It's okay to be white (campaign)

[Tarfeather]

On 11/19/2017 at 1:41 AM, Yato said:

So you agree the political atmosphere is inherently biased, and favors liberals over conservatives. You just don't notice, because you're already Liberal and share a similar world view already.

*tableflip*

 

Goddamnit, people, what kind of bubble do you live in? You two keep ranting on about critical thinking, but all I see here is you parroting the false narratives that the establishment has been working over the past 50 years to enforce on the people. Liberal vs conservative my ass. Neither of those are actually sensible political views.

 

On 11/19/2017 at 5:53 AM, Yato said:

Only Conservatives lose jobs over their beliefs.

Yeah, and obviously people like Cenk Uygur, Edward Snowden, Chelsea Manning, Glenn Greenwald, Noam Chomsky and Chris Hedges are "conservatives". Face it, anyone who doesn't parrot the establishment line is liable to lose their job. The people owning almost all of the wealth in the country don't want to employ someone who works against their interest. Yes, nazis are among those people, because they give them a really bad image, but socialists and left wing establishment critics are at least as much of a target.

 

13 hours ago, CaptainYesterday said:

And some of us are labeled as conservatives (and have since had to embrace that label simply to make conversations easier) because the rest of this forum is so far left.

Do you know what "far left" is? Socialists. Communists. Anarchists. You know, those movements that have been killed off long ago in every western nation. I haven't seen many other communists on these forums, in fact I think I'm in the minority here. Most people here actually seem to be tacit supporters of capitalism, which economically would put them somewhere from dead center to actually on the right. And yes, economically speaking, all major parties in the US are center right to far right, as well as authoritorian. The "left" in the US hasn't existed in a long time, the people in power made sure of that. They just keep labeling anything that's even center right, such as Bernie Sanders, as "far left nutjobs", because there's no other way to keep an insane economic system like that of the US running, other than to bend the truth.

[Guest]

 

[m4rble]

19 hours ago, Tarfeather said:

*tableflip*

 

Goddamnit, people, what kind of bubble do you live in? You two keep ranting on about critical thinking, but all I see here is you parroting the false narratives that the establishment has been working over the past 50 years to enforce on the people. Liberal vs conservative my ass. Neither of those are actually sensible political views.

 

Yeah, and obviously people like Cenk Uygur, Edward Snowden, Chelsea Manning, Glenn Greenwald, Noam Chomsky and Chris Hedges are "conservatives". Face it, anyone who doesn't parrot the establishment line is liable to lose their job. The people owning almost all of the wealth in the country don't want to employ someone who works against their interest. Yes, nazis are among those people, because they give them a really bad image, but socialists and left wing establishment critics are at least as much of a target.

 

Do you know what "far left" is? Socialists. Communists. Anarchists. You know, those movements that have been killed off long ago in every western nation. I haven't seen many other communists on these forums, in fact I think I'm in the minority here. Most people here actually seem to be tacit supporters of capitalism, which economically would put them somewhere from dead center to actually on the right. And yes, economically speaking, all major parties in the US are center right to far right, as well as authoritorian. The "left" in the US hasn't existed in a long time, the people in power made sure of that. They just keep labeling anything that's even center right, such as Bernie Sanders, as "far left nutjobs", because there's no other way to keep an insane economic system like that of the US running, other than to bend the truth.

People often see things as unusual if they are rare present in their immediate environment, but that doesn't make them universally unusual. That's why I think statements which judge ideas on how ridiculous or extreme they are are flawed. Nothing is inherently unusual. 

[CaptainYesterday]

[deleted]

[Tarfeather]

55 minutes ago, CaptainYesterday said:

When I took a break from these forums a few months ago, there was an alarmingly large number of people who supported Antifa here.  This was right around Charlottsville, so maybe tensions where just high at the time, but I don't think you can just spontaneously gain temporary support for a far-left terrorist organization.  Deep down you already need to agree with them, at least a little bit.

 

Maybe those were just lurkers who were only active during that time, which is why it might not seem like there are that many.  I honestly didn't keep a list.  But it wasn't a small amount.

> antifa

> far left terrorist organization

 

You really don't know anything, do you. Calling antifa a terrorist organization is kind of like calling the Boston Tea Party a terrorist act.

[CaptainYesterday]

[deleted]

[Sally]

On 11/19/2017 at 1:55 PM, CaptainYesterday said:

The arguments are incredibly lop sided.  We have a small handful of people who are "conservative."  And it's even less now than it was the last time I posted here.

So what?  Will you just continue to complain about that?  Do you have a proposal to change it?  Because otherwise, you're just saying the same thing over and over and over...

[CaptainYesterday]

[deleted]

[A mere monkey]

On 16/11/2017 at 7:34 AM, Eureka. Immense. said:

White privilege is something I encourage you to explore at the library and in scholarly articles about critical race theory. I'm not interested in offending anyone further. 

In a gist it's an advantage in access to quality education, housing, justice, having your history and culture considered the "norm", represented in all forms of media across the world in a generally positive light, and socio-economic inequality. It's a long and complicated history in injustice and inequality not just in the states but across the world. 

Call me crazy, but I think the reason here in Europe western culture and history is considered the norm is... Well, because most people here belong to that western culture and is from a country with that history

 

Anyway, it's kind of funny when something so innocent and harmless gets such a reaction from certain groups. It's even funnier when you realize the signs wanted to provoke those reactions in particular. 

