Slashdot Mirror
Reddit Bans Far-Right Groups Altright and Alternativeright (theguardian.com)
An anonymous reader quotes a report from The Guardian: Social media site Reddit has banned two of the largest far-right "subreddits" groups it hosts, altright and alternativeright. The subreddits have been used in the organization of America's resurgent neofascist movement but the final straw for Reddit was the two groups' participation in what is known as "doxing": sharing private personal information without permission as a form of online harassment. The subreddits were specifically banned for breaking Reddit's content policy, according to a message posted by the site admins, "specifically, the proliferation of personal and confidential information." Reddit did not make it explicit which content infringed its rules, but it is believed to be attempts to dox the protestor who punched a white nationalist during a TV interview at Donald Trump's inauguration. Speaking to the Daily Beast, one Reddit moderator claimed that the ban was instead a result of its "record monthly traffic" (Reddit moderators, like the creators of individual subreddits, are all volunteers with no official relationship to the site's staff). "It's clear that Reddit banned us because we were becoming very popular and spreading inconvenient truths about who's ruining our country and robbing our children of a future," the moderator said.
They're going to ban them too, right?
If you think that "alt right" means "far right", you have no idea what kind of shitstorm the left is busily trying to summon by calling for assassination, coup, and terror.
See that "Preview" button?
They would fit right in here; anyone who is more liberal than Genghis Khan is generally chased out as a goddamned commie here. There's plenty of space and bandwidth in this site, considering how little traffic it takes now compared to what it used to...
Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
If they think these people will go away, they're mistaken. Perhaps they feel they don't want to enable them by using Reddit's resources to organize, but, really, they were doing a huge service to the rest of society by keeping these posts out in the open where everybody can see them.
You can drive them all to locked sites on .onion services, but that is not in the public interest.
My God, it's Full of Source!
OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
Why yes, let's ban them, that'll show them. I'm sure they are disbanding as we speak.
Or Reddit just drove them underground, removing the possibility that their ideas could be challenged in an open forum. That's real smart, *golf clap*; why don't you try running for President next? I'm sure the US government needs your assistance in its follies.
I'm not sure how identifying someone who committed assault on TV is considered "doxing".
It's the fact that the moderators failed to clamp down on it, and even encouraged posting personal data that really forced Reddit to ban the entire boards, rather than just individual users.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
"It's clear that Reddit banned us because we were becoming very popular and spreading inconvenient truths about who's ruining our country and robbing our children of a future," the moderator said.
The go-to response of the alt-right: we reject your reality and substitute our own.
And it is fascists anti-fascists. Because not only they are fascists, but they are also a semantic contradiction.
Don't take me wrong, the ban is perfectly justified, but it's always right-wing fascists who get punished. This guy had no right to punch whoever it was in the face, and this is not an isolated case. Even moderate trump supporters get constantly beaten up with no consequences. A young college girl got pepper sprayed while giving an interview at UC, and several innocent bystanders were beaten up by the anti-fascist crowd, which was destroying everything b/c they didn't like a speaker the Republican student association had invited. These people are dividing the country, and creating a climate of tension and violence way more than the alt-right.
The media coverage is ridiculous, and focus instead on actual fake stories of people who are pretending to be assaulted by Trump supporters, a claim, as far as I know, always unfounded. End of rant. Good luck America.
Banning ANYONE is the strategy an intelligent person will never employ.
Banning increases resistance. Banning increases resolve. Banning creates a CAUSE.
If Reddit was not run by idiots, they'd already know these things.
You mean the guy who fabricated tweets about Leslie Jones to try to make her look like a racist. Yes, he doesn't care about skin color at all.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
"Neofascist movement" to describe the victims of black-clad henchmen beating people in the streets over their political views? What the fuck kind of alternative reality does this asshole live in?
a. most biz have a right to refuse service
b. this is what happens with lack of regulation.
c. alt-right folks can always startup their own rededit... hold it wait they're supposed to be poor and can't afford cool snowflake servers and such.
The courts could figure this out, but you have an administration and gov't that want to 'tear it all down'. So much for courts and academics... hold it wait, didn't we just nominate an academic for the SCOTUS?
Welcome to a brave new world folks. Extreme hypocrisy fed by narcissism/nepotism.
An historian observes it's way over-time to start butchering-out Trotsky sluts, just like German brown-shirt patriots did in 1920. ... the American republic will stand.
Drive out lib.com imported poodles and take from the globalist elite what they have stolen. Put them down quick and put them down hard
White nationalist?
White? What do they mean?
Also how is the skin color of that person relevant?
Because of racist SJWs and BLM people who think it's ok to attack white people?
