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.
On August 03 2019 16:01 Biff The Understudy wrote:
Outside of the totalitarian regime, the orwellian model of society, the labor camps, the purges and the malnutrition of millions, Donny is spot on one more time.
User was warned for this post
I wouldn't blame Kim too much. Imagine your daddy is the ruler of a totalitarian regime and he dies leaving you to take over. If you suddenly give people freedom, they will rise up and kill you. You have no choice but to continue oppressing them for your own survival.
You seem to have set up a false dichotomy here. Kim doesn't have to choose between A or B, where A is dying early and B is:
Having large numbers of people executed, and
Horribly oppressing millions of people
However, even if it were the case that literally those were only his two options, then yes, I think blame is in order. It's not necessarily his fault he was in that situation, but there comes a point where selfishness just can't be overlooked anymore. If I have to choose between exterminating half the planet or dying, as tragic as that is, I should and will be blamed if I choose to prioritize myself to such an extreme. This isn't one of those philosophy exercises where you have to choose between saving your sibling or saving two random children.... the scale is quite different.
An absolute dictatorship is the natural form of government. Either you have that, or no government. Unless you have this special thing called civilization.
And this makes such regimes more evil, not less. That they oppress millions of people that is s given. Kim cannot just decide to tomorrow to announce free elections. Egypt and Libia are perfect examples. These dictators are constantstruggling to stay in power.
This may seem as an excuse defending a dictator as a person. But it should be read as a warning to appticiate what we have in the west and be vigilant of politicians with tyrranical tendencies. Not to mention those that praise the killing of journalists (Kashoggi) and openly express their admiration for adversorial dictators (MBS, Kim, Putin).
If I have to choose between exterminating half the planet or dying, as tragic as that is, I should and will be blamed if I choose to prioritize myself to such an extreme.
This is not really true, as you would be protecting all those around you. And if you stop being part of the system, all those loyal to you will be killed. And surely the person who will be dictator after you with the same dillemas won't be more benevolent and wiser in being so, right? The person that claws it's way to power in the chaos you leave behind likely is one of the last persons you want to succeed you.
All early civilizations started off as dictatorships. Only in very recent times have some of them become democracies when the conditions were ripe. This does not necessarily mean that all dictatorships are evil (e.g. think of the 5 good emperors of Rome).
Only western ideological supremacists and cultural imperialists who are out of touch with reality will claim that all societies throughout the history of mankind are bad except those that subscribe to their current set of values based on abstract modernistic notions.
NK for one was always a dictatorship from the Korean empire to Japanese rule. The question posed should be whether the Kim regime is less oppressive than the previous 2 regimes and is there any better alternative, while keeping in mind that abruptly forcing western-style democracy upon a population used to dictatorial rule has always resulted in disaster.
Dictators should be judged by comparisons to their local alternatives and not western politicians who govern societies under a completely different set of circumstances.
The freak show that is the 2020 democrat nominations just got freakier with porn star Stormy Daniels lawyer Michael Avenetti reconsidering his decision to quit the race according to CNBC.Good luck in the $20 million Nike extortion case Michael!
On August 04 2019 15:31 iPlaY.NettleS wrote: The freak show that is the 2020 democrat nominations just got freakier with porn star Stormy Daniels lawyer Michael Avenetti reconsidering his decision to quit the race according to CNBC.Good luck in the $20 million Nike extortion case Michael!
Most candidates know they don't stand a chance and are just running for the political or financial benefits that publicity will bring them.
A few are running to advance particular issues they think are important. E.g. Tulsi knows she's not gonna win but uses the race as a platform to educate the public about the evils of militaristic interventionism and american imperialism.
On August 04 2019 15:31 iPlaY.NettleS wrote: The freak show that is the 2020 democrat nominations just got freakier with porn star Stormy Daniels lawyer Michael Avenetti reconsidering his decision to quit the race according to CNBC.Good luck in the $20 million Nike extortion case Michael!
On August 04 2019 16:38 Simberto wrote: Nettles is extremely hard right, for him everything left of the uttermost right edge of the democrats is a "freak show".
I know he is, it’s not a reason to say random stuff like that. Up to now those primaries are relatively well ordered and civil, especially compared to both last republican and democrats primaries which were both unbelievably ugly.
Can we talk about that other right wing act of terrorism in El Paso by the way, or should it stay on the other thread?
On August 04 2019 16:42 Simberto wrote: Other thread. Gun stuff doesn't belong here and makes this thread even worse. There is a reason there is a separate thread for that.
It’s not gun stuff, it’s white supremacism and right wing terrorism, though.
