U.S. Politics: Dining on Doritos with Derrida and Donald

[Bonnot OG]

44 minutes ago, Zorral said:

The NPR cotton baller didn't even ask him about or even mention that SOMEONE WAS KILLED BY HIS PEOPLE in Charlottesville, and then cut to the EVILE of Black Lives Matter.  Eff NPR for sure.  They are enablers, facilitators and complicit in all this and they have to be called out even as they try constantly to shake us down for money to keep them going with THEIR really nice salaries and benefits.  AND they gave him extensive free promo and publicity for his nazis in D.C.

 

I have no doubt that genocide will be legal at some point here in the US, and it will not doubt be in response to some distorted threat that blames the victims, legally, for what happened while also invoking jingoistic values.

It will be voted on and executed by a bunch of individuals that love their families, pray to their god, are said to be nice to their neighbors, stand for the national anthem, give to charity, and are said to have this good side if you could only just see "the nuance of their position."

The killings will be carried out by people who were just doing their jobs by following orders and it will be supported by constituents who felt their lives were threatened.

The planners, the killers, and the supporters will be humanized as much as possible to the point of white washing them and their actions.

It has happened before and it's currently in motion now. This is how it will happen if it gets worse.

That's how it works. It will be the ultimate expression of "outsource risk" to have the state engage in violence in a top down way. No one can be blamed because the culpability spreads around to the point that even the people that are trying to stop it by standing in the way saying "Fuck off, don't do this" are demonized successfully because they hate those that are carrying out the genocide, and in doing so, they are are said to be breaking the law and said to be the real fascists that hate the country and that they just don't see the nuance.

Calls for genocide and ethnic cleansing are fundamentally and utterly uncivil, even if ethnic cleansing and genocide are labeled as peaceful and the calls for it are delivered calmly in interviews with the mainstream media by white guys in suits that insist they are being rational and peaceful. Not challenging them, and giving them platforms and not challenging them is complicity.

[ThinkerX]

12 hours ago, Bonnot OG said:

If you're willingly giving white supremacists platforms to spew from while not challenging them, you certainly are being complicit. 

You moderates do nothing of value and are utterly worthless to combat what is going right on. 

Moderate politics is why there are kids in concentration camps right now being sexually assaulted, drugged and tortured while some of their parents are killing themselves because they have no clue when they are getting out to get to their kids.

And can't forget how some of the women that are pregnant in there are giving birth to still borns.

But please, keep mocking people that are about direct action and aren't about worthless and undeserved civility torwards a bunch of abusive white supremacists or about giving those same bigots a platform to preach from in an unchallenged manner. 

White moderates are a fucking disease and are the biggest enablers of bigotry in this country.

 

Change a few words, and this could be a post from some of the far right sites.

This road leads nowhere but to a great deal of pain and misery for everybody.

 

[Altherion]

On 8/11/2018 at 12:40 PM, Zorral said:

Of course NPR has been doing this sort of thing for decades, since Reagan at least.  Making the false equivalences  and playing soft ball with the racists and cray cray.  But it's really gotten worse in the last decade -- as though the nazis and Black Lives Matter are the same damned thing, while publicizing to all and sundry that damned DC gathering and the commemorations in Charlottesville.  Their idea of 'push back' is so soft it's like throwing cotton balls at an anvil.

I don't see why you find uniform treatment of the practitioners of identity politics so objectionable. It's quite likely that we'd all be better off if all of them were given less publicity, but the uniformity is not the problem.

[Deadlines? What Deadlines?]

32 minutes ago, ThinkerX said:

Change a few words, and this could be a post from some of the far right sites.

This road leads nowhere but to a great deal of pain and misery for everybody.

 

Yeah, like this:

"Black Lives Matter isn't the moral equivalent of the KKK"

or

"Black Lives Matter is the moral equivalent of the KKK."

See?  Changing one little word is the difference between common sense and sounding like a complete fucking idiot.

Maybe "pain and misery" are coming regardless.

21 minutes ago, Altherion said:

I don't see why you find uniform treatment of the practitioners of identity politics so objectionable. It's quite likely that we'd all be better off if all of them were given less publicity, but the uniformity is not the problem.

Because they are not equal.

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

7 minutes ago, Deadlines? What Deadlines? said:

 

Th

Quote

Because they are not equal.