[Mostly Peaceful Ryan]

On 11/21/2017 at 6:12 PM, Tarfeather said:

You really don't know anything, do you. Calling antifa a terrorist organization is kind of like calling the Boston Tea Party a terrorist act.

The British government who at the time was in ruling  American colonies shut down Boston Harbor due to the Boston Tea Party, if the term terrorism was around at the time of the Boston Tea Party the British Government would have probably labeled it a terrorist act. 

 

Also Antifa and the Sons of Liberty aren't comparable when you look at the governments they are rebelling against. The sons of liberty were rebelling against a government that had no representation of the people of the American colonies, while Antifa are rebelling against a government that does represent the majority. The sons of liberty had to uses violent acts because they had no other recourse, while Antifa are using violent acts because communism is wildly unpopular in America and there  is no other way implement a communist. 

 

TL;DR British government would have probably labeled what the sons of Liberty did as a terrorist act, if Terrorist acts was a thing, which it wasn't till about 20 to 30 years later. Antifa is using violence to put in an oppressive government that the majority don't want. Sons of liberty were using violence to give a political voice to the Americans people. This is simply  a terrible comparison.

 

If you wanna have a debate whether the Neo-Nazi's in Charlottsville are worse then Antifa we can, but this debate is like debating what is worse shoe Crocs or fivefinger shoes, you can debate all day, but in the end the correct answer is they both are just awful and society would be best if no one had to see them in public or deal with it. 

[Yatogami]

On 11/21/2017 at 6:12 PM, Tarfeather said:

> antifa

> far left terrorist organization

 

You really don't know anything, do you. Calling antifa a terrorist organization is kind of like calling the Boston Tea Party a terrorist act.

Antifa is an official terrorist organization in New Jersey. Many of their actions are considered domestic terrorism by the FBI as well.

[RK800]

26 minutes ago, Yato said:

Antifa is an official terrorist organization in New Jersey. Many of their actions are considered domestic terrorism by the FBI as well.

Irony is my organization being labeled "terrorism" but neo-nazi groups being labeled "expression of free speech".

Frankly I don't care anymore, if someone considers me a terrorist for participating in the revolution so be it. Conservatives seem to have selective disdain for the FBI, saying they're against government surveillance unless y'know...it's on the other side.

[Yatogami]

2 minutes ago, Flower Boy said:

Irony is my organization being labeled "terrorism" but neo-nazi groups being labeled "expression of free speech".

Frankly I don't care anymore, if someone considers me a terrorist for participating in the revolution so be it. Conservatives seem to have selective disdain for the FBI, saying they're against government surveillance unless y'know...it's on the other side.

Terrorism is using violence to further your political goals.

 

Words are not violence. 

 

Rioting and assaulting is violence and destruction of property.

[CaptainYesterday]

[deleted]

[Tarfeather]

@CaptainYesterday When I said 'You don't know anything', it's because you're making sweeping generalizations about a movement without even knowing its history.

 

https://www.jacobinmag.com/2017/05/antifascist-movements-hitler-nazis-kpd-spd-germany-cold-war

 

 

1 hour ago, ♣Ryan♣ said:

The British government who at the time was in ruling  American colonies shut down Boston Harbor due to the Boston Tea Party, if the term terrorism was around at the time of the Boston Tea Party the British Government would have probably labeled it a terrorist act.

Yes, that's my point. 'Terrorism' is not actually a word that carries intrinsic meaning, but rather a propaganda tool. It basically succeeded 'communist' as the bogeyman when the cold war tension eased. It's part of this primitive, tribalistic 'us vs them' thinking. The same acts that are considered 'terrorism' when they do it, are just 'war' or 'collatoral damage' or 'rebellion' when we do it. Using that word unironically makes me take you about as seriously as a religious person whining about blasphemy.

 

2 hours ago, ♣Ryan♣ said:

while Antifa are rebelling against a government that does represent the majority.

 

No, the government represents a small cabal of powerful elites. Those in power make use of their influence over media, education, etc. to convince the public that their interests are being served, when in reality this is not the case.

 

Quote

The sons of liberty had to uses violent acts because they had no other recourse, while Antifa are using violent acts because communism is wildly unpopular in America and there  is no other way implement a communist. 

Quote

Antifa is using violence to put in an oppressive government that the majority don't want.

I'm not very well familiar with what the antifa movement is like in the US, but what you are describing sounds more like Marxism / Leninism, which is more of an authoritorian strand of communism, whereas antifa for most of its history and in most parts of the world is more libertarian / anarchist leaning, meaning they want to abolish the state, not use it as a tool to enforce communism.

 

 

Quote

This is simply  a terrible comparison.

No, it is not. You only lack the independent understanding of history and politics to grasp the implications of the comparison. In essence, you are evidence of how effective the brainwashing and propaganda assault has been that the US establishment launched on the American public beginning in the 60s. Sucks to be you, I guess.

 

Quote

If you wanna have a debate whether the Neo-Nazi's in Charlottsville are worse then Antifa we can, but this debate is like debating what is worse shoe Crocs or fivefinger shoes, you can debate all day, but in the end the correct answer is they both are just awful and society would be best if no one had to see them in public or deal with it. 

 

Why would I? That's just the kind of debate that those pulling the strings want us to have. The people turning against each other, and overlooking the fact that they're all being exploited by the same group of parasites who in reality care nothing for political ideologies, other than as a tool to control others and make themselves even richer.

