EPTIf anybody is interested in the numbers of votes in FL so far. I hope Andrew Gillum wins. I think there is a huge chance he does. I've been hearing, and seeing a lot of life long republicans who know what authoritarianism is about because they were around for the wars and voting Democrat in FL.
US Politics Mega-thread - Page 895
| Forum Index > General Forum |
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 | ||
|
ShoCkeyy
7815 Posts
If anybody is interested in the numbers of votes in FL so far. I hope Andrew Gillum wins. I think there is a huge chance he does. I've been hearing, and seeing a lot of life long republicans who know what authoritarianism is about because they were around for the wars and voting Democrat in FL. | ||
|
pmh
1366 Posts
Trump had choice between 2 closing adds,an optimistic one about the economy and a fear one about immigration. He choose the later which was rejected by fox because it was racist. Was this smart or stupid. Democrats in the discussion think it was stupid and will backfire,republicans are a bit devided about it. good show and panel by cnn. | ||
|
Gorsameth
Netherlands21953 Posts
| ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
| ||
|
Gahlo
United States35162 Posts
On November 06 2018 08:24 Panthous wrote: This is an absolutely absurd statement. A Molotov cocktail is supposed to burn everything down. And you make the point they merely send in Trojan horse. A Molotov cocktail isn't a shot across the bow. These people literally voted for the worst candidate possible just to make a point. Are you really saying Trump isn't doing enough damage? Trump filled every institution with crooks, making them completely dysfunctional. And most of that damage is completely irreversible. And on top of that we have this polarization. Now of course people are completely foolish in throwing a Molotov cocktail. But that isn't your point. Are you saying that they should have voted for Ted Cruz if they had wanted a real Molotov cocktail? And the fact that it didn't work and this extremism has now become the new normal, next election they will try to elect someone who doesn't just praise violence. There must be some Duterte or Bolsonaro type out there in there US somewhere. The Democrats didn't even flinch. A large problem with this government is that the politicians are bought by private interest. All electing Trump does was trick idiots into cutting out the middleman. None of the republican options brought anything new to the table - they were all status quo or Trump. Trump's more extreme positions aren't anything new. To borrow a line from GH, he's just honest about it. | ||
|
Doodsmack
United States7224 Posts
| ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
Except Valve, they won’t do shit. | ||
|
Sermokala
United States14047 Posts
Basically, they troll courthouses for cases that involve black on white or white on black crime before riling up black neighborhoods with misinformation campaigns in order to kick off protests. They then show up at the courthouse during the protests and search for white males that are turned off by the protests and/or are just confused about what's going on. Gamergate is about ethics in game journalism I swear, is a sad joke because yeah it is but you have to be an extremist on either side to not see how it got hijacked as soon as it started by extremist groups in order to recruit. The Alt right managed to find an extremely fertile event to farm propaganda and recruits from. Now they don't even have to put in any footwork they just have to wait for social justice activists to give them the events they need. | ||
|
Wulfey_LA
932 Posts
| ||
|
Taelshin
Canada420 Posts
Crazy people are going to recruit unstable people where ever they are, and there are plenty of unstable people everywhere. | ||
|
Sent.
