|
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 July 02 2019 10:12 xDaunt wrote:
I find it amusing that you are arguing that fascism is irrational when there is quite an argument to be made that your form of communism-lite is quite irrational.
I know you are trolling, but saying Nebuchad has ANYTHING to do with anything even vaguely ressembling communism is just plain stupid. No offense.
|
On July 02 2019 16:04 Wegandi wrote:
I'm just curious, are the people talking about rationality overlapping the same people who think ideas like rent control are good, or that increases in minimum wage does not displace workers, or I don't know, simple concepts like monopoly economics applying equally to the State. /shrug
We can discuss if those are good or not, for sure, and you can be certain they all suck. I can give you very rational arguments for a higher minimal wage, or for rent control being a lesser evil.
Meanwhile, the foundations of fascism are found in fear, and the cornerstone of fascism is deconnection from any kind of intellectual integrity. Which is what is so worrying about Trump, by the way: his relationship to the truth and its absolute lack of accountability is something not seen in the West at that level since 1945. Politicians lie all the time, but they pretend not to. And when they are caught, it's considered shameful. Fascists just make up facts because none of their supporters is interested in reality whatsoever. It's all about feelings and passions.
|
On July 02 2019 16:29 FueledUpAndReadyToGo wrote:
Why would they take congress members phones and not allow photo or video of the migrant detention facilities?
AOC described some pretty horrible stuff, including how aggressive the staff were with her. And before anyone says she is exaggerating, look at what was just found:
|
I don't understand how people can argue against multiculturalism when the monolithic entity that we call "The West" is based on multiculturalism. Europe post WW2 (and actually rooted in pre WW1, but with hiccups) and the US, with all the colonists from different backgrounds deciding to work together.
It's absurd that we should somehow reject people with differing values because of the scare it'll make the assimilatory culture crumble from the inside. I'm not going into how in groups will always hold some kind of hostility (even if it's just suspicious ponderings) towards outgroups, because that's basically the entire motivation for the feeling of cultural superiority and racism, but we're rapidly changing simply because of the inundation of all those different cultures and realizing humans are humans and not that much different from each other. We all want to be comfortable (except extremists).
Also, look at how the current political climate all over the world. Inherent cultural differences within populations are even threatening to do the same, so why even care with politics? Let's just invoke authoritarians everywhere and be done with it.
|
On July 02 2019 07:56 Nebuchad wrote:Show nested quote +On July 02 2019 07:28 Taelshin wrote:
1: nope never been beatin up by a group of communist thugs(thankfully).
2: nope I like my milkshake's concrete free. I did point out there was conflicting reports on that, and it did come from the police.
Neb 2 Q's
Have you seen the video of the attack?
Do you think the masked thugs were justified? Yes. Assuming you mean morally justified, absolutely, yeah. It wasn't good strategy though.
I think you are wrong here. Violence against the Proud Boys themselves might be justified (I don't actually know enough about them). But violence against someone who is essentially functioning as a journalist and merely reporting on the protests (albeit with a pro-Proud Boys bias)? I don't actually mind throwing eggs and milkshake at him to chase him away, although I find that is very much on the limit of the acceptable, but they also punched him in the face and stole his gopro, which is way over the line.
|
On July 02 2019 07:56 Nebuchad wrote:Show nested quote +On July 02 2019 07:28 Taelshin wrote:
1: nope never been beatin up by a group of communist thugs(thankfully).
2: nope I like my milkshake's concrete free. I did point out there was conflicting reports on that, and it did come from the police.
Neb 2 Q's
Have you seen the video of the attack?
Do you think the masked thugs were justified? Yes. Assuming you mean morally justified, absolutely, yeah. It wasn't good strategy though.
I think you are wrong here. Violence against the Proud Boys themselves might be justified (I don't actually know enough about them). But violence against someone who is essentially functioning as a journalist and merely reporting on the protests (albeit with a pro-Proud Boys bias)? I don't actually mind throwing eggs and milkshake at him to chase him away, although I find that is very much on the limit of the acceptable, but they also punched him in the face and stole his gopro, which is way over the line.
