|
On August 07 2018 21:48 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On August 07 2018 21:36 Biff The Understudy wrote:On August 07 2018 20:24 GreenHorizons wrote:On August 07 2018 19:50 Biff The Understudy wrote:On August 07 2018 06:30 GreenHorizons wrote:On August 07 2018 06:14 Dangermousecatdog wrote:
It's probably a talking point from wherever xdaunt gets his news from. Every now and then you get strange phrases and arguments where you can pinpoint where an idea has come from like "remoaner" or "UK knife epidemic", but usually the poster themselves have no idea where he got the idea from originally.
I am sure that more astute observers can identify certain sources of my media consumption from curious phrases I may use as well. If I wanted to speculate I'd say it's the natural procession coming after "being mean to me made me a Nazi" we've seen out of everywhere from NYT to WP. The biggest liberal publications in the country gave people on the right free reign to turn people pointing out the inhumanity of their policy prescriptions into legitimate reasons to support the inhumane policy and react violently. By making ANTIFA and "Proud Boys" two sides of the same coin (they aren't) it's just "two violent sides" as opposed to people advocating genocide and people not taking it lying down. The "some people just get a gun and shoot people in this situation" is their not so veiled threat that white guys are going to increasingly become terrorists in response to not politely letting them advocate for genocide (or ethnic cleansing) in the political discourse. Sometimes I really wonder if you have ever opened, once, the NYT. I have a subscription and read it everyday, and every time you mention it I break five bones in my hand facepalming. That they make the proud boys and antifa two sides of the same coin is to die of laughter. Did you read Charlotteville reports in the Times? Here, I googled “thenyt antifa” and first article that comes says: President Trump angrily denounced the so-called alt-left at a news conference on Tuesday, claiming that the group attacked followers of the so-called alt-right at a white supremacist rally that exploded into deadly violence in Charlottesville, Va., on Saturday.
“What about the ‘alt-left’ that came charging at the, as you say, the ‘alt-right’? Do they have any semblance of guilt?” he asked. There was “blame on both sides,” he said. “I have no doubt about it.”
Both phrases are part of a broad lexicon of far-right terminology that has become important to understanding American politics during the Trump administration. Many of these terms have their roots in movements that are racist, anti-Semitic and sexist.
Antifa” is a contraction of the word “anti-fascist.” It was coined in Germany in the 1960s and 1970s by a network of groups that spread across Europe to confront right-wing extremists, according to Mr. Pitcavage. A similar movement was seen in the 1980s in the United States and has re-emerged recently as the “alt-right” has risen to prominence.
For some so-called antifa members, the goal is to physically confront white supremacists. “If they can get at them, to assault them and engage in street fighting,” Mr. Pitcavage said. Mr. Lenz, at the Southern Poverty Law Center, called the group “an old left-wing extremist movement.”
Members of the “alt-right” broadly portray protesters who oppose them as “antifa,” or the “alt-left,” and say they bear some responsibility for any violence that ensues — a claim made by Mr. Trump on Tuesday.
But analysts said comparing antifa with neo-Nazi or white supremacist protesters was a false equivalence. SourceGranted, the NYT hosts a huge variety of opinions and some of them sometimes make my eyes roll, and I’m sure you’ll find articles by conservative pundits they put for the sake of debate that say dumb stuff about antifa, but you are just one more time just ignoring reality for your cheap anti-« crooked corporate liberal establishment » crusade. Which is fine. Just bother not to make stuff up all the f... times, you start to look like the other guys. What are you even suggesting I'm making up? This or any other time? I just suggest you don’t bend the facts about the NYT to fit your narrative. What you are saying is not only unfair, it’s simply factually false. The NYT distinguishes perfectly between the far left and far right activists and in fact jumped at Trump’s throat when he made an equivalence between the two after Charlotteville. And in three of four years if reading them daily, I never once read them excusing nazis with sociological reasons or people being mean to them. I know you want them to be bad corporate establishment media because that’s your narrative for everything, but you’ll have to find better angle of attack. I know there is a paywall, and I suppose you don’t have a subscription, but then just don’t talk about articles you haven’t read. The NYT is by no mean perfect, I agree with you on that. But once again, the world is not black and white and they happen not to be on the wrong side of everything. That’s a pity, it would be convenient but unfortunately they are a highly reflected newspaper of a world class quality. I don’t write out of animosity against you, there is no vendetta. But for god sake, just try to be a bit fair or at least make sure you don’t blind yourself like that. I wouldn't get so bent about my rhetoric. It's no more hyperbolic or sensational than many posts, it's just indicting liberals, so it's viewed differently. Quite frankly, it's also factually true. You're trying to use this to make a different argument and it simply isn't working.