Poland9246 Posts
On November 06 2018 13:54 Plansix wrote: People have been saying this since 2014, but better late than never. Military history, Nordic mythology. Anyone who played table top war games can spot the dudes that are wait to into the German army and think warhammer 40k is super cool in an uncomfortable way. I’m glad this is finally getting some mainstream coverage, because it is going to fuck over multiplayer games if developers and platform holders don’t clamp down on this. Except Valve, they won’t do shit. https://twitter.com/NPR/status/1059511664951799808 Can you explain how exactly you want game developers to clamp down on this? Do you mean they're not banning players who type racist words in chat fast enough? Do you want them to stop making games with stuff considered cool by nazis (and millions of other people) like anything related to Germany between 1870 and 1945 or have them replace the cool stuff with something purposely unfun? | ||
|
Acrofales
Spain18117 Posts
On November 06 2018 18:21 Sent. wrote: Can you explain how exactly you want game developers to clamp down on this? Do you mean they're not banning players who type racist words in chat fast enough? Do you want them to stop making games with stuff considered cool by nazis (and millions of other people) like anything related to Germany between 1870 and 1945 or have them replace the cool stuff with something purposely unfun? Getting rid of in-game global chat and twitch chat would probably solve 95% of all problems with game communities (and not just the neonazis recruiting, which I think is pretty tiny all things considered). | ||
|
Belisarius
Australia6233 Posts
That said, the article itself is a pretty clear games-are-evil thing written while peering out from behind the curtains. Concluding that things are better now because the kid plays less games says a lot about the author and little about the subject. | ||
|
ReditusSum
79 Posts
It becomes very difficult in that world-space to speak up as a young man who is being targeted by extremists because he already knows what is coming when he does speak up: "You're a f***ing idiot!" "I can't believe you would believe that s***!" "You're a horrible person!" "I don't want to talk about this. You need help." Or some variation of this, possibly even including punishment if the young man in question is still a minor living at home. It's understandable, because really, who wants to sit down and sympathetically argue with someone that is telling you with a straight face that he doesn't think the Holocaust was real, or even if it was, it was deserved? It's a lot easier and more pleasant to write them off as freaks and geeks. Unfortunately that just plays into the hands of the extremist as far as the young man is concerned, because he sees one side that loves to argue """the facts""" and another side that he perceives as shutting down the conversation whenever it comes up. Then the public at large comes up with solutions that are largely trying to put the genie back in the bottle. You see media articles talking about how someone needs to do something about 4-chan! Youtube and Google need to do their part! Facebook and Twitter cannot be platforms of hate! That strategy works if 1) You don't care about the people in question and they aren't a large enough minority to really have an effect. or 2) You don't care about the people in question and you're willing to use extreme measures to crack down on them when they strike back at the perceived provocation of the powers-that-be "shutting us down". It makes sense, because hateful and horrible attitudes should be socially shamed, and hateful and horrible people with radical beliefs should not feel welcome to push their ideology, but at the same time the censorship of the beliefs is only a preventative measure. Once the ideology is firmly pushed and takes hold in a section of the populace, censorship kind of becomes counter-productive if your end-goal is de-escalation. At that point censorship creates a self-perpetuating cycle of radicalization where the very act of social disapproval is seen as proof that the ideology should be approved. Society becomes the absolute enemy and common ground entirely disappears. Then you have only one of two options. Surrender to the radicals or wipe em out. (edit: as someone who has found himself, in darker times, targeted by extremists and could have fallen without the patience of close family members and the grace of God, I find both options to be very sad.) | ||
|
Jockmcplop
United Kingdom9717 Posts
On November 06 2018 19:39 ReditusSum wrote: Part of the problem is that no one wants to look at things from the point of view of the young man in question. It's pretty simple in theory, but extremely hard in practice because we are so hard-wired into trying to force people to see things our way, instead of trying to help them work it out for themselves. Sometimes this is a good instinct, but it can go haywire in certain circumstances. It becomes very difficult in that world-space to speak up as a young man who is being targeted by extremists because he already knows what is coming when he does speak up: "You're a f***ing idiot!" "I can't believe you would believe that s***!" "You're a horrible person!" "I don't want to talk about this. You need help." Or some variation of this, possibly even including punishment if the young man in question is still a minor living at home. It's understandable, because really, who wants to sit down and sympathetically argue with someone that is telling you with a straight face that he doesn't think the Holocaust was real, or even if it was, it was deserved? It's a lot easier and more pleasant to write them off as freaks and geeks. Unfortunately that just plays into the hands of the extremist as far as the young man is concerned, because he sees one side that loves to argue """the facts""" and another side that he perceives as shutting down the conversation whenever it comes up. Then the public at large comes up with solutions that are largely trying to put the genie back in the bottle. You see media articles talking about how someone needs to do something about 4-chan! Youtube and Google need to do their part! Facebook and Twitter cannot be platforms of hate! That