Where's Elwood Blues when we need him?
The groups were banned for doxxing political opponents. That is, sharing personal information (name, phone number, home address, etc.) This behaviour is explicitly against the Reddit terms of service.
The political leanings of the groups are unrelated to the ban (unless you assume a correlation between "alt-right" mentality and disregard for the established rules of a privately owned website)
This signature is false.
I remember someone even trying to prove Milo wasn't a racist because he likes to sleep with black man. It was pointed out that that would have made meant many of the slave owners in the American South weren't racists.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
That is very selective to ban ONLY the far right and not the far left. It's obvious that Reddit are socialist liberals! It's so funny because almost all the crime commit in this world is done by liberals, not us.
While I prefer to challenge people like Yiannopoulos in public, in this case I can see a reasonable justification for not inviting him to speak.
The guy is a serial outer of trans women. At previous tasks he has held up photos of women attending those colleges, repeated their names and mocked them for being trans.
Such attacks are unacceptable and you have to prioritize the safety of students over the desire to offer them a chance to hear him speak.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
Yeah, the "white nationalist" Jewish newspaper editor who exclusively takes black cock up his ass and proudly admits it. Yep. White nationalist alt-right.
Whatever. You're still banned,and whining about secret 'persecutorial' motivations won't do anything to change that.
Stormfront will probably host you and not bat an eye. Why do you feel so deprived? If you wanted to stay on Reddit you could simply have stamped out the doxing problem and, you know, followed Reddit's 'pretextual' rules.
Are you trying to imply that Leslie Jones ISN'T racist? Lmao.
Reddit and Twitter have little influence on Trump / right wing voters. This kind of move just deepens the ignorance of progressives. Good luck trying to win elections that way.
The answer to free speech you don't like is more free speech. And who knows, if you engage in a discussion, you might actually learn something and change your own mind.
Are all Republicans alt-rightists?
When you get around to posting the berkeley riots from last night will you mark this with a Democrat icon?
Here's the real inconvenient truth: the people in power only have one thing in common and it's money.
And they're doing all they can so that you idiots fight amongst yourselves instead of seeing that the rich are the real problem.
#DeleteFacebook
Go hang out on stormfront, scum.
Far left = we should be the parent for the rest of the world and give everything to everyone else in the world even if it meaning causing harm to ourselves. "Kindness that can kill"
Far right = White supremacist, religious nuts, basically tribalism gone wild but in a different way
I'm in the middle (clowns to the left of me, jokers to the right): It's clear that good hard-working Americans are being taken advantage of by foreigners that have no interest in seeing America thrive. A lot of them just want to siphon wealth from America back to their home lands and they really don't like us at all and some would even invade us, slaughter us and take our lands if they could.
It doesn't mean I hate other people that aren't the same as me. Quite the contrary. It means I hate people that want to take my home away from me and my family at our expense. I was born here. They weren't. If they want their respective home land to be good, those folks ought to get busy and make it a place worth living instead of trying to take ours away.
I do agree with Liberals that if there were enough of everything to go around for everyone to the point that we could abolish the economic system and stop having to compete in survival of the fittest fashion that would be great. The problem is we're not even close to that and with the population growth, there doesn't seem to be much evidence we could ever accomplish that without some pretty serious technological advancement like food replicators and free abundant energy. Until then, it's the same as it always was: survival of the fittest
We'll make great pets
Once a site starts to ban its own users, many other users will have to try self-censorship to keep their accounts.
That gets boring and feels like work. Why stay on an interactive social media site if you have no free speech or freedom after speech?
As a site becomes more safe, more regulated by teams of SJW, more boring users will seek fun, interaction and content on other better sites that support freedom of speech.
The fun, desire for and enjoyment of real free speech does not go away when teams of SJW ban users and accounts on one site.
The site that had the SJW censorship will just be used as a safe space for brands, governments, faiths, cults and celebrities.
A bland safe space for marketing, brands, advertising and big government does not attract fun new users.
What will the teams of SJW like to ban next? Cartoons that would be considered blasphemy? Politics? No mention of Tiananmen Square and 1989?
Do SJW have a long list of words, terms they want banned? Protect all celebrity marketing by ensuring only positive movie reviews can be found?
Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
Those groups were full of absolute scumbags. I don't blame Reddit for flushing them out to go congeal in some other gutter.
Code, Hardware, stuff like that.
This post is just a heap of steaming shit. Neither Trump nor 99.99% of his supporters are fascist or neofacists whatever the fuck that means. Get your fucking facts straight you stupid assclowns.