The sides here are not equivalent, you are absolutely right about that.  But those who oppose you would use exactly the same justification to silence those who disagree with them that you offer for silencing them.  

NPR is doing their job reporting the news and the fact that they piss off people regardless of their political point of view suggests to me that they are doing their job well.

[polishgenius]

10 minutes ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

But those who oppose you would use exactly the same justification to silence those who disagree with them that you offer for silencing them.  

There's a difference between silencing them and not giving them a platform.

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

18 minutes ago, polishgenius said:

There's a difference between silencing them and not giving them a platform.

Certainly there is.  But NPR reports the news.  These people are news.  

[polishgenius]

12 minutes ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

Certainly there is.  But NPR reports the news.  These people are news.   

Two things in response to that:

(1) every news outlet in the world must prioritise what news they show. Why prioritise these, given the strong risk that putting them on the news makes them bigger news than they'd otherwise be?

(2) This particular discussion started with NPR bringing on a guy to preach his racist agenda on their air. That's no longer just 'reporting the news'.

[Bonnot OG]

1 hour ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

Th

The sides here are not equivalent, you are absolutely right about that.  But those who oppose you would use exactly the same justification to silence those who disagree with them that you offer for silencing them.  

NPR is doing their job reporting the news and the fact that they piss off people regardless of their political point of view suggests to me that they are doing their job well.

If Nazis are willing and eager to appear on your radio show, you're doing something wrong, and they're not scared of you or your liberal arts undergrad 'rational probing'.

30 minutes ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

Certainly there is.  But NPR reports the news.  These people are news.  

What a shocker, a white moderate thinks fence sitting news organizations that give neo nazis a platform are doing the right thing, even though NPR severly fucked up letting that sack of shit have an interview with them. And a weak one that did not challenge him at all.

They weren't reporting the news or facts. They let a white surepmacist that has blood on his hands have a platform to spew his neo nazi propaganda. Stop being an apologist for their bullshit and gigantic fuck up here.

Did those hacks at NPR ask him about why he called Heather Heyer a fat communnist who got what was coming to her? Oh wait, they didnt. That would require a spine, something moderates in the media severly lack.

Instead during the interview she interrupted him a couple of times to inform him, politely, that, sir, with all due respect (because a nazi totally desrves that yea?), white people are not being oppressed and the academic establishment does not like Charles Murray (a racist he was citing). That is utterly useless against white supremacists like him.

NPR made the same mistake liberals make when dealing with fascism. Mainly the whole, "yes we gave them a platform to spew their dogma BUT, we made pedantic debate team arguments 'debunking' them, so its all good."

These fascists don't care about scoring logical rhetorical points, their perspective audience doesn't care either. They are interested in PROPAGANDA which relies on emotionally appealing narratives to curry favor with a mass audience. One person being recruited to their side and agreeing with them is a huge win for them. I posted an article that shows 11 million americans agree with the view this fuck has. Letting these people have a platform, and in such a way NPR gave them one, is a gigantic mistake and highly fucking dangerous.

If you want to "debunk" fascists, you need make them say out loud what the implications of their beliefs are.  Don't make the mistake of believing their worldview is the result of an earnest attempt to rationally explain the world.

The arguments of racists/fascists are absurd and irrational, but they don't exist to stand up to scientific/journalistic scrutiny, they exist to rationalize massive state violence, ethnic cleansing, wars of aggression, slavery, and genocide. 

You can't counter the efficacy of their propaganda if you don't force the propagandist to make a connection between the (faulty) ideology and the policy the ideology exists to justify.

He had the interview basically pull the liberal foil to "well, ackshully" to all his bullshit. It enhances the appeal of fascist propaganda. going on NPR because not it becomes a the crowning achievement for this sack of shit, regardless of how objectively he was humiliated or proven wrong.

It also gives him, and his views legitmacy. That then makes the marginalized that he wants to kill have to fight and say why that is a horrible idea. 


Liberal journalists are seriously a bunch of deluded fools that believe they can dismantle fascism by giving it equal footing on a national platform, introducing it to a larger audience than it's ever seen, and granting it legitimacy by politely debating it.

That's the equivalent of giving a person with a history of shooting people in the back, a loaded gun and immediately turning your back on them to start walking the traditional 10 steps before a formal duel.

Nazis like Kesler dont deserve level heads, they deserve their heads to be leveled.


