In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up!
NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action.
The GOP is pretty radicalized, but even in the Tea Party, the average stormfront user would be an outcast for their views.
Edit: also, though I'd like to see real data on this, I've repeatedly heard that the young are generally liberal on gay marriage and fairly conservative on abortion (at least personally). Is this a true statistic/does anyone know of the source?
Well of course the users of a 'Hate Website' are going to skew younger, it's an internet site? Other than sites like AARP pretty sure the registration lists for most websites skew under 30 pretty hard.
You can see it in poll after poll that Social conservatism (and the hate that often comes along) is far less prevalent in young people, however young people are far more vocal about it now than they were in lets say the late 90's.
Thinking back to the OJ trial, I would hear the occasional racial slur or remark regarding OJ's guilt or a snide remark about Johnny but it was one of those things people said looking over their shoulders under their breath. Now with the internet being so popular and social networking being where it is something like Trayvon Martin's death put front and center more racial animosity in an hour than the whole OJ trial did.
Instantly after a Trayvon Story was posted you would see "That N**ger deserved to be shot" and plenty worse. It's not that people were not saying that kind of stuff about OJ it's just that they didn't make a million facebook, instagram, tumblr, tweets, saying those racist comments.
I would suggest that the membership of sites like Stormfront is less about any new swell in young bigotry, it's just where all the 'cool kid' bigots hang out (instead of some lodge or in a field with a burning cross [obviously less observable])
On July 15 2014 02:14 Wolfstan wrote: Israel and Saudi Arabia are our allies in the middle east. I support Israel and right to defend it's right to exist. I feel it's trying its best to be precise in it's targets.
Supporting Israel's right to exist isn't exclusive to supporting every action they do. They've been pushing Palestinian buttons for awhile now, trying to get a rise out of the extremist groups so they can come in and justify wiping out those groups and all the collateral that comes with an operation of that magnitude.
What has Israel been doing to "push buttons" and make the bleeding heart liberals condemn Israel for offending extremists? The have been warning civilian population away from tactical targets and using low impact mortars on the roofs of buildings before imminent strikes.
On July 15 2014 02:14 Wolfstan wrote: Israel and Saudi Arabia are our allies in the middle east. I support Israel and right to defend it's right to exist. I feel it's trying its best to be precise in it's targets.
Supporting Israel's right to exist isn't exclusive to supporting every action they do. They've been pushing Palestinian buttons for awhile now, trying to get a rise out of the extremist groups so they can come in and justify wiping out those groups and all the collateral that comes with an operation of that magnitude.
What has Israel been doing to "push buttons" and make the bleeding heart liberals condemn Israel for offending extremists? The have been warning civilian population away from tactical targets and using low impact mortars on the roofs of buildings before imminent strikes.
Killing more Palestinian civilians in retaliation for threatening/ launching rockets that cause very little comparable damage at Jewish civilians is one thing, the asymmetrical nature of the deaths would be another.
Regarding to alexa and some report I found on the Internet this site has less than 1.8k unique visitors a day. I don't think that says anything about Americas youth.
Killing more Palestinian civilians in retaliation for threatening/ launching rockets that cause very little comparable damage at Jewish civilians is one thing, the asymmetrical nature of the deaths would be another.
Given the fact that the Hamas has been hitting them with rockets for years Israel could basically claim that they're at war. If Cuba would start shooting rockets at Florida I don't think many people would claim that the US can't attack them "because that's completely unfair and it's killing people!"
If Palestine wants to live in peace with Israel they need to kick the Hamas out, simply as that.
well obviously the stormfront thing is not representative of any broad trends, but still, if you are looking for young bigots there's some. the idea that we'll be free of these people once the old guys die is very much wonderful, but there does seem to be de novo genesis of young bigots, from mechanisms not described by established views like lack of education or lack of economic security.
i keep tab on some of these extremist outlets, and the situation seems to me to be ideological self radicalization. a guy finds a pamphlet or a website and they click with his established but undeveloped prejudices. keep in mind you need to be an activist bigot to join something like stormfront.
On July 15 2014 02:14 Wolfstan wrote: Israel and Saudi Arabia are our allies in the middle east. I support Israel and right to defend it's right to exist. I feel it's trying its best to be precise in it's targets.
Supporting Israel's right to exist isn't exclusive to supporting every action they do. They've been pushing Palestinian buttons for awhile now, trying to get a rise out of the extremist groups so they can come in and justify wiping out those groups and all the collateral that comes with an operation of that magnitude.
What has Israel been doing to "push buttons" and make the bleeding heart liberals condemn Israel for offending extremists? The have been warning civilian population away from tactical targets and using low impact mortars on the roofs of buildings before imminent strikes.
Continuing to develop in the West Bank after agreeing many times to stop, I would call that a gigantic button they keep pushing. The situation in Gaza and the West Bank has been in pretty poor shape in general, and there's a LOT of "group punishment" going around for the actions of some extremists.
Also, I don't disagree with the notion that they are attempting to keep civilian casualties to a minimum, but they are accepting them as collateral damage in the end. None of the higher ups are getting upset that innocent people are getting caught in the operation.