 

Noam Chomsky, my personal hero, and a radical left anarchist, has gone as far as saying that 'Antifa is a boon to the right', and as far as US politics are concerned, he may be right. Certainly, those individuals engaging in petty acts of violents are serving the establishment very well to create this narrative of 'equalism' between far left and far right.

 

At the end of the day, though, there's just no comparison. The far left are those individuals who believe in equality, in justice and human rights, independently of your race, gender, origin, or any other traits. Some of them employ the wrong strategy, increasing the suffering, and I will be happy to condemn them. Some merely portray themselves as having these values, while in reality only pursuing their own selfish goals, and I will be happy to condemn them also.

 

But ultimately, at this point in time, anyone not on the "far left", is a collaborator, an enabler, for the exploitations and injustices carried out by those in power, against those who have no voice and can not defend themselves. In my eyes, someone like you who parrots the propaganda of the establishment, is far more of an obstacle to justice than someone who's foolish and misguided enough to believe that violent street riots will bring about positive change.

 

Or, as Dr. Martin Luther King aptly put it, "I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the Negro's great stumbling block in the stride toward freedom is not the White Citizen's Council-er or the Ku Klux Klanner, but the white moderate who is more devoted to "order" than to justice;". A very wise man, that one. Wish that he'd lived a little longer, and that we'd had more of his kind.

[RK800]

1 hour ago, Yato said:

Terrorism is using violence to further your political goals.

 

Words are not violence. 

 

Rioting and assaulting is violence and destruction of property.

Words can in fact be violence.

Which is why threats are considered illegal. When you put knocking over a trashcan on the same level as advocating for the death of an entire group of people based on their skin tone it's safe to say that maybe, just maybe, your morals are a little shitty.

 

1 hour ago, CaptainYesterday said:

Both Antifa and neo-nazi groups have free speech.  Neither has the right to attack people and property.  Both have engaged in violence, but Antifa has done it far more often and has engaged in far more coordinated violence.  That's also a key part to this whole thing.  The various neo-nazi groups at Charlottesville did not coordinate to plan the car attack, which makes it different from Antifa's coordinated riots.

 

If you crack open someone's skull with a bike lock, stomp on unconscious people in the street, and light buildings on fire in an attempt to push a certain political belief, then yeah, you're probably a terrorist.

 

I'm going to hope you don't do those things.

Antifa is no longer granted freedom of speech under the law. If you are openly a part of it you can be charged federally with crimes that violate an obscure anti-Communism bill that was put in place long ago. Hence my use of VPNs, proxies, and the list goes on.

However Neo-nazis are not even considered a terrorist threat, despite having actually killed people.

This is a very major issue, the alt-right wants freedom of speech but also wants the freedom to kill people when they say things they dislike. Which they have done.

[Mostly Peaceful Ryan]

51 minutes ago, Tarfeather said:

Yes, that's my point. 'Terrorism' is not actually a word that carries intrinsic meaning, but rather a propaganda tool. It basically succeeded 'communist' as the bogeyman when the cold war tension eased. It's part of this primitive, tribalistic 'us vs them' thinking. The same acts that are considered 'terrorism' when they do it, are just 'war' or 'collatoral damage' or 'rebellion' when we do it. Using that word unironically makes me take you about as seriously as a religious person whining about blasphemy.

Terrorism- the unlawful use of violence and intimidation, especially against civilians, in the pursuit of political aims. If you don't understand the meaning of the word terrorist it isn't my problem. If you mean that after communist superpowers fell after the cold war the next biggest threat were small groups of people bent on doing harm to others for political gain then yes you are correct. The rest of your post seems to be trying to diminish the people killed by these groups  and I won't go along with it. 

 

51 minutes ago, Tarfeather said:

No, the government represents a small cabal of powerful elites. Those in power make use of their influence over media, education, etc. to convince the public that their interests are being served, when in reality this is not the case.

 

It's still the people voting, you can ignore TV if you want, and there is plenty of books on different government philosophy, but overall your statement is false, If the elites in America had control like you said Trump wouldn't be president. 

 

51 minutes ago, Tarfeather said:

I'm not very well familiar with what the antifa movement is like in the US, but what you are describing sounds more like Marxism / Leninism, which is more of an authoritorian strand of communism, whereas antifa for most of its history and in most parts of the world is more libertarian / anarchist leaning, meaning they want to abolish the state, not use it as a tool to enforce communism.

They are communist that is what the red flag represents, there is no way to enact communism without authoritarian government it's just doesn't happen. They are also using authoritarian tactics, they can shout about non-sense anarchy all they want, but do you really believe that the group will stop attacking people if they had power over the government? The simple answer is no they won't. They will uses the notion of Anarchy to attack others that don't agree with them and be oppressive just like any authoritarian government, 

 

51 minutes ago, Tarfeather said:

No, it is not. You only lack the independent understanding of history and politics to grasp the implications of the comparison. In essence, you are evidence of how effective the brainwashing and propaganda assault has been that the US establishment launched on the American public beginning in the 60s. Sucks to be you, I guess.

 

So I'm brainwashed and you aren't? why can't I sit here and say you are brainwashed talking about propaganda of others as well. This entire argument rest on the fact you think I am brainwashed, instead of us just differing on political opinions. This is a really poor argument it's just "Nah-uh you're just brainwashed" my response could literally be "nah-uh you're brainwashed" and it would be equally valid.  