I don’t see how that article even starts to make a moral equivalence between the two groups nor does it excuses nazis in any way; if anything it’s just pretty shallow and that’s it. Do I have to go and dig all the Times article saying Trump is a dangerous c... for suggesting that the far right and far left activists are all the same?
Anyway, I’m done here. Have a good day.
|
On August 07 2018 22:01 Biff The Understudy wrote:Show nested quote +On August 07 2018 21:48 GreenHorizons wrote:On August 07 2018 21:36 Biff The Understudy wrote:On August 07 2018 20:24 GreenHorizons wrote:On August 07 2018 19:50 Biff The Understudy wrote:On August 07 2018 06:30 GreenHorizons wrote:On August 07 2018 06:14 Dangermousecatdog wrote:
It's probably a talking point from wherever xdaunt gets his news from. Every now and then you get strange phrases and arguments where you can pinpoint where an idea has come from like "remoaner" or "UK knife epidemic", but usually the poster themselves have no idea where he got the idea from originally.
I am sure that more astute observers can identify certain sources of my media consumption from curious phrases I may use as well. If I wanted to speculate I'd say it's the natural procession coming after "being mean to me made me a Nazi" we've seen out of everywhere from NYT to WP. The biggest liberal publications in the country gave people on the right free reign to turn people pointing out the inhumanity of their policy prescriptions into legitimate reasons to support the inhumane policy and react violently. By making ANTIFA and "Proud Boys" two sides of the same coin (they aren't) it's just "two violent sides" as opposed to people advocating genocide and people not taking it lying down. The "some people just get a gun and shoot people in this situation" is their not so veiled threat that white guys are going to increasingly become terrorists in response to not politely letting them advocate for genocide (or ethnic cleansing) in the political discourse. Sometimes I really wonder if you have ever opened, once, the NYT. I have a subscription and read it everyday, and every time you mention it I break five bones in my hand facepalming. That they make the proud boys and antifa two sides of the same coin is to die of laughter. Did you read Charlotteville reports in the Times? Here, I googled “thenyt antifa” and first article that comes says: President Trump angrily denounced the so-called alt-left at a news conference on Tuesday, claiming that the group attacked followers of the so-called alt-right at a white supremacist rally that exploded into deadly violence in Charlottesville, Va., on Saturday.
“What about the ‘alt-left’ that came charging at the, as you say, the ‘alt-right’? Do they have any semblance of guilt?” he asked. There was “blame on both sides,” he said. “I have no doubt about it.”
Both phrases are part of a broad lexicon of far-right terminology that has become important to understanding American politics during the Trump administration. Many of these terms have their roots in movements that are racist, anti-Semitic and sexist.
Antifa” is a contraction of the word “anti-fascist.” It was coined in Germany in the 1960s and 1970s by a network of groups that spread across Europe to confront right-wing extremists, according to Mr. Pitcavage. A similar movement was seen in the 1980s in the United States and has re-emerged recently as the “alt-right” has risen to prominence.
For some so-called antifa members, the goal is to physically confront white supremacists. “If they can get at them, to assault them and engage in street fighting,” Mr. Pitcavage said. Mr. Lenz, at the Southern Poverty Law Center, called the group “an old left-wing extremist movement.”
Members of the “alt-right” broadly portray protesters who oppose them as “antifa,” or the “alt-left,” and say they bear some responsibility for any violence that ensues — a claim made by Mr. Trump on Tuesday.