The person who was doxxed was a fucking criminal who should be in jail for felony assault, and by definition, a terrorist (committing violence for a political cause). HE WAS NOT A FUCKING PROTESTER YOU ASSHOLES. All you left wing cunts are going to find out one day soon that you are no longer in power, and the laws on the books will be enforced now, those who fail to enforce the laws, or selectively only on political opponents, will be charged and convicted of treason. BTW, the person who was assaulted was a member of LGBT for Trump, so yah, not a white supremacist, just not a fucktard liberal.
The level of stupid these days is just astonishing.
Communists love to call people fascist. To the Soviets, West Germany, the UK, and the US were fascist. To be called a "fascist" by the left is good for a brief chuckle, nothing more.
Finding some willing stuntcock to penetrate him does not disqualify him from white-supremacist status -- or at minimum, encouraging white-supremacist sentiment. He's a whore for money and attention, he knows who pays his bills. It's in his best interest to use his intersectional identity as a gay Jewish white male as a shield to justify his hate. Fuck him, in all the most unpleasant ways.
It is always right to punch a Nazi. It always has been and it always will be.
You are so concerned about some hateful shit of a girl getting pepper sprayed... where were you when peaceful protesters on college campuses were getting hosed down with pepper spray by an agent of the state for a simple sit in?
And here you are saying Anit-fascist like its a fucking bad thing.... you are supposed to be anti-fascist... thats like, the ideal we should be striving towards as a species.
"In America, first you get the sugar, then you get the power, then you get the women..." -H. Simpson
I call bullshit. I remember Trump telling supporters during a rally to hit protesters and he would pay for their legal fees. I remember seeing on the news an elderly man at a Trump rally punch a protester in the face as the protester was being dragged out by security. I am sure the ass hat that burned down that mosque in Texas was a Trump supporter. I am sure the neo nazi wanna be that burned down those churches in the south this last summer would vote for Trump. If you are not willing to speak out against those instances of violence by your fellow Trump supporters you have no right to bitch about being targeted.
I personally believe that if you lash out with physical violence at someone for their views, you are an asshole. I also personally believe that if you shooting off your mouth and advocating violence against your fellow citizens, you are an asshole. In both examples the perpetrators should be held to the letter of the law. In fact the only thing that the past 13 months have proven to me is that assholes are hell bent on taking over this country and are willing to destroy it to line their own pockets. It is also very clear from your post that you believe burning down places of worship, hitting people that cant fight back and generally being lower that scum is alright as long as you have a certain skin color and as long as people have the same view point as you.
Well guess what idiot, you are part of the fucking problem. Other people have been trying to use reason and patience to try to get people like you to see how they are hurting their fellow citizens around them. Instead, people like you just plug your fucking ears, scream at the top of your lungs calling everyone that doesn't agree with them childish names as well as threaten violence to those same people you disagree with while all at the same time proclaiming you are the fucking victim.
Suck it up snowflake. Your little group has been advocating crap like this for years. People like you don't get to bitch when other assholes use those same tactics against you.
Sure, "White Supremacists" can be blocked from Reddit, but what about the leftist nutjobs who believe that you should destroy other people's property and physically assault people with a different political viewpoint? I don't look at reddit as a rule, but I'd be willing to bet that extremist left wing groups exist on reddit and will not receive the same treatment as the "alt-right". That is true with Facebook and Twitter, so I assume it true on Reddit. Feel free to prove me wrong on that, I'll be happy to read about Reddit banning left wing nut jobs.
Frankly, if I had to look at who is worse right now I'd say it's the extremist progressive leftists who see no issues using violence against people simply because they have a different political view. In the last couple years, I have seen no valid reports of white supremacists out beating people. We have seen dozens of faked claims, and many of those have resulted in charges, but the "Right" has not been rioting and beating anyone. I have seen countless instances of leftists doing just that, and worse. Last night you have a young lady being interviewed on ABC punched in the face and pepper sprayed by one of these "oppressed" liberals. You have another pulled out of a car and beaten for no reason.
When you have a Government not prosecuting, or even arresting people, who are terrorizing people and preventing their free speech you will end up with a whole lot of violence from the other side. Hence you have a Trump supporter shooting an agitator at a separate rally after protesters started throwing bricks and rocks at people supporting the speaker showed up to counter protest.
People need to pay close attention to the rhetoric being used by the left right now. Sadly, the useful idiots really can't see the irony and hypocrisy in shutting down other people's free speech by committing physical violence while carrying signs and chanting slogans claiming the other side is fascist. They are claiming that words are violence, and a teacher who is an advocate for violent protests claimed that words from someone raped her. I wish I was joking, but both of those are factual. The claims that words are somehow causing physical harm is being used to justify violence against anyone not agreeing with (or bending over for) the leftists.