 

51 minutes ago, Tarfeather said:

Why would I? That's just the kind of debate that those pulling the strings want us to have. The people turning against each other, and overlooking the fact that they're all being exploited by the same group of parasites who in reality care nothing for political ideologies, other than as a tool to control others and make themselves even richer.

You mean the same parasites who give millions their jobs and risk their own personal wealth to try and create a business that others can profit from and have a better life? 

 

51 minutes ago, Tarfeather said:

At the end of the day, though, there's just no comparison. The far left are those individuals who believe in equality, in justice and human rights, independently of your race, gender, origin, or any other traits. Some of them employ the wrong strategy, increasing the suffering, and I will be happy to condemn them. Some merely portray themselves as having these values, while in reality only pursuing their own selfish goals, and I will be happy to condemn them also.

I find no evidence that the far left believes in these things, if you wanna say they do you can, but actions matter and what they have done has caused more damage to our society. Yes, but I find the left to be worse if you are in a minority group and don't agree, I've seen many call others Uncle Tom for not sharing the same opinion. You can say they are for equality but really they aren't they want everyone to support their ideology and if you don't they attack. 

51 minutes ago, Tarfeather said:

 

But ultimately, at this point in time, anyone not on the "far left", is a collaborator, an enabler, for the exploitations and injustices carried out by those in power, against those who have no voice and can not defend themselves. In my eyes, someone like you who parrots the propaganda of the establishment, is far more of an obstacle to justice than someone who's foolish and misguided enough to believe that violent street riots will bring about positive change.

Sounds tribalism propaganda right here, the very thing you were claiming was so wrong above. "Either you are on the left or you are helping these terrible things"

 

51 minutes ago, Tarfeather said:

Or, as Dr. Martin Luther King aptly put it, "I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the Negro's great stumbling block in the stride toward freedom is not the White Citizen's Council-er or the Ku Klux Klanner, but the white moderate who is more devoted to "order" than to justice;". A very wise man, that one. Wish that he'd lived a little longer, and that we'd had more of his kind.

In spite of its glowing talk about the welfare of the masses, Communism's methods and philosophy strip man of his dignity and worth, leaving him as little more than a depersonalized cog in the ever-turning wheel of the state.- Dr. Martin Luther King

[Mostly Peaceful Ryan]

53 minutes ago, Flower Boy said:

Words can in fact be violence.

Except they can't, especially not in this context. A group of people saying terrible things isn't violent. Violence- behavior involving physical force intended to hurt, damage, or kill someone or something. Words are not violence, physical actions are violence, if you wanna try and change definitions to win arguments I'm not about that game. 

 

53 minutes ago, Flower Boy said:

Which is why threats are considered illegal. When you put knocking over a trashcan on the same level as advocating for the death of an entire group of people based on their skin tone it's safe to say that maybe, just maybe, your morals are a little shitty.

Except he was talking about Antifa literally attacking people. If Antifa just knocked over a few trashcans we wouldn't even be discussing them. 

 

53 minutes ago, Flower Boy said:

Antifa is no longer granted freedom of speech under the law. If you are openly a part of it you can be charged federally with crimes that violate an obscure anti-Communism bill that was put in place long ago. Hence my use of VPNs, proxies, and the list goes on.

However Neo-nazis are not even considered a terrorist threat, despite having actually killed people.

This is a very major issue, the alt-right wants freedom of speech but also wants the freedom to kill people when they say things they dislike. Which they have done.

I would need evidence of the FBI doing such a thing, I've not heard of it. I really don't have a problem with Antifa talking about anarchy or communist, I do have an issue when they dress up in all black cover their face and attack people, and some claim they are the good guys. Fact is attacking people with different political opinions then yourself doesn't make you the good guys that makes you the bad guys.

[Tarfeather]

57 minutes ago, Flower Boy said:

Words can in fact be violence.Which is why threats are considered illegal. When you put knocking over a trashcan on the same level as advocating for the death of an entire group of people based on their skin tone it's safe to say that maybe, just maybe, your morals are a little shitty.

Eh, to be honest, I'm pretty much a free speech absolutist. I think discussing ideas should always be OK. Even when the idea is something terrifying like "Would the world be a better place if we killed off this entire group of people?", that should be allowed, because being authoritorian in the realm of ideas almost always provokes the opposite response. If you make something taboo to talk about, you'll only push people of that mentality into secrecy, and that'll make them stronger, give them this martyr / rebellious kind of feeling. If instead, you let them talk openly about their nonsense, you can also combat these ideas out in the open, which has a much higher chance of success.

 

So this whole, uniting against nazis thing, seems like bad strategy to me. Particularly because a lot of "anti establishment" people are currently being pushed into that corner, with nowhere else to go. You feel like illegal immigrants are taking away your jobs? Well, that makes you a racist and a nazi! Treating these people like that, it actually makes them feel on that "side", and that'll strengthen the actual nazis. Much better to try to engage these people and get them over to your side, or at least form an alliance. They're ignorant, sure, but at least a lot of them have the right idea that something's wrong, which if channeled in the right direction will be poison to the establishment.

 

57 minutes ago, Flower Boy said:

Antifa is no longer granted freedom of speech under the law. If you are openly a part of it you can be charged federally with crimes that violate an obscure anti-Communism bill that was put in place long ago. Hence my use of VPNs, proxies, and the list goes on.