Now maybe this guy has said stuff that justifies some level of violence (just as I didn't mind antifa blockading Milo when he was supposed to give a lecture at a university). I don't actually know enough about him. Why do you feel punching this guy in the face is morally just?
|
If someone is 'pro proud boys' then they have no argument for complaining about violence that's aimed at them. The Proud Boys are all about 'hanging trannys' and 'kicking the shit out of SJWs' etc. etc.
Given that they have set their stall out when it comes to violence and intimidation, they can fuck off playing the victim when people decide to defend themselves.
I agree with neb its a terrible strategy to actually go and kick their arses because we all know what they are about - provocation and then whining like little bitches when it comes back on them.
|
On July 02 2019 16:33 Dan HH wrote:Show nested quote +On July 02 2019 13:57 CosmicSpiral wrote:
Fascism is perfectly rational, it is simply incorrect in its priors and virtually anti-Enlightenment in all its principles. Most people who profess faith in liberal values will be instinctively repulsed by it regardless of its logical coherence. No ideology is 'perfectly rational' but fascism in particular is riddled with mysticism, it's what differentiates it from generic right wing authoritarianism. Rebirth myths, hero worship and a sense of impending cultural doom due to the decadence of society are all key ingredients rather than symptoms.
Those are not ingredients of fascism, although they have obviously been parts of fascist regimes in the past. Then again, they have also been part of communist regimes in the past... hero worship and mysticism are not a key ingredient of fascism, rather they are a useful tool to keep uneducated masses believing that whoever holds the power knows what is best. Whether that is Mussolini or Lenin.
|
On July 02 2019 20:20 Jockmcplop wrote:
If someone is 'pro proud boys' then they have no argument for complaining about violence that's aimed at them. The Proud Boys are all about 'hanging trannys' and 'kicking the shit out of SJWs' etc. etc.
Given that they have set their stall out when it comes to violence and intimidation, they can fuck off playing the victim when people decide to defend themselves.
I agree with neb its a terrible strategy to actually go and kick their arses because we all know what they are about - provocation and then whining like little bitches when it comes back on them.
So it's justified to start a gang of thugs and go and beat up... I dunno. Milo Papadopoulos, or as you're a Brit, Nigel Farage, because you think their ideas are abhorrent?
|
On July 02 2019 20:37 Acrofales wrote:Show nested quote +On July 02 2019 20:20 Jockmcplop wrote:
If someone is 'pro proud boys' then they have no argument for complaining about violence that's aimed at them. The Proud Boys are all about 'hanging trannys' and 'kicking the shit out of SJWs' etc. etc.
Given that they have set their stall out when it comes to violence and intimidation, they can fuck off playing the victim when people decide to defend themselves.
I agree with neb its a terrible strategy to actually go and kick their arses because we all know what they are about - provocation and then whining like little bitches when it comes back on them.
So it's justified to start a gang of thugs and go and beat up... I dunno. Milo Papadopoulos, or as you're a Brit, Nigel Farage, because you think their ideas are abhorrent?
I didn't say it was justified. I said the Proud Boys aren't justified in complaining, there's a difference.
|
On July 02 2019 20:39 Jockmcplop wrote:Show nested quote +On July 02 2019 20:37 Acrofales wrote:On July 02 2019 20:20 Jockmcplop wrote:
If someone is 'pro proud boys' then they have no argument for complaining about violence that's aimed at them. The Proud Boys are all about 'hanging trannys' and 'kicking the shit out of SJWs' etc. etc.
Given that they have set their stall out when it comes to violence and intimidation, they can fuck off playing the victim when people decide to defend themselves.
I agree with neb its a terrible strategy to actually go and kick their arses because we all know what they are about - provocation and then whining like little bitches when it comes back on them.
So it's justified to start a gang of thugs and go and beat up... I dunno. Milo Papadopoulos, or as you're a Brit, Nigel Farage, because you think their ideas are abhorrent? I didn't say it was justified. I said the Proud Boys aren't justified in complaining, there's a difference.