On July 15 2014 06:05 {CC}StealthBlue wrote: If the new GOP turns out to be very Libertarian then Europe is in for a shock on the foreign policy front.
I was under the impression the only libertarian of consequence in the entire party was Rand Paul and that the rest (Perry, Santorum, McCain, Cruz, Rubio, Ryan, Pence, Bush) were all firmly on the other side of the divide, wanting to ramp up/continue obama policy.
are American libertarians not in the favour of less interventionism? That would probably be more in line with European politics, especially regarding Russia and China.
They tend to be of no alliances,no treaties, no foreign ventures etc. Let Europe pay for Europe and only protect US trade i.e. Rand Paul, Gary Johnson positions. Meaning no foreign bases, nothing defense wise past our own borders.
There's a very significant and growing segment in the GOP base that wants to wind down our presence overseas and park our troops at the Southern border instead, which goes hand in hand with the more libertarian-oriented youth movement within the GOP. It's probably not something that will significantly influence the next presidential election, but it's coming pretty soon.
People tend to stress that the US is paying for 75% of the NATO budget, but honestly, Europe's military strength is still far bigger than Russia's, who is the only other big player on the continent. Not to mention of the French and British nuclear arsenal.
Let's say that the US leaves the NATO tomorrow, leaves all military bases and so on, what's going to change in reality?
Regarding to alexa and some report I found on the Internet this site has less than 1.8k unique visitors a day. I don't think that says anything about Americas youth.
Killing more Palestinian civilians in retaliation for threatening/ launching rockets that cause very little comparable damage at Jewish civilians is one thing, the asymmetrical nature of the deaths would be another.
Given the fact that the Hamas has been hitting them with rockets for years Israel could basically claim that they're at war. If Cuba would start shooting rockets at Florida I don't think many people would claim that the US can't attack them "because that's completely unfair and it's killing people!"
If Palestine wants to live in peace with Israel they need to kick the Hamas out, simply as that.
it is, of course, not that simple. the support the hamas is recieving becomes less suprising when one looks at the economic situation Gaza: extremly high population density and unemployment, a smuggling and shortage economy and a high dependency on the israeli currency paint a disastrous picture. all of this leads to a hugh support for the hamas due to the various welfare bodys the run or operate and the ridiciouls promises they make.
it is easy to dismiss the palestianians due to their continous support for the hamas, but it certainly isnt fair
On July 15 2014 06:23 Nyxisto wrote: People tend to stress that the US is paying for 75% of the NATO budget, but honestly, Europe's military strength is still far bigger than Russia's, which is the only other big player on the continent. Not to mention of the French and British nuclear arsenal.
Let's say that US leaves the NATO tomorrow, leaves all military bases and so on, what's going to change in reality?
Potential social programs are cut due to increased spending on arms procurement and development, Europe finds itself having to furnish economic aid to Eastern Europe (including some EU members), & Africa as the US has withdrawn from such projects. The EU now has to carry the entirety of the IMF and it's credits etc as the US is no longer part of that either. Arms buildup due to Middle East, and a more aggressive Russia. Bigger Naval spending (as the sea lanes that carry trade are no longer protected only the US ones). Entirely new treaties as NATO no longer exists in its current form and the UN is possibly reformed.
World recession in short while the US economy rapidly changes as Corporations no longer have subsidies etc.
On July 15 2014 06:23 Nyxisto wrote: People tend to stress that the US is paying for 75% of the NATO budget, but honestly, Europe's military strength is still far bigger than Russia's, which is the only other big player on the continent. Not to mention of the French and British nuclear arsenal.
Let's say that US leaves the NATO tomorrow, leaves all military bases and so on, what's going to change in reality?
Potential social programs are cut due to increased spending on arms procurement and development, Europe finds itself having to furnish economic aid to Eastern Europe (including some EU members), & Africa as the US has withdrawn from such projects. The EU now has to carry the entirety of the IMF and it's credits etc as the US is no longer part of that either. Arms buildup due to Middle East, and a more aggressive Russia. Bigger Naval spending (as the trade lanes are no longer protected only the US ones). Entirely new treaties as NATO no longer exists in its current form and the UN is possibly reformed.
Is complete withdrawal from international diplomatic and monetary organisations something that libertarians advocate? Because that goes far further than just changing foreign military policy.
We support the maintenance of a sufficient military to defend the United States against aggression. The United States should both avoid entangling alliances and abandon its attempts to act as policeman for the world. We oppose any form of compulsory national service.
3.3 International Affairs
American foreign policy should seek an America at peace with the world. Our foreign policy should emphasize defense against attack from abroad and enhance the likelihood of peace by avoiding foreign entanglements. We would end the current U.S. government policy of foreign intervention, including military and economic aid. We recognize the right of all people to resist tyranny and defend themselves and their rights. We condemn the use of force, and especially the use of terrorism, against the innocent, regardless of whether such acts are committed by governments or by political or revolutionary groups.
3.4 Free Trade and Migration
We support the removal of governmental impediments to free trade. Political freedom and escape from tyranny demand that individuals not be unreasonably constrained by government in the crossing of political boundaries. Economic freedom demands the unrestricted movement of human as well as financial capital across national borders. However, we support control over the entry into our country of foreign nationals who pose a credible threat to security, health or property.