 

Reminds me of what happened in Germany with our "Die Linke" (only major party which is even moderately left). Basically, our secret service published a report that deemed them as "enemies of the constitution", because of such sinister goals like "nationalizing energy companies", and "abolishing capitalism". Yep, you heard it. Being against capitalism is now being against the very principles of our constitution! I talked about brainwashing earlier, this is one such instance thereof. People have had such a negative image of communism put in their mind, where they immediately equate it with dictatorship and authoritarianism, that they don't even see the wide logical gap in front of them. Being a communist, in the minds of a lot of people, it resonates the same way as if you said you're in league with Satan. Ironically, some of those same people think they're way smarter than religious folk. :-)

 

Quote

 

However Neo-nazis are not even considered a terrorist threat, despite having actually killed people.

This is a very major issue, the alt-right wants freedom of speech but also wants the freedom to kill people when they say things they dislike. Which they have done.

 

No, "they" have not. Some of them have. Do not judge an entire group based on the actions of a few. These are the same principles Hitler used to justify what they did to Jews, or Isreal uses to justify what they are doing to Palestinians. Or, yeah, actually it's the same fallacy some idiots in this thread are using to attack you based on the fact you identified as member of antifa. So it'd be kinda.. sporting for you not to commit that fallacy? Thanks.

 

Anyway, there are many alt-righters out there who don't believe in violence, and who would also condemn violent actions on their "side". They still for the most part have horrible ideas, but you have to at least give them credit for being opposed to violence. Throw them in with the nazis, and the nazis will gain actual support from moderates, which is the only point at which they start becoming genuinely dangerous.

 

No, it's not nazis you have to be worried about at this stage (although they can become very dangerous once the state turns full on fascist), it's the government that with its actions is continuously pushing toward a situation where fascism will flourish.

 

PS: I almost lost this post due to connection blackout.. Really relieved to have this post restore feature.

[Tarfeather]

Hey Ryan. I'll take you point for point. This is actually kind of fun, albeit a bit unfair. Just want you to know, I do believe in critical thinking, and am open to change my mind. Unfortunately for you, though, I strongly suspect you'll either have to do the same, or this conversation won't go far.

 

29 minutes ago, ♣Ryan♣ said:

Terrorism- the unlawful use of violence and intimidation, especially against civilians, in the pursuit of political aims. If you don't understand the meaning of the word terrorist it isn't my problem. If you mean that after communist superpowers fell after the cold war the next biggest threat were small groups of people bent on doing harm to others for political gain then yes you are correct. The rest of your post seems to be trying to diminish the people killed by these groups  and I won't go along with it.

It is a known fact that the CIA has been involved in overthrowing the governments of foreign countries. This is not a conspiracy theory, thanks to declassified documents it is proven black on white. Their methods have involved torture, abduction, assassination, the arming of violent groups, often the direct instructions to those groups to commit mass violent acts. By your own definition, the CIA and by extension the US government, is a terrorist organization. I do not diminish those people killed by extremist Muslim terrorist groups, however I do think that refusing to acknowledge the obvious and call the US government a terrorist organization, is a way of diminishing the people killed by "our side".

 

Oh, and I'm sure you could try to wriggle your way out of this with the "lawful" portion of your statement. After all, the only kind of stable government in this world, is one left untoppled by the US. And so, almost by definition, there is no entity that can declare something "unlawful", which the US refuses to consider as such. However, this is confusing law with morality, and by direct logical conclusion, it would essentially be arguing that might makes right. It's a logically consistent defense, but one I hope that's beneath you.

 

Quote

It's still the people voting

I agree with this. If people like myself exist who despite societal pressure can develop an independent opinion, then the same is true for others. So, ultimately, yes I do believe that the public is still making a choice. Only, unlike you, I believe it is a choice that is uninformed and ultimately will lead to their own doom.

 

Quote

, you can ignore TV if you want, and there is plenty of books on different government philosophy,

Your point is that we don't live in a complete Orwellian state. I mean, that is good. But it's still not preventing the ruling class from controlling the narrative and world views of almost everyone.

 

Quote

If the elites in America had control like you said Trump wouldn't be president.

Honestly? I don't even understand your point. Trump is like the personification of what the elites did to America. They created a whole population who are so uneducated and disinterested in their own politics, that they elected a reality show buffoon as a president. This is perfect for them. Maybe you misunderstand me. I do not think of there being one smoke filled black room where all decisions of US politics are secretly decided. The elite are not united, there are factions, conflicting interests, etc. But ultimately, they all agree that the public should not be educated politically, not be an active part of the political arena, and they've achieved that, culminating in Trump. To the people who feel left behind and excluded from the political process, Trump seemed like this big wrench thrown into the establishment machine, but in reality the first thing he did in office was to bend over sideways to corporate interests. He's just perfect for the job, seeming like change and resistance, while being just as much of a puppet as any president before him.

 

Quote

They are communist that is what the red flag represents, there is no way to enact communism without authoritarian government it's just doesn't happen.

Your chain of logic there is inconsistent in itself. Even assuming that communism without a state couldn't practically happen, that still doesn't mean that people can't try. From your viewpoint, antifa could simply be trying the impossible. So that's inconsistent, and I'm starting to suspect malicious intent on your end.

 

Beyond that, we have no way of knowing that communism without the state can't happen. In fact, it has happened in the past. However, it was usually short lived, as any stateless society will be quickly crushed militaristically by surrounding countries. In short, we actually have little empirical data on whether stateless communism can work in the long run, but there's nothing to suggest it couldn't.