For example I think this episode is really relevant; Trump using the same words than the El Paso terrorist and everyone at his meeting, himself included laughing at the suggestion of killing immigrants. The video is absolutely abject:
I think that it’s time to start pointing out that Trump is actually fueling domestic terrorism and had as much blood on his hands than those islamic clerics that haven’t planted a bomb or killed anyone themselves but inspire and fuel the hatred of those who do.
On August 04 2019 16:42 Simberto wrote: Other thread. Gun stuff doesn't belong here and makes this thread even worse. There is a reason there is a separate thread for that.
It’s not gun stuff, it’s white supremacism and right wing terrorism, though.
For example I think this episode is really relevant; Trump using the same words than the El Paso terrorist and everyone at his meeting, himself included laughing at the suggestion of killing immigrants. The video is absolutely abject:
https://twitter.com/MuhammadLila/status/1157965796695597056 I think that it’s time to start pointing out that Trump is actually fueling domestic terrorism and had as much blood on his hands than those islamic clerics that haven’t planted a bomb or killed anyone themselves but inspire and fuel the hatred of those who do.
It's even worse than what that guy who wrote the tweet describes, because immediately before that person tells out shoot them, trump laments the fact that US border patrol cant have weapons. As demonstrated by the response, his dog whistle was heard. The dog whistles always have a double meaning that provides for plausible deniability, but they get heard.
AOC’s chief of staff who recently quit is now under federal investigation for allegedly funneling 1 million in political donations into private accounts.
The transfers were made by Saikat Chakrabarti, Ocasio-Cortez’s chief of staff, and may have run afoul of the Federal Election Campaign Act that places a limit of $5,000 on contributions from political action committees to candidates, the Washington Examiner reported Tuesday.
The complaint, filed Monday by the National Legal and Policy Center, said the transfers violated the law because PACs must disclose what those funds were used for — such as advertisements, payments to vendors and donations to candidates.
The private companies Chakrabarti moved the money to are not subject to those requirements
On August 04 2019 16:42 Simberto wrote: Other thread. Gun stuff doesn't belong here and makes this thread even worse. There is a reason there is a separate thread for that.
It’s not gun stuff, it’s white supremacism and right wing terrorism, though.
For example I think this episode is really relevant; Trump using the same words than the El Paso terrorist and everyone at his meeting, himself included laughing at the suggestion of killing immigrants. The video is absolutely abject:
https://twitter.com/MuhammadLila/status/1157965796695597056 I think that it’s time to start pointing out that Trump is actually fueling domestic terrorism and had as much blood on his hands than those islamic clerics that haven’t planted a bomb or killed anyone themselves but inspire and fuel the hatred of those who do.
I made a big deal of this at the time. I believe the spin from our right-wing friends was "it was a joke".
On August 04 2019 17:30 Biff The Understudy wrote:
On August 04 2019 16:42 Simberto wrote: Other thread. Gun stuff doesn't belong here and makes this thread even worse. There is a reason there is a separate thread for that.
It’s not gun stuff, it’s white supremacism and right wing terrorism, though.
For example I think this episode is really relevant; Trump using the same words than the El Paso terrorist and everyone at his meeting, himself included laughing at the suggestion of killing immigrants. The video is absolutely abject:
https://twitter.com/MuhammadLila/status/1157965796695597056 I think that it’s time to start pointing out that Trump is actually fueling domestic terrorism and had as much blood on his hands than those islamic clerics that haven’t planted a bomb or killed anyone themselves but inspire and fuel the hatred of those who do.
I made a big deal of this at the time. I believe the spin from our right-wing friends was "it was a joke".
I would have loved to see their reaction if Obama had made such a « joke ». But then of course Obama would have never done that.
At least, the terrorist seems not to have taken it as a joke at all either.
On August 05 2019 01:43 iPlaY.NettleS wrote: AOC’s chief of staff who recently quit is now under federal investigation for allegedly funneling 1 million in political donations into private accounts.
The transfers were made by Saikat Chakrabarti, Ocasio-Cortez’s chief of staff, and may have run afoul of the Federal Election Campaign Act that places a limit of $5,000 on contributions from political action committees to candidates, the Washington Examiner reported Tuesday.
The complaint, filed Monday by the National Legal and Policy Center, said the transfers violated the law because PACs must disclose what those funds were used for — such as advertisements, payments to vendors and donations to candidates.
The private companies Chakrabarti moved the money to are not subject to those requirements
He is not under federal investigation whatsoever, it’s just a complain that was filled, as your article states, by a conservative watchdog:
« A conservative government watchdog group filed a complaint... » is literally how the paper starts.
You really can do better than that.
Pity we don’t hear you on the white supremacist terrorist attack and the fact the terrorist basically quotes what your president says in his rallies. But eh!