strategy works if 1) You don't care about the people in question and they aren't a large enough minority to really have an effect. or 2) You don't care about the people in question and you're willing to use extreme measures to crack down on them when they strike back at the perceived provocation of the powers-that-be "shutting us down". It makes sense, because hateful and horrible attitudes should be socially shamed, and hateful and horrible people with radical beliefs should not feel welcome to push their ideology, but at the same time the censorship of the beliefs is only a preventative measure. Once the ideology is firmly pushed and takes hold in a section of the populace, censorship kind of becomes counter-productive if your end-goal is de-escalation. At that point censorship creates a self-perpetuating cycle of radicalization where the very act of social disapproval is seen as proof that the ideology should be approved. Society becomes the absolute enemy and common ground entirely disappears. Then you have only one of two options. Surrender to the radicals or wipe em out. (edit: as someone who has found himself, in darker times, targeted by extremists and could have fallen without the patience of close family members and the grace of God, I find both options to be very sad.) I'll always take the side of people who are fighting against fascist ideas, but you do have a point. I think one area where these debates could be improved is by taking care only to discuss ideas, instead of discussing the people who are having bad ideas. I definitely support some versions of what you would call censorship (I'm in favour of deplatforming if its done correctly, for example, and I'm in favour of social media sites taking responsibility for the content they host), but the issues arise where you have mobs protesting against individuals or attacking individuals instead of protesting or attacking the idea that some individual is putting forward. Its often very difficult to accept the right wing mantra that they are being shut down and censored when the platforms they use to make those claims are national TV, Youtube etc. Its simply a lie, and it certainly isn't the left's responsibility to make sure teenage gamers can't be fooled by ridiculous fascist lies. That's just something that's going to happen. Where vulnerable/suggestible people are angry about stuff, fascist liars will be there ready to play into that. There isn't really a way around this other than to try and reduce the reach of those ideas so that fewr people are fooled by them. | ||
|
ReditusSum
79 Posts
The breakdown of the "Church and Town" communal ties that typified the young people of older generations is a game changer and not in a good way. | ||
|
Jockmcplop
United Kingdom9717 Posts
On November 06 2018 20:04 ReditusSum wrote: Well no one has an obligation to try to convince them, or to reach out, so I can't blame people who don't have the patience for it and want to write them off. As long as everyone is aware of the consequences of their decisions, there really is no right answer. My personal prediction is that it's too late to deplatform effectively and that eventually this is going to lead to some kind of physical conflict that spills out into the wider society. But I could be wrong and it could be just a passing fad. The breakdown of the "Church and Town" communal ties that typified the young people of older generations is a game changer and not in a good way. Its a case of trying to contain something that has already broken out into the mainstream. There's very little you can do about it, and I think some people are forgetting that once these extreme political attitudes are forged, there really isn't any changing them - not on the scale that needs to happen to 'fix' the current issue with political debate. You're looking at waiting a generation and hoping the next lot of politically aware teenagers see things more clearly. I don't think we can write society off as being broken due to things the breakdown of 'church and town', but its certainly worth noting that the current generation, for whatever reason, hasn't adapted particularly well to it. I'm very hopeful for the future though. In the UK, for example, there's been a massive decrease in teenagers drinking and doing drugs. I can't help thinking that there's some forces at play that we don't understand that are behind a huge change in the way people think, and that we're somewhere in the middle of that and that's why everyone's confused. | ||
|
Dromar
United States2145 Posts
On November 06 2018 20:04 ReditusSum wrote: The breakdown of the "Church and Town" communal ties that typified the young people of older generations is a game changer and not in a good way. I agree completely. This is really worrisome to me, and IMO a root cause of many problems we are facing today, not just fascism. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On November 06 2018 17:07 Taelshin wrote: That article is proof of nothing and totally anecdotal from one unnamed fathers point of view. Also why do you believe anything from a former white supremacist(aka totally crazy person). Crazy people are going to recruit unstable people where ever they are, and there are plenty of unstable people everywhere. This is a very strange objection because the majority of the information in the article is not from the father or the former extremist. On November 06 2018 18:21 Sent. wrote: Can you explain how exactly you want game developers to clamp down on this? Do you mean they're not banning players who type racist words in chat fast enough? Do you want them to stop making games with stuff considered cool by nazis (and millions of other people) like anything related to Germany between 1870 and 1945 or have them replace the cool stuff with something purposely unfun? They should make every game super boring until the white suprematism goes away. But for serious, putting greater thought into chat. More aggressive moderation forums on sites like steam. A reporting system for parents who discover that their kids are being recruited that isn’t some automated system. Maybe some ads telling parents what to do if they discover this. There is a lot more then can do. | ||
|
farvacola
United States18839 Posts
| ||
| ||