 

Quote

They are also using authoritarian tactics, they can shout about non-sense anarchy all they want, but do you really believe that the group will stop attacking people if they had power over the government? The simple answer is no they won't. They will uses the notion of Anarchy to attack others that don't agree with them and be oppressive just like any authoritarian government, 

That's possible. I'm not necessarily defending the antifa movement in the US. As I've said, Chomsky criticized them, I've also seen other communists condemn them. So, maybe what you say about antifa is true in the US, I really have no opinion about it, but to be honest it doesn't seem like you yourself have very much objective data about it. It seems more like you're repeating whatever negative things you hear about them because you have a prejudice against radicals.

 

Quote

So I'm brainwashed and you aren't? why can't I sit here and say you are brainwashed talking about propaganda of others as well. This entire argument rest on the fact you think I am brainwashed, instead of us just differing on political opinions. This is a really poor argument it's just "Nah-uh you're just brainwashed" my response could literally be "nah-uh you're brainwashed" and it would be equally valid.  

It's because, frankly, you have a very lopsided view of the world and it shows. You are essentially saying all the same things I hear most other people say, the same things I hear on the media constantly. I know where these ideas are coming from, I understand the system by which these ideas propagate. I also have spent many years finding different viewpoints and exposing logical contradictions and outright lies in this narrative.

 

Note, I don't dislike you for this, nor do I think people who believe these things are stupid or anything. I've known very brilliant people, much smarter than me, who can't get past this. It's just that there's really no reason for me to indulge you in any of this. You are wrong in your stance on most of these things, and if you'd spend a few years learning about the world with an open and critical mind, you would see that.

 

1 hour ago, ♣Ryan♣ said:

I find no evidence that the far left believes in these things, if you wanna say they do you can, but actions matter and what they have done has caused more damage to our society. Yes, but I find the left to be worse if you are in a minority group and don't agree, I've seen many call others Uncle Tom for not sharing the same opinion. You can say they are for equality but really they aren't they want everyone to support their ideology and if you don't they attack.

Well, the left has been neutered since the 60s. They haven't been able to get many positive changes through. However, you are once more exposing your ignorance on the matter. You should go talk to some local people sometime. People who do good things, like helping the poor. Ask them about their political views. Part of the reason you won't hear so much about far leftists who are fighting the good fight, is because they're kind of busy doing things that are very important, but get little media attention.

 

What you're talking about, it sounds more like what I'd call "fake liberals". You know the type. The ones who would walk around with Hillary Clinton certified "woman cards", the ones who use their political "views" as more of a tool to control people than anything else. They sure exist, and they've grown in numbers and strength through the same process that's taken away the voice from leftists who actually care. Because you see, someone who challenges capitalism is a threat to those in power, whereas someone who genuinely thinks women are better than men is actually a gift to them.

 

Quote

Sounds tribalism propaganda right here, the very thing you were claiming was so wrong above. "Either you are on the left or you are helping these terrible things"

It's sheer realism, and actually we all, even those on the far left, are helping it. We all rely on this system to survive and provide us with our basic needs. It's just a difference between those of us who are uncomfortable with that and seek to change it, vs those of us who are happy to keep things running as they are, as long as they themselves are well off.

 

Saudi Arabia right now is blockading humanitarian aid to Yemen, leading to famine. A million people are currently suffering from cholera. And meanwhile, my country, Germany, is happily selling weapons to them, and doing not a thing to stop them. Meanwhile, I'm personally benefitting, being wealthier, by living in a country whose economy is strengthened by dealing with Saudi Arabia, all on the backs of millions of people who are literally being starved to death. Yes, I would argue that anyone who is fine with something such as this, is not a good person.

 

Judging people based on their actions, their choices, I don't think that is tribalism.

 

Quote

In spite of its glowing talk about the welfare of the masses, Communism's methods and philosophy strip man of his dignity and worth, leaving him as little more than a depersonalized cog in the ever-turning wheel of the state.- Dr. Martin Luther King

Well, that's a point for you, then, isn't it? MLK apparently was buying into the same false narrative about communism that you are. He was wise about the struggles of his race, but it seems I have been wrong about him being wise about the struggle for equality in general. You win this one.

[Mostly Peaceful Ryan]

2 hours ago, Tarfeather said:

Hey Ryan. I'll take you point for point. This is actually kind of fun, albeit a bit unfair. Just want you to know, I do believe in critical thinking, and am open to change my mind. Unfortunately for you, though, I strongly suspect you'll either have to do the same, or this conversation won't go far.

I'm also having fun   

 

10 minutes ago, Tarfeather said:

It is a known fact that the CIA has been involved in overthrowing the governments of foreign countries. This is not a conspiracy theory, thanks to declassified documents it is proven black on white. Their methods have involved torture, abduction, assassination, the arming of violent groups, often the direct instructions to those groups to commit mass violent acts. By your own definition, the CIA and by extension the US government, is a terrorist organization. I do not diminish those people killed by extremist Muslim terrorist groups, however I do think that refusing to acknowledge the obvious and call the US government a terrorist organization, is a way of diminishing the people killed by "our side".

 

Oh, and I'm sure you could try to wriggle your way out of this with the "lawful" portion of your statement. After all, the only kind of stable government in this world, is one left untoppled by the US. And so, almost by definition, there is no entity that can declare something "unlawful", which the US refuses to consider as such. However, this is confusing law with morality, and by direct logical conclusion, it would essentially be arguing that might makes right. It's a logically consistent defense, but one I hope that's beneath you.

