|
Now that we have a new thread, 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 complete and thorough read before posting! NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets.
Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source.If you have any questions, comments, concern, or feedback regarding the USPMT, then please use this thread: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/website-feedback/510156-us-politics-thread |
On March 16 2019 03:24 Paljas wrote:
The Candance Owens part in the manifesto is clearly a joke, just like the pewdiepie meme.
That guy's brain has rotten on 4chan memes and the like, its a sick example of someone who has chosen to let his perception of reality to be guided by shit he saw on a deranged anime image board.
Nonetheless, I am a bit suprised to see that some people in this thread are reluctant to call that guy what he is:
a rightwing terrorist.
The question was what was his goal and what share of the blame should people on the right take for inspiring him. You’re the first to question what label we should apply to him based on the acts. If you want to find out what people are reluctant to do, you actually have to converse with other people.
|
On March 16 2019 03:42 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On March 16 2019 03:24 Paljas wrote:
The Candance Owens part in the manifesto is clearly a joke, just like the pewdiepie meme.
That guy's brain has rotten on 4chan memes and the like, its a sick example of someone who has chosen to let his perception of reality to be guided by shit he saw on a deranged anime image board.
Nonetheless, I am a bit suprised to see that some people in this thread are reluctant to call that guy what he is:
a rightwing terrorist. The question was what was his goal and what share of the blame should people on the right take for inspiring him. You’re the first to question what label we should apply to him based on the acts. If you want to find out what people are reluctant to do, you actually have to converse with other people.
Would you label him a right wing terrorist?
|
Poeple who for years have spouted hateful, divisive rhetoric are to blame for events like that. There are no shades of gray here. They created an environment where such speech is not only acceptable but often applauded.
|
On March 16 2019 03:53 IyMoon wrote:Show nested quote +On March 16 2019 03:42 Danglars wrote:On March 16 2019 03:24 Paljas wrote:
The Candance Owens part in the manifesto is clearly a joke, just like the pewdiepie meme.
That guy's brain has rotten on 4chan memes and the like, its a sick example of someone who has chosen to let his perception of reality to be guided by shit he saw on a deranged anime image board.
Nonetheless, I am a bit suprised to see that some people in this thread are reluctant to call that guy what he is:
a rightwing terrorist. The question was what was his goal and what share of the blame should people on the right take for inspiring him. You’re the first to question what label we should apply to him based on the acts. If you want to find out what people are reluctant to do, you actually have to converse with other people. Would you label him a right wing terrorist?
Easily.
On March 16 2019 04:01 PoulsenB wrote:
Poeple who for years have spouted hateful, divisive rhetoric are to blame for events like that. There are no shades of gray here. They created an environment where such speech is not only acceptable but often applauded.
That’s where I depart. No group must accept the labels of their enemy and the encouragement of their fringe. The crazies of this world don’t deserve special consideration if they mention Clinton, Trump, Bernie, or the Dalai Lama as inspiration for their acts. It leads to all sorts of discivilizational conclusions, like Pelosi must dare not mention that she thinks Republican legislation is causing the deaths of millions because some nutcase might say that justifies violence against them. It’s a bad philosophy, and the practitioners find ways to excuse their own side from it.
|
Before you "depart": do you think the shooting was politically motivated? You can answer "yes" or "no" if you don't want to elaborate.
|
On March 16 2019 03:24 Paljas wrote:
The Candance Owens part in the manifesto is clearly a joke, just like the pewdiepie meme.
That guy's brain has rotten on 4chan memes and the like, its a sick example of someone who has chosen to let his perception of reality to be guided by shit he saw on a deranged anime image board.
Nonetheless, I am a bit suprised to see that some people in this thread are reluctant to call that guy what he is:
a rightwing terrorist.
The problem is how the critiques end up being framed by members of the right.
My understanding is that in their eyes, many people hear political figures use terms like "invaders" and "infest" and they are simply able to be like "yeah, i want immigration to be reduced as well". Then some people hear that and think "holy fuck our entire society is being destroyed and we are actively losing this war. I MUST escalate this situation to prevent the world from being ruined!"
Some people look at that and say "See? If the problem was the language, everyone would be doing that". If only some people do crazy things from having their fears stoked by language, then the problem is the individual and not the language.
But I think this perspective misses some nuance and ignores the difference in responsibility for leaders. Leaders have a unique form of influence over the types that flock to 4chan and racial supremacy. Nazi Germany was not the fault of all the Nazi sympathizers. People were straight up manipulated, in my eyes. Weird psychology happens when leaders target other groups. It doesn't happen with all the followers, but it happens with enough.
Nazi Germany is what happens when that type of language is cranked up to full blast. I am by no means saying Trump and the various people who inspired this guy are the same as Hitler. But there are many "levels" of hatred. Hitler was a solid 10. Less than that can be problematic and cause suffering. People often think the only reason for civility is appearance and to be proper. Or people think of it as a matter of manners. But that is not nearly the entirety of it.
|
Above all else, the NZ shooter's motive was to ignite tensions and push us towards civil war as stated in his manifesto. Predictably, everyone seems to be taking the bait and that's not sitting well with me.
|
That’s nonsense, his “above all else” motive was to kill Muslims. Your self-congratulatory window dressing is just that, window dressing intended to provide cover for lukewarm reactions to hate killings. Congrats for being so “levelheaded,” I guess?
|
This guy is a classic case of horseshoe theory. Anti-capitalist, malthusian, nativist. Worst of "both worlds". Its like if Sanders and Trump had a baby.
|
On March 16 2019 04:43 youngjiddle wrote:
Above all else, the NZ shooter's motive was to ignite tensions and push us towards civil war as stated in his manifesto. Predictably, everyone seems to be taking the bait and that's not sitting well with me. "Tensions" are already "ignited" around the time the terrorist murdered a bunch of other people. There is no bait, except to inspire others to do the same. To make clear that the greater part of society views his political act as negative is the only only way to combat this. What would make you sit well? To simply allow his message spread without counter?
|
On March 16 2019 04:56 Wegandi wrote:
This guy is a classic case of horseshoe theory. Anti-capitalist, malthusian, nativist. Worst of "both worlds". Its like if Sanders and Trump had a baby.