But analysts said comparing antifa with neo-Nazi or white supremacist protesters was a false equivalence. SourceGranted, the NYT hosts a huge variety of opinions and some of them sometimes make my eyes roll, and I’m sure you’ll find articles by conservative pundits they put for the sake of debate that say dumb stuff about antifa, but you are just one more time just ignoring reality for your cheap anti-« crooked corporate liberal establishment » crusade. Which is fine. Just bother not to make stuff up all the f... times, you start to look like the other guys. What are you even suggesting I'm making up? This or any other time? I just suggest you don’t bend the facts about the NYT to fit your narrative. What you are saying is not only unfair, it’s simply factually false. The NYT distinguishes perfectly between the far left and far right activists and in fact jumped at Trump’s throat when he made an equivalence between the two after Charlotteville. And in three of four years if reading them daily, I never once read them excusing nazis with sociological reasons or people being mean to them. I know you want them to be bad corporate establishment media because that’s your narrative for everything, but you’ll have to find better angle of attack. I know there is a paywall, and I suppose you don’t have a subscription, but then just don’t talk about articles you haven’t read. The NYT is by no mean perfect, I agree with you on that. But once again, the world is not black and white and they happen not to be on the wrong side of everything. That’s a pity, it would be convenient but unfortunately they are a highly reflected newspaper of a world class quality. I don’t write out of animosity against you, there is no vendetta. But for god sake, just try to be a bit fair or at least make sure you don’t blind yourself like that. I wouldn't get so bent about my rhetoric. It's no more hyperbolic or sensational than many posts, it's just indicting liberals, so it's viewed differently. Quite frankly, it's also factually true. You're trying to use this to make a different argument and it simply isn't working. I don’t see how that article even starts to make a moral equivalence between the two groups nor does it excuses nazis in any way; if anything it’s just pretty shallow and that’s it. Do I have to go and dig all the Times article saying Trump is a dangerous c... for suggesting that the far right and far left activists are all the same? Anyway, I’m done here. Have a good day.
I guess you're right? They actually make the white supremacists almost sound like the good guys
Divisions over the region’s identity have prompted repeated clashes and protests, especially since the election of President Trump. The rally on Saturday was organized in part by Patriot Prayer, which espouses anti-immigrant rhetoric and obtained a legal permit from the city for the event. A group called Rose City Antifa started in Portland more than a decade ago, and its members, often masked, have shown themselves to be as interested in breaking windows, vandalizing businesses and challenging the police as fighting the right wing.
The rally and counterprotests, which wound along the Willamette River east of downtown, had plenty of rage, shouted insults and a few thrown punches on both sides. But the Portland police were also out in force and moved to break up the counterprotesters first, after rocks and bottles, the police said, were thrown at officers.
You're confusing anti-Trump rhetoric with anti-white supremacy rhetoric. They aren't the same thing, although they can sound similar at times.
|
I still can't get my head around these temp bans that are getting slapped on stealthblue
I appreciate getting to read the news that he posts and I can't understand why his presentation of it gets micromanaged so hard. I also don't see who his posts are hurting - everyone is free to skip over his posts and keep arguing the theme of the day if they desire.
What is the rationale here?
|
On August 08 2018 05:18 Aveng3r wrote:
I still can't get my head around these temp bans that are getting slapped on stealthblue
I appreciate getting to read the news that he posts and I can't understand why his presentation of it gets micromanaged so hard. I also don't see who his posts are hurting - everyone is free to skip over his posts and keep arguing the theme of the day if they desire.
What is the rationale here?
I think the basic rationale is: they set a rule, and stealth repeatedly fails to follow it. the bans are just because repeated warnings are failing to work.
regardless of whether the rule itself is reasonable or well thought out, it's the rule they've chosen so they're going to enforce it.
|
On August 08 2018 05:26 zlefin wrote:Show nested quote +On August 08 2018 05:18 Aveng3r wrote:
I still can't get my head around these temp bans that are getting slapped on stealthblue
I appreciate getting to read the news that he posts and I can't understand why his presentation of it gets micromanaged so hard. I also don't see who his posts are hurting - everyone is free to skip over his posts and keep arguing the theme of the day if they desire.
What is the rationale here? I think the basic rationale is: they set a rule, and stealth repeatedly fails to follow it. the bans are just because repeated warnings are failing to work. regardless of whether the rule itself is reasonable or well thought out, it's the rule they've chosen so they're going to enforce it.
