EPTUS Politics Mega-thread - Page 8395
| Forum Index > Closed |
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please. 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. | ||
KwarK
United States43444 Posts
| ||
|
Kickboxer
Slovenia1308 Posts
 | ||
|
KwarK
United States43444 Posts
The masked individuals attacking Trump supporters are not doing so out of a deep and abiding love of democracy, they're doing so because they enjoy it. They're no more the defenders of democracy than Batman is the defender of law and order. | ||
|
OuchyDathurts
United States4588 Posts
| ||
|
Nyxisto
Germany6287 Posts
On August 14 2017 08:20 KwarK wrote: I've always been against punching Nazis outside of wartime. Nazism is inseparable from the idea that power and morality are the same thing, that by having the power to impose your will on another you gain the moral right to impose your will on them. When a vigilante punches a Nazi they are partaking in the philosophy that they despise. The barriers to Nazism are twofold, firstly, everyone hates them so they can't get any power, and secondly, even if they get any power, moral people everywhere will oppose them. By punching Nazis we erode the latter. Civil society is inimical to Nazism, we shouldn't allow it to be degraded in a fight against Nazism, we should do the opposite, fortifying the bastions of justice and peace against their assault. And if a time comes when their attacks upon society threaten to topple society as a whole then we should act collectively with a mandate against them. The masked individuals attacking Trump supporters are not doing so out of a deep and abiding love of democracy, they're doing so because they enjoy it. They're no more the defenders of democracy than Batman is the defender of law and order. For that reason I said the state, who has the right to exercise force, and not random individuals looking for petty revenge. But don't you think it's curious that racists decades ago dressed up to obfuscate their identity when today they march through the streets plain faced? Where is the state exactly? These people seem to be pretty damn emboldened and proud, in a strong civil society they would be afraid and ashamed to even leave their houses. The disease comparison isn't far off, you prevent them before they spread, not when they're in full force. The cost of pushing these people back will go higher and higher the more their views are normalised. | ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States23569 Posts
If you insult someone's mother (or in this case, advocate that they be exterminated like pests), you can't be surprised if they punch you in the mouth. It's not fear of the justice system or people's character that causes the drastic disparity in the use of the N-word on the internet vs in the presence of black people in person. | ||
|
KwarK
United States43444 Posts
On August 14 2017 08:28 Nyxisto wrote: For that reason I said the state, who has the right to exercise force, and not random individuals looking for petty revenge. But don't you think it's curious that racists decades ago dressed up to obfuscate their identity when today they march through the streets plain faced? Where is the state exactly? These people seem to be pretty damn emboldened and proud, in a strong civil society they would be afraid and ashamed to even leave their houses. The disease comparison isn't far off, you prevent them before they spread, not when they're in full force. The cost of pushing these people back will go higher and higher the more their views are normalised. This is where we disagree. In a civil society nobody should be afraid to leave their houses. If they act within existing laws they should get the protection of the law. And if existing laws are insufficient to restrain the rise of Nazism then the laws should be expanded. I don't think they won with their most recent march though. They're complaining that we've been taking down the statues of their heroes. We're going to keep doing that. All they're doing is publicizing their own impotence at this point. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On August 14 2017 08:34 GreenHorizons wrote: As far as punching nazi's goes I don't personally care if someone does it, but I also don't think they should be immune to appropriate legal consequences. If you insult someone's mother (or in this case, advocate that they be exterminated like pests), you can't be surprised if they punch you in the mouth. It's not fear of the justice system or people's character that causes the drastic disparity in the use of the N-word on the internet vs in the presence of black people in person. The pearl clutching over punching Nazis is comical. Advocating for genocide or a whites only America is on the long list of things that pretty risky to pay in public. Much like the N-word or telling random women you want to fuck them. There is a huge difference between laughing about it and saying Nazi punchers shouldn't be arrested for assault Topical: American Tourist Punched For Giving Nazi Salute In Germany | ||
frazzle
United States468 Posts
There has to have been that one guy wondering what the hell he got himself into, and his story will be incorporated into "The Hangover IV". | ||
|
KwarK
United States43444 Posts
On August 14 2017 09:31 frazzle wrote: There's got to be at least one story of some clueless dummy in Charlottesville showing up thinking he was protesting political correctness run amok, only to be woken up at midnight to march on the square and asked if he wants a club or torch to go with his fascist shield. There has to have been that one guy wondering what the hell he got himself into, and his story will be incorporated into "The Hangover IV". Ah yes, because the political correctness gone amok folks totally don't know what they're marching for. | ||
|
Karis Vas Ryaar
United States4396 Posts
| ||
|
Doodsmack
United States7224 Posts
On Thursday, President Trump announced that his eldest daughter would head the U.S. delegation at November’s Global Entrepreneurship Summit in southern India, a three-day event designed to encourage collaboration and "lasting relationships" between American business leaders and investors with international counterparts, according to a statement released by the U.S. State Department. Bobby Gosh, editor of the Hindustan Times tweeted that an Indian diplomat, whose name he didn't reveal, remarked on Ivanka: "We regard Ivanka Trump the way we do half-wit Saudi princes. It's in our national interest to flatter them.” www.yahoo.com | ||
|
Wulfey_LA
932 Posts
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Preventive_war | ||
|
Nevuk
United States16280 Posts
On August 14 2017 10:49 Wulfey_LA wrote: Trump is proposing not at all a preemptive strike. What is on the table is a preventative strike. Preemptive strikes are like the 1967 6 day war where Israel attacked Egypt after Egypt moved their divisions to the border and Israel gathered intelligence suggesting an imminent attack. Preventative war is like the 2003 Iraq invasion where we invaded Iraq to prevent Saddam from handing off chemical weapons to Al-Queda at an unknown and unspecified future time. We have no indication of an imminent North Korean attack. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Preventive_war So it's basically an even worse idea than a preemptive strike? | ||
|
m4ini
4215 Posts
On August 14 2017 11:03 Nevuk wrote: So it's basically an even worse idea than a preemptive strike? Not to mention pointless since you can't really retro-actively strike preventive. If officials are to believed, they already have nukes. | ||
|
CorsairHero
Canada9491 Posts
On August 14 2017 09:43 Karis Vas Ryaar wrote: https://twitter.com/JChengWSJ/status/896869224743710720 just tell him the stock market will correct if he strikes | ||
|
xDaunt
United States17988 Posts
On August 14 2017 09:43 Karis Vas Ryaar wrote: https://twitter.com/JChengWSJ/status/896869224743710720 And what about the advisers who think that a strike is a good idea? The premise here is absurd. | ||
|
CorsairHero
Canada9491 Posts
https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2017/07/the-worst-problem-on-earth/528717/ Also the author of that article Mark Bowden did a podcast with Sam Harris on the issue + Show Spoiler + | ||
|
Wulfey_LA
932 Posts
On August 14 2017 11:03 Nevuk wrote: So it's basically an even worse idea than a preemptive strike? Preemption is protected under international law as an act of self defense against an imminent attack. Preventative war is what Bush2 tried to use as the basis for Iraq War 2. If anyone still cares about international law and war crimes and whatnot, preventative war is at this point a war crime without some kind of backing by the UN. If Trump simply launches an attack on NK without any kind of indication of in incoming attack then that would be an act of aggression without any kind of international law backing. Of course, no one cares about international law anymore and great powers can just invade freely at any time. | ||
|
Danglars
United States12133 Posts
Exchanges following from Cruz, Rubio, and several MSM journos were worthwhile. | ||
| ||