 

Evergreen Sartre quote:

Never believe that anti-Semites are completely unaware of the absurdity of their replies. They know that their remarks are frivolous, open to challenge. But they are amusing themselves, for it is their adversary who is obliged to use words responsibly, since he believes in words. The anti-Semites have the right to play. They even like to play with discourse for, by giving ridiculous reasons, they discredit the seriousness of their interlocutors. They delight in acting in bad faith, since they seek not to persuade by sound argument but to intimidate and disconcert. If you press them too closely, they will abruptly fall silent, loftily indicating by some phrase that the time for argument is past.

You need to watch this.

 

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

Bonnot,

What do you propose to do about NPR reporting the news, if anything?

[Bonnot OG]

3 minutes ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

Bonnot,

What do you propose to do about NPR reporting the news, if anything?

Giving white supremacists a platform through an interview is not reporting the news. 

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

3 minutes ago, Bonnot OG said:

Giving white supremacists a platform through an interview is not reporting the news. 

You’re dodging the question.  What do you propose to do about it, if anything?

[The Anti-Targ]

9 hours ago, polishgenius said:

But no-one was talking about punching Nazis until you brought it up so you could dismiss the argument. The discussion was whether NPR and other big media are right to be giving these people a platform to tell the world their views and if you think that having such a platform doesn't help them at the ballot box then you're really, really, really wrong.

And neither was I. Punching Nazis is a metaphor.

[Zorral]

2 hours ago, Altherion said:

I don't see why you find uniform treatment of the practitioners of identity politics so objectionable. It's quite likely that we'd all be better off if all of them were given less publicity, but the uniformity is not the problem.

You're blowing gobbleydegook, making no sense, not even within your so consistent, predictable whataboutisms and equivalencisms, which, of course, are not equivalent, and certainly not deserving of the many explanations that people have generously provided about why you are, well, wrong. 

Anyhooo, I just heard the o so consistent predictable hand wringing about WE ARE BEING CRITICIZED, O NOES, WHAT WILL HAPPEN TO THE WORLD IF WE AREN'T ALLOWED TO BE O SO NICE TO PEOPLE WHO, WELL, MAY BE AREN'T SO NICE -- THE WORLD NEEDS TO KNOW ABOUT THEM AND MAYBE THEN WE WILL HAVE DIALOG AND THEY WILL BE MAYBE NICER!

Gads, it was pathetic and disgusting both, while knowing at some point some of these people they are being nice to will just slap them silly.

[Darth Richard II]

6 minutes ago, The Anti-Targ said:

And neither was I. Punching Nazis is a metaphor.

Not to me, if I saw an actual fucking Nazi in real life, I would punch them.

[polishgenius]

Scot, with all due respect, you're dodging the answer. There's a lot I disagree with SoD/Bonnot on, but he's absolutely right here- inviting white supremacists, nazis, and general alt-righters onto your platform and then carefully dismantling their argument with logic (If you even go that far) hurts them not one little bit. These people don't operate on logic. It's the exact thinking that got Trump constantly on TV to make a fool of himself whereupon he got enough momentum to win the presidency.

 

6 minutes ago, The Anti-Targ said:

And neither was I. Punching Nazis is a metaphor. 

It's a pretty shitty metaphor in the context of the discussion. You really think not inviting a Nazi on your show is attacking them?

[Zorral]

59 minutes ago, Bonnot OG said:

If Nazis are willing and eager to appear on your radio show, you're doing something wrong, and they're not scared of you or your liberal arts undergrad 'rational probing'.

What a shocker, a white moderate thinks fence sitting news organizations that give neo nazis a platform are doing the right thing, even though NPR severly fucked up letting that sack of shit have an interview with them. And a weak one that did not challenge him at all.

They weren't reporting the news or facts. They let a white surepmacist that has blood on his hands have a platform to spew his neo nazi propaganda. Stop being an apologist for their bullshit and gigantic fuck up here.

Did those hacks at NPR ask him about why he called Heather Heyer a fat communnist who got what was coming to her? Oh wait, they didnt. That would require a spine, something moderates in the media severly lack.

Instead during the interview she interrupted him a couple of times to inform him, politely, that, sir, with all due respect (because a nazi totally desrves that yea?), white people are not being oppressed and the academic establishment does not like Charles Murray (a racist he was citing). That is utterly useless against white supremacists like him.