Okay, that is different to what Nebuchad said tho. Neb said antifa was justified in beating the blogger (not Proud Boys) bloody.
|
On July 02 2019 20:40 Acrofales wrote:Show nested quote +On July 02 2019 20:39 Jockmcplop wrote:On July 02 2019 20:37 Acrofales wrote:On July 02 2019 20:20 Jockmcplop wrote:
If someone is 'pro proud boys' then they have no argument for complaining about violence that's aimed at them. The Proud Boys are all about 'hanging trannys' and 'kicking the shit out of SJWs' etc. etc.
Given that they have set their stall out when it comes to violence and intimidation, they can fuck off playing the victim when people decide to defend themselves.
I agree with neb its a terrible strategy to actually go and kick their arses because we all know what they are about - provocation and then whining like little bitches when it comes back on them.
So it's justified to start a gang of thugs and go and beat up... I dunno. Milo Papadopoulos, or as you're a Brit, Nigel Farage, because you think their ideas are abhorrent? I didn't say it was justified. I said the Proud Boys aren't justified in complaining, there's a difference. Okay, that is different to what Nebuchad said tho. Neb said antifa was justified in beating the blogger ( not Proud Boys) bloody.
Yeah its different from when Neb said.
Its a difficult question whether or not its justified. I don't think so, especially if whoever did this went there with the express motivation to kick the shit out of a Proud Boy/supporter. In self defense I believe it is justified, and I'm including in this defending other people from violence OR intimidation.
|
On July 02 2019 20:18 Acrofales wrote:Show nested quote +On July 02 2019 07:56 Nebuchad wrote:On July 02 2019 07:28 Taelshin wrote:
1: nope never been beatin up by a group of communist thugs(thankfully).
2: nope I like my milkshake's concrete free. I did point out there was conflicting reports on that, and it did come from the police.
Neb 2 Q's
Have you seen the video of the attack?
Do you think the masked thugs were justified? Yes. Assuming you mean morally justified, absolutely, yeah. It wasn't good strategy though. I think you are wrong here. Violence against the Proud Boys themselves might be justified (I don't actually know enough about them). But violence against someone who is essentially functioning as a journalist and merely reporting on the protests (albeit with a pro-Proud Boys bias)? I don't actually mind throwing eggs and milkshake at him to chase him away, although I find that is very much on the limit of the acceptable, but they also punched him in the face and stole his gopro, which is way over the line. Now maybe this guy has said stuff that justifies some level of violence (just as I didn't mind antifa blockading Milo when he was supposed to give a lecture at a university). I don't actually know enough about him. Why do you feel punching this guy in the face is morally just?
Attacking Andy Ngo is bad strategy because it's exactly what he wanted to happen. He has been following antifa around hoping to get assaulted so that he could make it into a story. He is going to monetize that for months, his new family name is now Ngo-Assaulted-by-Antifa. And now we're having these conversations, which also aren't particularly helpful, so yeah the strategy was terrible.
Now in terms of who Ngo is, he's the kind of dude who sees fascists and antifascists and decides "I'm going to make articles critical of antifascists and I'm willing to be dishonest about it". He was fired from a previous student journalism job for deliberately misquoting a muslim student in a way that put them under threat, he has penned articles on the islamization of Britain, on how there are hate crimes surges because the gays are faking them, on how journalists are secretly antifa and that's why they're fake news...
It's circulating on Twitter that he was also filming this incident in which a woman's neck was broken but I haven't been able to independently verify that. After the event, Andy Ngo doxxed to his Proud Boys/Patriot Prayer audience who the woman who had her neck broken (and survived) was, probably because he wanted them to send flowers to her and an apology, I dunno.
Andy Ngo is an established propagandist for fascist groups, that's just what he does. I can't really picture how you decide that's the line of work you want without having sympathy for fascism yourself.
|
On July 02 2019 16:14 CosmicSpiral wrote:Show nested quote +On July 02 2019 14:24 Nebuchad wrote:On July 02 2019 13:57 CosmicSpiral wrote:
Fascists is perfectly rational, it is simply incorrect in its priors and virtually anti-Enlightenment in all its principles. Most people who profess faith in liberal values will be instinctively repulsed by it regardless of its logical coherence. I think we're mostly saying the same thing in terms of content, perhaps I'm being lazy with the terminology. If your priors can adequately be described as incorrect and you refuse to reconsider them, I wouldn't consider that to be perfectly rational. Philosophically, the issue is threefold: - There are (theoretically) an infinite number of belief systems that can be derived from a set of correct priors that can be adequately descriptive and prescriptive.
