a tyrannical government (focus on the word tyrannical ,which the US isn't) and if that happens I actually believe republicans would be the first to help us over throw a tyrant , it's kinda one of their biggest points .if a people do not want remove an oppressive tyranny then chances are that they might be ideologically possessed (ideological possession is a fascinating topic , I highly recommend you look into it just for fun if nothing else ) and that state is not "normal "

As for the case of the people not being able to resist a tyrannical government , is something that's not your choice and you have no power to change defining of you character ? I don't think the north Korean locals for example are possessed by evil ideology the same way Germany was back in the 30s (but I'll be honest and say that the comparison is kinda muddy water)

 

I make no claims that my argument is flawless but I really enjoyed this more nuanced discussion . And again I'm really sorry for dismissing you on initial contact without the benefit of the doubt :cheers:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, SweetPea said:

Hilarious how?

It's not just Tommy Robinson btw. It's the media ban about his arrest (now lifted), it's the whole trial of Count Dankula, it's the banning of Lauren Southern, Martin Sellner and Brittany Pettibone from entering the country, it's the conviction of Alison Chabloz. These are just the ones that gained some publicity, I'm sure there are many more. The UK is very far from having free speech. 

Because he deserves to be in Prison? The outrage about his conviction is ridiculous.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, SweetPea said:

Care to explain why? And why the media ban about his arrest was okay?

He broke the law. He immediately admitted guilt. Don't really understand how there is even a debate about this and yes the media ban was to protect another ongoing case. The ban was then challenged and overturned. Yay democracy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Somebody really wants that Nobel, even used capital letters!* 

 

Great potential for Trump branded hotels and golf courses!  Yeah baby, economic development for dummies dictators. 

 

* (which of his aids wrote this one?)

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...