On August 05 2019 01:43 iPlaY.NettleS wrote: AOC’s chief of staff who recently quit is now under federal investigation for allegedly funneling 1 million in political donations into private accounts.
The transfers were made by Saikat Chakrabarti, Ocasio-Cortez’s chief of staff, and may have run afoul of the Federal Election Campaign Act that places a limit of $5,000 on contributions from political action committees to candidates, the Washington Examiner reported Tuesday.
The complaint, filed Monday by the National Legal and Policy Center, said the transfers violated the law because PACs must disclose what those funds were used for — such as advertisements, payments to vendors and donations to candidates.
The private companies Chakrabarti moved the money to are not subject to those requirements
He is not under federal investigation whatsoever, it’s just a complain that was filled, as your article states, by a conservative watchdog:
« A conservative government watchdog group filed a complaint... » is literally how the paper starts.
You really can do better than that.
Pity we don’t hear you on the white supremacist terrorist attack and the fact the terrorist basically quotes what your president says in his rallies. But eh!
He can do better, but hasn't chosen to do so the last hundred or so times he had conflict with facts.
And of course Obama would never have gotten away with making such a "joke". He didn't get away with wearing a brown suit that one time, or for putting mustard on his sandwich either. They put a clamp on that shit right away. Good thing they kept his secret Muslim-ness under control, too. Who knows where this country would be if he had instated Sharia Law like he planned all along. God Bless Sean Hannity.
White nationalist terrorism must be addressed with the same zeal and hostility with which Islamic terrorism is addressed. It's not a matter of gun policy or mental health. It's a matter of fighting the terrorists, including with preemptive action. Of course the difference here is that the terrorists are american citizens, and so they have constitutional rights. That makes it tough.
On August 05 2019 06:25 Doodsmack wrote: White nationalist terrorism must be addressed with the same zeal and hostility with which Islamic terrorism is addressed. It's not a matter of gun policy or mental health. It's a matter of fighting the terrorists, including with preemptive action. Of course the difference here is that the terrorists are american citizens, and so they have constitutional rights. That makes it tough.
ICE has no issue with locking up citizens in inhuman conditions without repercussion. No the problem is not that they are citizens, it's that they are white.
You can wish it to be different, you can hope to change it but reality is what it is. Its 'fine' that people get killed by nationalist terrorism be it 1, 10 or 100 so long as the shooter is white enough.
But on a more serious note, the solution is proper mental healthcare to identify and intervene before it gets this far.
On August 05 2019 06:25 Doodsmack wrote: White nationalist terrorism must be addressed with the same zeal and hostility with which Islamic terrorism is addressed. It's not a matter of gun policy or mental health. It's a matter of fighting the terrorists, including with preemptive action. Of course the difference here is that the terrorists are american citizens, and so they have constitutional rights. That makes it tough.
ICE has no issue with locking up citizens in inhuman conditions without repercussion. No the problem is not that they are citizens, it's that they are white.
You can wish it to be different, you can hope to change it but reality is what it is. Its 'fine' that people get killed by nationalist terrorism be it 1, 10 or 100 so long as the shooter is white enough.
But on a more serious note, the solution is proper mental healthcare to identify and intervene before it gets this far.
Sidenote, I wouldn't be surprised at all if these knuckleheads got past a mental health screen just fine. You don't need to have mental issues to be an evil asshole.
On August 05 2019 06:25 Doodsmack wrote: White nationalist terrorism must be addressed with the same zeal and hostility with which Islamic terrorism is addressed. It's not a matter of gun policy or mental health. It's a matter of fighting the terrorists, including with preemptive action. Of course the difference here is that the terrorists are american citizens, and so they have constitutional rights. That makes it tough.
ICE has no issue with locking up citizens in inhuman conditions without repercussion. No the problem is not that they are citizens, it's that they are white.
You can wish it to be different, you can hope to change it but reality is what it is. Its 'fine' that people get killed by nationalist terrorism be it 1, 10 or 100 so long as the shooter is white enough.
But on a more serious note, the solution is proper mental healthcare to identify and intervene before it gets this far.
It would be kind of funny to see how people react if the same tactics that the US uses against "terrorists" abroad were to be used against nationalist terrorists in the US.
My guess is that they would suddenly be a lot less okay with drone strikes blowing up weddings, and probably wouldn't accept every male to just be a terrorist by default if the terrorists are white.
(I do not actually want this to happen)
I do not know if you actually reach the terrorists via mental healthcare easily, though. Not that i am against mental healthcare in general, far from it. But i do not think it solves this problem.
But if mental healthcare is the solution to terrorism, maybe send therapists instead of bombs into the middle east, too? It cannot work worse than the bombs.
EPT