- In non-scientific fields, one still has to evaluate priors in relation to each other or as part of a hierarchy. How people do this depends largely on teleology, intuition, and pragmatic application.
- The factual accuracy of priors usually pales in importance compared to their persuasive or sentimental value. Liberalism is the most ironic example of this phenomenon.
That sounds complicated, I'm a simple dude. Here's how I see fascism in an analogy:
"Provided that unicorns are out to get me, I'm going to stay away from stables and rainbows."
That's certainly a rational set of reactions based on this premise, but it's still silly to call that rational, at least in my view. I don't think you're going to have a lot of success reaching an individual who believes this by having a calm, reasoned argument with them in the marketplace of ideas to show them that unicorns are not, in fact, out to get them.
|
Who are you to decide who is a journalist? The julian Assange case wants a word with you. If one are a journalist, you should get extra protection even if someone does not agree with your journalistic bias.
|
On July 02 2019 21:24 Neneu wrote:
Who are you to decide who is a journalist? The julian Assange case wants a word with you. If one are a journalist, you should get extra protection even if someone does not agree with your journalistic bias.
We're talking about my moral code my dude, I'm pretty sure it's not weird that I'm the one who gets to decide how I feel about people when we talk about that.
If you want to argue that I'm wrong about Ngo you get to do that, I'll listen.
|
On July 02 2019 21:24 Neneu wrote:
Who are you to decide who is a journalist? The julian Assange case wants a word with you. If one are a journalist, you should get extra protection even if someone does not agree with your journalistic bias.
'Bias' isn't misquoting and doxxing people.
I don't know if that falls under a breach of journalistic ethics that would get you in serious professional trouble, but it sure sounds like it should be.
|
If there is one thing that is being done all the time in media, it is misquoting. It does not make it right, but it is just a part of what a lot of media is doing atm.
Deciding who is a journalist and who is not, is a dangerous road to walk down. It is one of the reasons journalist's death rate is on the rise and retaliation murders nearly doubled in 2018. People don't care about the protections of journalists they don't agree with, as much as they did before.
|
On July 02 2019 21:49 Neneu wrote:
If there is one thing that is being done all the time in media, it is misquoting. It does not make it right, but it is just a part of what a lot of media is doing atm.
Deciding who is a journalist and who is not, is a dangerous road to walk down. It is one of the reasons journalist's death rate is on the rise and retaliation murders nearly doubled in 2018. People don't care about the protections of journalists they don't agree with, as much as they did before.
Your trepidation in the face of identifying journalists and non-journalists is a key aspect of what goes into fascist cooption of liberal social norms. It’s basically another iteration of the paradox of tolerance.
|
On July 02 2019 21:49 Neneu wrote:
If there is one thing that is being done all the time in media, it is misquoting. It does not make it right, but it is just a part of what a lot of media is doing atm.
Deciding who is a journalist and who is not, is a dangerous road to walk down. It is one of the reasons journalist's death rate is on the rise and retaliation murders nearly doubled in 2018. People don't care about the protections of journalists they don't agree with, as much as they did before.
You're actually wrong there, journalists do not misquote people all the time, it's pretty rare. Often proofreaders get quoted sentences that don't make sense grammatically and they are supposed not to touch them unless it's egregious, because there is concern that the quote might be modified. When journalists misquote people it's almost always a genuine error. Sometimes it's simply out of time constraint and lazyness, you'd be surprised. Once we had an article about islam in Germany (written by a journalist that doesn't work for us) and the general tone of the article was that everything was mostly fine and it was a shame that the people only remembered shocking information, like "salafists are recruiting people in train station".
The editor chose as a pluck out line "salafists are recruiting people in train station", which is completely absurd given the content of the article. I phoned him and he wouldn't be arsed to change it, my guess is because he was doing something else at that point.
Now here's what he didn't do: he didn't go on a rampage about how conservatives are denied their free speech rights because they can't misquote muslims in the way they want to further their narrative.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