How do you manage to mingle sanders with a hate crime?
Trump I 100% understand but there's no sanders to find there.
|
On March 16 2019 05:00 Dangermousecatdog wrote:Show nested quote +On March 16 2019 04:43 youngjiddle wrote:
Above all else, the NZ shooter's motive was to ignite tensions and push us towards civil war as stated in his manifesto. Predictably, everyone seems to be taking the bait and that's not sitting well with me. "Tensions" are already "ignited" around the time the terrorist murdered a bunch of other people. There is no bait, except to inspire others to do the same. To make clear that the greater part of society views his political act as negative is the only only way to combat this. What would make you sit well? To simply allow his message spread without counter?
A proper and timely reaction is what is needed, NOT comments like AO-Cortez's mocking the "NRA" and prayer.
|
I'm used to the rightwing having bad takes on terrorism but these are downright insane
|
On March 16 2019 05:06 Artisreal wrote:Show nested quote +On March 16 2019 04:56 Wegandi wrote:
This guy is a classic case of horseshoe theory. Anti-capitalist, malthusian, nativist. Worst of "both worlds". Its like if Sanders and Trump had a baby. How do you manage to mingle sanders with a hate crime? Trump I 100% understand but there's no sanders to find there.
Maybe it's the anti-capitalist, pro-socialist ravings in his "manifesto". Like I said, the dude is classic horseshoe. Hating the "1%" isn't far removed philosophically from hating immigrants.
|
On March 16 2019 05:07 Nebuchad wrote:
I'm used to the rightwing having bad takes on terrorism but these are downright insane
Just for fun, imagine if instead the murderer had been a muslim guy who shot up a church and claims that he was murdering people because of inspiration by stuff that Imam A and Imam B said.
And now think about how Danglars and xDaunt would react to that.
I find the contrast to the reaction that they display in this case very telling. Gotta protect your own team.
|
On March 16 2019 05:15 Simberto wrote:Show nested quote +On March 16 2019 05:07 Nebuchad wrote:
I'm used to the rightwing having bad takes on terrorism but these are downright insane Just for fun, imagine if instead the murderer had been a muslim guy who shot up a church and claims that he was murdering people because of inspiration by stuff that Imam A and Imam B said. And now think about how Danglars and xDaunt would react to that. I find the contrast to the reaction that they display in this case very telling. Gotta protect your own team.
That really goes for both sides as has been proven multiple times already in this thread. It's pathetic all around.
|
On March 16 2019 05:19 Ghostcom wrote:Show nested quote +On March 16 2019 05:15 Simberto wrote:On March 16 2019 05:07 Nebuchad wrote:
I'm used to the rightwing having bad takes on terrorism but these are downright insane Just for fun, imagine if instead the murderer had been a muslim guy who shot up a church and claims that he was murdering people because of inspiration by stuff that Imam A and Imam B said. And now think about how Danglars and xDaunt would react to that. I find the contrast to the reaction that they display in this case very telling. Gotta protect your own team. That really goes for both sides as has been proven multiple times already in this thread. It's pathetic all around.
How do you figure?
|
On March 16 2019 05:15 Wegandi wrote:Show nested quote +On March 16 2019 05:06 Artisreal wrote:On March 16 2019 04:56 Wegandi wrote:
This guy is a classic case of horseshoe theory. Anti-capitalist, malthusian, nativist. Worst of "both worlds". Its like if Sanders and Trump had a baby. How do you manage to mingle sanders with a hate crime? Trump I 100% understand but there's no sanders to find there. Maybe it's the anti-capitalist, pro-socialist ravings in his "manifesto". Like I said, the dude is classic horseshoe. Hating the "1%" isn't far removed philosophically from hating immigrants.
First of all, these have nothing to do with killing people.
Secondly there's a significant disparity in reasoning why either supposedly foreign people, for gods sake, technically he's a foreigner where he committed the terrorist act and surely at least some of those he murdered were citizens, are subject of hate. that is usually because of who the perpetrators think these people are.
How do you think this matches being anti capitalistic? Being against the oppression of the working people?
One is demonising swathes of the populace while the other is a widespread legitimate criticism of the way of life we all enjoy.
Id challenge you to substantiate that a right wing terrorist might as well have been labelled a left wing terrorist.
Thanks
|
|
|
On March 16 2019 05:19 Ghostcom wrote:Show nested quote +On March 16 2019 05:15 Simberto wrote:On March 16 2019 05:07 Nebuchad wrote:
I'm used to the rightwing having bad takes on terrorism but these are downright insane Just for fun, imagine if instead the murderer had been a muslim guy who shot up a church and claims that he was murdering people because of inspiration by stuff that Imam A and Imam B said. And now think about how Danglars and xDaunt would react to that. I find the contrast to the reaction that they display in this case very telling. Gotta protect your own team. That really goes for both sides as has been proven multiple times already in this thread. It's pathetic all around.
I see lots of left-leaning folks call out people "on their team" when they do something out of line or say something awful. It's not that out of place.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