NPR made the same mistake liberals make when dealing with fascism. Mainly the whole, "yes we gave them a platform to spew their dogma BUT, we made pedantic debate team arguments 'debunking' them, so its all good."

These fascists don't care about scoring logical rhetorical points, their perspective audience doesn't care either. They are interested in PROPAGANDA which relies on emotionally appealing narratives to curry favor with a mass audience. One person being recruited to their side and agreeing with them is a huge win for them. I posted an article that shows 11 million americans agree with the view this fuck has. Letting these people have a platform, and in such a way NPR gave them one, is a gigantic mistake and highly fucking dangerous.

If you want to "debunk" fascists, you need make them say out loud what the implications of their beliefs are.  Don't make the mistake of believing their worldview is the result of an earnest attempt to rationally explain the world.

The arguments of racists/fascists are absurd and irrational, but they don't exist to stand up to scientific/journalistic scrutiny, they exist to rationalize massive state violence, ethnic cleansing, wars of aggression, slavery, and genocide. 

You can't counter the efficacy of their propaganda if you don't force the propagandist to make a connection between the (faulty) ideology and the policy the ideology exists to justify.

He had the interview basically pull the liberal foil to "well, ackshully" to all his bullshit. It enhances the appeal of fascist propaganda. going on NPR because not it becomes a the crowning achievement for this sack of shit, regardless of how objectively he was humiliated or proven wrong.

It also gives him, and his views legitmacy. That then makes the marginalized that he wants to kill have to fight and say why that is a horrible idea. 


Liberal journalists are seriously a bunch of deluded fools that believe they can dismantle fascism by giving it equal footing on a national platform, introducing it to a larger audience than it's ever seen, and granting it legitimacy by politely debating it.

That's the equivalent of giving a person with a history of shooting people in the back, a loaded gun and immediately turning your back on them to start walking the traditional 10 steps before a formal duel.

Nazis like Kesler dont deserve level heads, they deserve their heads to be leveled.


 

Evergreen Sartre quote:

Never believe that anti-Semites are completely unaware of the absurdity of their replies. They know that their remarks are frivolous, open to challenge. But they are amusing themselves, for it is their adversary who is obliged to use words responsibly, since he believes in words. The anti-Semites have the right to play. They even like to play with discourse for, by giving ridiculous reasons, they discredit the seriousness of their interlocutors. They delight in acting in bad faith, since they seek not to persuade by sound argument but to intimidate and disconcert. If you press them too closely, they will abruptly fall silent, loftily indicating by some phrase that the time for argument is past.

You need to watch this.

 

Extremely well said, well-reasoned and so sensible.

 

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

7 minutes ago, polishgenius said:

Scot, with all due respect, you're dodging the answer. There's a lot I disagree with SoD/Bonnot on, but he's absolutely right here- inviting white supremacists, nazis, and general alt-righters onto your platform and then carefully dismantling their argument with logic (If you even go that far) hurts them not one little bit. These people don't operate on logic. It's the exact thinking that got Trump constantly on TV to make a fool of himself whereupon he got enough momentum to win the presidency.

 

It's a pretty shitty metaphor in the context of the discussion. You really think not inviting a Nazi on your show is attacking them?

PG,

For sake of discussion I accept what you are saying.  What should be done about NPR interviewing a neo-nazi?  If anything?  

[polishgenius]

1 minute ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

What should be done about NPR interviewing a neo-nazi?

Depends what you mean by 'what should be done'. Obviously they can't be stopped by any legal means, your freedom of speech laws prevent that, but if people were to start avoiding/boycotting NPR I wouldn't be surprised nor condemn the idea.

There was a very similar situation in Australia just this week where Melbourne city governance dropped Sky News from their place on their public transport system because of precisely that.

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

1 minute ago, polishgenius said:

Depends what you mean by 'what should be done'. Obviously they can't be stopped by any legal means, your freedom of speech laws prevent that, but if people were to start avoiding/boycotting NPR I wouldn't be surprised nor condemn the idea.

There was a very similar situation in Australia just this week where Melbourne city governance dropped Sky News from their place on their public transport system because of precisely that.

Just, please, don’t call them “an enemy of the people”.  We get plenty of that from Trump supporters.  I sure as hell don’t what to hear only stuff I agree with from any news source.