 

Yes many of the actions of the US government fail to meet the moral standards I expect from my government. I think a debate could be made on "lawful", but like I said I'm not happy about some of the government actions of the US in the past and not going defend it. 

 

1 hour ago, Tarfeather said:

I agree with this. If people like myself exist who despite societal pressure can develop an independent opinion, then the same is true for others. So, ultimately, yes I do believe that the public is still making a choice. Only, unlike you, I believe it is a choice that is uninformed and ultimately will lead to their own doom.

 

"The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter." - Winston Churchill

 

1 hour ago, Tarfeather said:

Honestly? I don't even understand your point. Trump is like the personification of what the elites did to America. They created a whole population who are so uneducated and disinterested in their own politics, that they elected a reality show buffoon as a president. This is perfect for them. Maybe you misunderstand me. I do not think of there being one smoke filled black room where all decisions of US politics are secretly decided. The elite are not united, there are factions, conflicting interests, etc. But ultimately, they all agree that the public should not be educated politically, not be an active part of the political arena, and they've achieved that, culminating in Trump. To the people who feel left behind and excluded from the political process, Trump seemed like this big wrench thrown into the establishment machine, but in reality the first thing he did in office was to bend over sideways to corporate interests. He's just perfect for the job, seeming like change and resistance, while being just as much of a puppet as any president before him.

My point is the majority of elites and people who control media, do hate Trump, to the point he wasn't given a chance by many news outlets. Trump is disliked by most There are many reasons to him being elected whether it was a rejection of Hillary, some point to her calling them deplorable for voting for him. There are some good people who voted for Trump and some bad, some are educated and some are not. I personally see it as a rejection of the democrats policy, over a love for Trump himself. 

 

1 hour ago, Tarfeather said:

Your chain of logic there is inconsistent in itself. Even assuming that communism without a state couldn't practically happen, that still doesn't mean that people can't try. From your viewpoint, antifa could simply be trying the impossible. So that's inconsistent, and I'm starting to suspect malicious intent on your end.

 

Beyond that, we have no way of knowing that communism without the state can't happen. In fact, it has happened in the past. However, it was usually short lived, as any stateless society will be quickly crushed militaristically by surrounding countries. In short, we actually have little empirical data on whether stateless communism can work in the long run, but there's nothing to suggest it couldn't.

Your point here is "I have no data, let's try it", this is not going to sell me on communism. If you are referring to small tribes that were taken over by nearby countries, I'm going say I don't wanna be taken over by some other country. 

 

By the way, I don't think communism without a state is impossible, I believe communism in general won't work. 

 

1 hour ago, Tarfeather said:

It's because, frankly, you have a very lopsided view of the world and it shows. You are essentially saying all the same things I hear most other people say, the same things I hear on the media constantly. I know where these ideas are coming from, I understand the system by which these ideas propagate. I also have spent many years finding different viewpoints and exposing logical contradictions and outright lies in this narrative.

 

Note, I don't dislike you for this, nor do I think people who believe these things are stupid or anything. I've known very brilliant people, much smarter than me, who can't get past this. It's just that there's really no reason for me to indulge you in any of this. You are wrong in your stance on most of these things, and if you'd spend a few years learning about the world with an open and critical mind, you would see

I find your point of view to be lopsided, again this is because we are far on political maps from each other. I could say you are telling me just far left talking points and could sit here and point our contradictions in your narrative.  

 

2 hours ago, Tarfeather said:

Well, the left has been neutered since the 60s. They haven't been able to get many positive changes through. However, you are once more exposing your ignorance on the matter. You should go talk to some local people sometime. People who do good things, like helping the poor. Ask them about their political views. Part of the reason you won't hear so much about far leftists who are fighting the good fight, is because they're kind of busy doing things that are very important, but get little media attention.

 

What you're talking about, it sounds more like what I'd call "fake liberals". You know the type. The ones who would walk around with Hillary Clinton certified "woman cards", the ones who use their political "views" as more of a tool to control people than anything else. They sure exist, and they've grown in numbers and strength through the same process that's taken away the voice from leftists who actually care. Because you see, someone who challenges capitalism is a threat to those in power, whereas someone who genuinely thinks women are better than men is actually a gift to them.

 

So if you want my point of view and seeing who are doing good, I see more conservatives giving to charities and serving the poor through private charity.  This is not to say all people on the left don't help the poor. My Grandma is on the left politically and she gives to the charity and would be at the soup kitchen every weekend to serve the poor till recently because she is unable to do it anymore. The point is not all the right is evil, and not on the left are good. There are good people and jerks in any political group. The "Fake liberal" is a No true Scotsman fallacy to me, and that is the problem I am having. I have no problem telling you earlier that the alt-right and neo-nazi are terrible, yet you want to defend antifa, and while these aren't same and we can debate the differences all day; I find comments defending antifa to be troublesome

 

2 hours ago, Tarfeather said:

It's sheer realism, and actually we all, even those on the far left, are helping it. We all rely on this system to survive and provide us with our basic needs. It's just a difference between those of us who are uncomfortable with that and seek to change it, vs those of us who are happy to keep things running as they are, as long as they themselves are well off.

 

Saudi Arabia right now is blockading humanitarian aid to Yemen, leading to famine. A million people are currently suffering from cholera. And meanwhile, my country, Germany, is happily selling weapons to them, and doing not a thing to stop them. Meanwhile, I'm personally benefitting, being wealthier, by living in a country whose economy is strengthened by dealing with Saudi Arabia, all on the backs of millions of people who are literally being starved to death. Yes, I would argue that anyone who is fine with something such as this, is not a good person.