The rule itself is the target of my gripe
|
(almost) everyone else managed to adapt
|
On August 08 2018 06:17 ticklishmusic wrote:
(almost) everyone else managed to adapt
Doesn't make it not a stupid rule enforced poorly (though it's tangentially gotten rid of some personal pests so I can't be that mad).
|
On August 08 2018 05:49 Aveng3r wrote:Show nested quote +On August 08 2018 05:26 zlefin wrote:On August 08 2018 05:18 Aveng3r wrote:
I still can't get my head around these temp bans that are getting slapped on stealthblue
I appreciate getting to read the news that he posts and I can't understand why his presentation of it gets micromanaged so hard. I also don't see who his posts are hurting - everyone is free to skip over his posts and keep arguing the theme of the day if they desire.
What is the rationale here? I think the basic rationale is: they set a rule, and stealth repeatedly fails to follow it. the bans are just because repeated warnings are failing to work. regardless of whether the rule itself is reasonable or well thought out, it's the rule they've chosen so they're going to enforce it. The rule itself is the target of my gripe
ok, well, gl getting an answer. Seeker generally tries to answer stuff, so if you don't get an answer in a few days you could try pm'ing him to get an answer.
I know the topic was discussed aways back in the thread, and maybe there was an answer there, but I would'nt know the page number or anything.
|
On August 08 2018 06:17 ticklishmusic wrote:
(almost) everyone else managed to adapt
I don't think many others really had to, not many posted news like he did, in fact the only one I can recall who has at all recently is Plansix
My feeling is that the rule needlessly singles CCs posts out
|
Folks used to argue by linking articles, rather than making arguments themselves. CC just doesn’t communicate with the mods as far as I know, so it’s one way communication for them.
|
On August 08 2018 06:33 Aveng3r wrote:Show nested quote +On August 08 2018 06:17 ticklishmusic wrote:
(almost) everyone else managed to adapt I don't think many others really had to, not many posted news like he did, in fact the only one I can recall who has at all recently is Plansix My feeling is that the rule needlessly singles CCs posts out
It singles out literally the only person that has continually violated that rule. I bet you could find at least one other person that does the same things but is not temped if this is really about the man and not his type of posting. I can think of at least two that were warned and temped just as StealthBlue has been for similar behaviors. Check the US Pol banthread.
|
Seeker
Where dat snitch at?36921 Posts
On August 08 2018 06:33 zlefin wrote:Show nested quote +On August 08 2018 05:49 Aveng3r wrote:On August 08 2018 05:26 zlefin wrote:On August 08 2018 05:18 Aveng3r wrote:
I still can't get my head around these temp bans that are getting slapped on stealthblue
I appreciate getting to read the news that he posts and I can't understand why his presentation of it gets micromanaged so hard. I also don't see who his posts are hurting - everyone is free to skip over his posts and keep arguing the theme of the day if they desire.
What is the rationale here? I think the basic rationale is: they set a rule, and stealth repeatedly fails to follow it. the bans are just because repeated warnings are failing to work. regardless of whether the rule itself is reasonable or well thought out, it's the rule they've chosen so they're going to enforce it. The rule itself is the target of my gripe ok, well, gl getting an answer. Seeker generally tries to answer stuff, so if you don't get an answer in a few days you could try pm'ing him to get an answer. I know the topic was discussed aways back in the thread, and maybe there was an answer there, but I would'nt know the page number or anything.
I would be happy to answer any of Aveng3r's questions. However, I'm not sure what else more there is to say that hasn't already been covered previously.
|
free stealthblue. the people demand a stealthblue exception. free stealthblue
|
On August 08 2018 07:54 Seeker wrote:Show nested quote +On August 08 2018 06:33 zlefin wrote:On August 08 2018 05:49 Aveng3r wrote:On August 08 2018 05:26 zlefin wrote:On August 08 2018 05:18 Aveng3r wrote:
I still can't get my head around these temp bans that are getting slapped on stealthblue
I appreciate getting to read the news that he posts and I can't understand why his presentation of it gets micromanaged so hard. I also don't see who his posts are hurting - everyone is free to skip over his posts and keep arguing the theme of the day if they desire.
What is the rationale here? I think the basic rationale is: they set a rule, and stealth repeatedly fails to follow it. the bans are just because repeated warnings are failing to work. regardless of whether the rule itself is reasonable or well thought out, it's the rule they've chosen so they're going to enforce it. The rule itself is the target of my gripe ok, well, gl getting an answer. Seeker generally tries to answer stuff, so if you don't get an answer in a few days you could try pm'ing him to get an answer. I know the topic was discussed aways back in the thread, and maybe there was an answer there, but I would'nt know the page number or anything. I would be happy to answer any of Aveng3r's questions. However, I'm not sure what else more there is to say that hasn't already been covered previously.
is it easy for you to search the thread to find the point where they were previously answered? I don't have tl+ and have never had much luck with the forum searching stuff on here.
|
On August 08 2018 08:20 IgnE wrote:
free stealthblue. the people demand a stealthblue exception. free stealthblue
Frankly, I'm more interested that the mods have yet to weigh in on your previous post and RvB's:
On August 06 2018 20:18 RvB wrote:Show nested quote +On August 06 2018 10:47 KwarK wrote:On August 06 2018 10:26 JimmiC wrote:On August 06 2018 09:52 KwarK wrote:On August 06 2018 09:38 xDaunt wrote:On August 06 2018 05:29 KwarK wrote:
Globalists has always been Jews lol. The secret group of people within every nation who don't belong to the race and don't share the culture/religion/language/blood of the nation but are instead loyal to their international fraternal brotherhood. Also they control banking. And they're working together to destroy nations through creating global governments etc. It's literally the Protocols of the Elders of Zion.
xDaunt's shtick has always been that he's not a Nazi, he just says all the same things as them. This is just another example. He won't say that globalist means Jews, but he will agree that the (((globalists))) like Soros are the enemy. Uh, no. Globalists definitely does not mean Jews in the context of globalism vs nationalism. Anyone who thinks otherwise is really missing the big picture. Globalists include anyone who seeks to subordinate the interests of the nation state to global interests and institutions. This is a very broad category, though George Soros is certainly in it. Your disagreement can be summed up as “you’re forgetting the Jew-lovers, it’s not just Jews”. Seriously, take an honest look at the rhetoric of the rest of the anti-globalist crowd sometime. None of its new. How do the globalists your talking about justify trumps support of Israel if they hate jews? I'm interested in the mental gymnastics. It's not my mental gymnastics, it's theirs, I'm not a Nazi who supports Trump and has to reconcile his incoherent policy decisions with my own Nazi ideology. Why not ask xDaunt this question? Is this acceptable? Kwark is calling xDaunt a Nazi here. Will this have any consequences?
On August 07 2018 02:14 IgnE wrote:Show nested quote +On August 07 2018 01:19 Nebuchad wrote:On August 07 2018 00:37 IgnE wrote:
I guess you can't be opposed to totally free trade or you are a Nazi. Or the World Bank. Or socialism.
That's one way to be political. "You're either with me or you're a Nazi" It's weird to see you refuse to engage with what is being said like this. kollin's is the only interesting post in that whole line of discussion. calling people nazis for using the word globalist is about as lazy as calling people who criticize israel anti-semitic.
It's been a day now, and all that any observer can tell is that you may accuse other posters of being Nazis for using populist language, particularly if you're part of the old boy network of moderators. There's been zero response, and based on Plexa's post, we should all just "move along."
Plexa, Seeker, and tofucake: Is Kwark's use of Nazi accusations in the context of populist critique of globalism something you condone or approve of in the US Politics thread? There's been a conspicuous lack of feedback in Website Feedback on whether or not posters may lodge accusations of Nazism based on word choice of other posters.
|
United Kingdom13775 Posts
On August 08 2018 08:20 IgnE wrote:
free stealthblue. the people demand a stealthblue exception. free stealthblue
Could we at least free Kickboxer from the USPMT ban list?
|
On August 08 2018 09:04 LegalLord wrote:Show nested quote +On August 08 2018 08:20 IgnE wrote:
free stealthblue. the people demand a stealthblue exception. free stealthblue Could we at least free Kickboxer from the USPMT ban list?