 

Judging people based on their actions, their choices, I don't think that is tribalism.

But it's not, it's tribalism you have no problem calling tribalism out of people you disagree with but not yourself. You are saying if you aren't in agreement with my politics you are the problem. That is separating yourself and your group also known as tribalism. I can sit here and agree with you that certain things going on in the world are evil while still disagree with you on economics and political views. 

 

You are literally judging people on their political views not their actions or choices. I'm politically on the right, I have put money and time to many charities and have volunteered. You are judging me based on not being on the left and ignoring my actions in this.

 

2 hours ago, Tarfeather said:

Well, that's a point for you, then, isn't it? MLK apparently was buying into the same false narrative about communism that you are. He was wise about the struggles of his race, but it seems I have been wrong about him being wise about the struggle for equality in general. You win this one.

He believed in equality of opportunity, not equality of outcome. He wanted the chance for people to be judged on what they do not what color their skin is. This is where you and I differ on equality. I'm for equality as well, but to me equality comes on the opportunity. People are all different in the world and have different abilities and bring different things to the table. If someone works harder studying in school they should be able to benefit from that. A doctor who worked through years of college and medical school shouldn't be payed the same as someone who is a drop out of high school, to do so to me is immoral. 

 

[Comrade F&F]

On 11/20/2017 at 12:19 AM, FictoVore. said:

 

"Take the color of white and darken it a few shades."

 

Me: Wait. So he's gray?

[ConorOberst]

I think it's hilarious!  A perfect troll!  There wouldn't be any problems if the sign said "it's ok to be black"!  The sign perfectly highlights how racist the left actually is towards whites and how they are trying their hardest to divide us.

 

Brilliant!

[Purge]

I loosely support the "campaign" myself. I'm growing quite weary of this trend in academia and pop culture that blames us cis White males for the extinction of the dinosaurs. 

[Artistofnoname]

It is okay to be white just as much as it is okay to be black,red,tan, or any other race. Hating anyone because of skin color is racist no matter what. So yeah I think this campaign came in handy. You have white people being told they are monsters and they should be held accountable for something they never even did in the first place.

Its like murdering a child while he was just innocently playing in his front yard because his grandfather was a serial killer decades ago.

 

Now I myself am white and coming from an Irish background I am certainly not responsible for what some people I am in no way related to did. Even if I was it would still not make it right. In fact there was an Irish slave trade and many were brought to America and were considered disposable as they were cheaper. There were black slaves and white slaves. There were white slave owners and black slave owners.

So as you can see this was equal opportunity so race had little to do with it. To say it didn't and to know these facts is in fact quite racist.
Slavery does sadly still exist and goes more often under the term Trafficking.

 

Rather then whine about the past you weren't even a part of while not use that energy to fight this real life issue. Heck my maternal grandma was trafficked by her own uncle which is how my mother was born. She put my mother up for adoption to save her and after finding her back in 2012 I have seen the effects it had on her and it makes it all the more real. Thankfully under Trump so much more has been done about this issue in the US then ever before. This is something that happens all over the world regardless of age,sex,race, or anything else.

 

 Nobody should be made to feel ashamed of what the color of their skin is. Racism was on life support ready for the plug to be pulled until a bunch of loser race baiters and organizations revived it otherwise they would have faded out into obscurity. I'm a 90's kid and growing up I never had to deal with this. Heck I never even knew the word "racism" until I was in fifth grade. We all got along fine.

 

Not to mention the definition of what makes a racist anymore has been stretched so far and wide and anything and everything can be considered racist. Which as a consequence causes the term to lose any real meaning and will stop people from even caring anymore. This will make it so people won't even be able to see when real racism happens in front of them.

[Yatogami]

The Irish may not have been full blown slaves in America, but they faced the same hardships as many blacks did, and the same prejudices. They were 2nd class citizens as well, and often competed with blacks for what jobs they could obtain. 

 

What they don't tell you in history class, is the Catholic Irish tried to help blacks long before it became legal. They opened up schools and orphanages for them, before they were destroyed by the Prodestant leaders of the time. They are part of the reason blacks went North and joined the Union in the civil war.

[CaptainYesterday]

[deleted]

[iff]

23 hours ago, Yato said:

What they don't tell you in history class, is the Catholic Irish tried to help blacks long before it became legal. They opened up schools and orphanages for them, before they were destroyed by the Prodestant leaders of the time. They are part of the reason blacks went North and joined the Union in the civil war.

a lot more complicated then that, indeed the national museum of ireland in their military and decorative arts museum (which i visited in october) side by side had exhibit showing irish who were on the union side of civil war and on the confederate side of the civil war.

 

indeed, John Mitchel is one such figure. I've played gaelige football against a club named for him (in the next county to my north, there is also one). This is a guy still revered throughout ireland and the us.

 

while this article is an eye opening one between the relationship between irish in american and freed slaves.

 

as with most issues, there were irish people on every side of it.

[Homer]

Quick check because I'm not invested in this topic: Do people still talk about this?

[Sally]

On 11/23/2017 at 11:03 AM, Yato said:

Antifa is an official terrorist organization in New Jersey. Many of their actions are considered domestic terrorism by the FBI as well.

New Jersey is a terrorist organization unto itself.