I mean he angrily posted a novel-length reply in the EU thread right after a ban from the US Pol thread. And I think his mod PM was pretty incoherent to say the least (I think "dense" would be the more charitable explanation).
|
i think it would be best described as a manifesto.
|
United Kingdom13775 Posts
On August 08 2018 09:16 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On August 08 2018 09:04 LegalLord wrote:On August 08 2018 08:20 IgnE wrote:
free stealthblue. the people demand a stealthblue exception. free stealthblue Could we at least free Kickboxer from the USPMT ban list? I mean he angrily posted a novel-length reply in the EU thread right after a ban from the US Pol thread. And I think his mod PM was pretty incoherent to say the least (I think "dense" would be the more charitable explanation).
No one is saying to reverse the site-wide ban.
|
Seeker
Where dat snitch at?36921 Posts
On August 08 2018 09:04 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On August 08 2018 08:20 IgnE wrote:
free stealthblue. the people demand a stealthblue exception. free stealthblue Frankly, I'm more interested that the mods have yet to weigh in on your previous post and RvB's: Show nested quote +On August 06 2018 20:18 RvB wrote:On August 06 2018 10:47 KwarK wrote:On August 06 2018 10:26 JimmiC wrote:On August 06 2018 09:52 KwarK wrote:On August 06 2018 09:38 xDaunt wrote:On August 06 2018 05:29 KwarK wrote:
Globalists has always been Jews lol. The secret group of people within every nation who don't belong to the race and don't share the culture/religion/language/blood of the nation but are instead loyal to their international fraternal brotherhood. Also they control banking. And they're working together to destroy nations through creating global governments etc. It's literally the Protocols of the Elders of Zion.
xDaunt's shtick has always been that he's not a Nazi, he just says all the same things as them. This is just another example. He won't say that globalist means Jews, but he will agree that the (((globalists))) like Soros are the enemy. Uh, no. Globalists definitely does not mean Jews in the context of globalism vs nationalism. Anyone who thinks otherwise is really missing the big picture. Globalists include anyone who seeks to subordinate the interests of the nation state to global interests and institutions. This is a very broad category, though George Soros is certainly in it. Your disagreement can be summed up as “you’re forgetting the Jew-lovers, it’s not just Jews”. Seriously, take an honest look at the rhetoric of the rest of the anti-globalist crowd sometime. None of its new. How do the globalists your talking about justify trumps support of Israel if they hate jews? I'm interested in the mental gymnastics. It's not my mental gymnastics, it's theirs, I'm not a Nazi who supports Trump and has to reconcile his incoherent policy decisions with my own Nazi ideology. Why not ask xDaunt this question? Is this acceptable? Kwark is calling xDaunt a Nazi here. Will this have any consequences? Show nested quote +On August 07 2018 02:14 IgnE wrote:On August 07 2018 01:19 Nebuchad wrote:On August 07 2018 00:37 IgnE wrote:
I guess you can't be opposed to totally free trade or you are a Nazi. Or the World Bank. Or socialism.
That's one way to be political. "You're either with me or you're a Nazi" It's weird to see you refuse to engage with what is being said like this. kollin's is the only interesting post in that whole line of discussion. calling people nazis for using the word globalist is about as lazy as calling people who criticize israel anti-semitic. It's been a day now, and all that any observer can tell is that you may accuse other posters of being Nazis for using populist language, particularly if you're part of the old boy network of moderators. There's been zero response, and based on Plexa's post, we should all just "move along." Plexa, Seeker, and tofucake: Is Kwark's use of Nazi accusations in the context of populist critique of globalism something you condone or approve of in the US Politics thread? There's been a conspicuous lack of feedback in Website Feedback on whether or not posters may lodge accusations of Nazism based on word choice of other posters.
I answered that here: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/website-feedback/510156-us-politics-thread?page=178#3558
And no, I don't condone KwarK's usage of Nazi accusations when he is arguing with xDaunt or anyone else. However, I also know that KwarK is not an idiot. He's well-versed in US politics and he's an intelligent individual. Almost rarely do I ever question why he said what he said. He may not make decisions that I agree with, but he doesn't just state things for the hell of it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