Trying times we are in right now, and in places like California I envision it getting worse before it gets better.
-The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.
"Troll" doesn't mean "something I disagree with."
I wonder what we should call this new red scare against 'Nazi/fascist'. Orange scare perhaps? No, it's not right to punch a Nazi you vigilante maniac. What happened to freedom of speech?
Millions long for immortality who do not know what to do with themselves on a rainy Sunday afternoon. -- Susan Ertz
You are so concerned about some hateful shit of a girl getting pepper sprayed... where were you when peaceful protesters on college campuses were getting hosed down with pepper spray by an agent of the state for a simple sit in?
Some of us are appalled by both events. That's the problem here, and what people on "the left" keep missing: there are plenty of us out here who aren't racists, who aren't misogynist, who think Trump is a disaster-in-waiting, but who are frankly sick and tired of the political climate where we're called misogynist racists because we simply disagree with your "progressive" politics.
You lost the election because of people like us. Instead of taking the lesson to heart, you've doubled down on it.
What part of "shall not be infringed" is so hard to understand?
It is always right to punch a Nazi. It always has been and it always will be.
So then, in the spirit of equality, it's always right to punch a communist as well?
I call bullshit. I remember Trump telling supporters during a rally to hit protesters and he would pay for their legal fees. I remember seeing on the news an elderly man at a Trump rally punch a protester in the face as the protester was being dragged out by security.
They've hugged and made up since then.
I am sure the ass hat that burned down that mosque in Texas was a Trump supporter.
Are you referring to the mosque that was burned down in 2016, or the mosque that was burned down in 2015? Because the 2015 arsonist is a Muslim who attended prayers 5 times a day, before burning down his own mosque on Christmas day. As for the 2016 arson, I'll wait for the police report, thank you.
I am sure the neo nazi wanna be that burned down those churches in the south this last summer would vote for Trump.
Actually, there was a grand total of one black church that was burned down and vandalized with "Vote Trump" graffiti. It turns out the arsonist was black, and a member of the congregation to boot. More encouragingly, the church has since raised over $170,000 from donors to rebuild the church, many of which were donations from Trump supporters.
If you are not willing to speak out against those instances of violence by your fellow Trump supporters you have no right to bitch about being targeted.
Got any more? Knocking these down is pretty fun.
How about the "Muslim scare", where anyone with brown skin is automatically assumed to be a dangerous terrorist, and that people who belong to a one-billion member religion that isn't even in and of itself homogeneous are all declared to be part of some "Muslim hoard" that's going to take over America and declare Sharia law (meanwhile, ironically, some Evangelical and Conservative Catholic hold positions that would be more compatible with Sharia).
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
I'm not implying anything. I'm outright stating Milo faked tweets from her and then encouraged his followers to harass her on Twitter.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
Are "alt right" and "far right" really synonyms? Whenever I hear an alt-right person speak (e.g. the president himself) they sound pretty left of, say, Democrats.
It's all the government's new efforts to prevent free trade (whether that's in terms of products or labor) that do it for me. It smells of economic micromanagement, with more of a Lenin 'n' Stalin flavor, than say, Goldwater 'n' Reagan. It's a reaction against laissez-faire, not a campaign for it.
I'm not talking about smart/dumb or right/wrong here, or trying to discuss the merits or lack thereof. I'm just trying to pin down the conservative-vs-liberal characterization. Why aren't people calling this stuff "alt left?" It even seems to have FDR parallels, and nobody calls FDR "right-wing," do they?
Meanwhile Madonna called for the sitting President to be assassinated. But since the old hag is your team, nobody is banning her from anything.
Reality:Many times more DANGEROUS and SCARY to be OUTED as a TRUMP SUPPORTED, than ANY MINORITY GROUPS right now. Here are just a few examples in the last few months alone.
1) White handicapped man beaten for MAYBE being a Trump supporter. http://www.foxnews.com/us/2017...
1a) abcnews deleted the story. http://web.archive.org/web/201...
2) https://www.youtube.com/watch?... Woman wants a Trump supporter to move from his seat because she doesn't like Trump
3)Trump supporter chocked and beaten for hat . http://abc7ny.com/politics/man...
4) Homeless woman beaten for Trump support. https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
5) Black woman Trump supporter harassed in NYC https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
I understand that businesses don't support free speech. Yet.
It is entirely possible to oppose all uses of pepper spray except in response to violence. One does not need to name every case, recent or historical, each time an objection is voiced.
It is not right to punch a Nazi, or someone who wants to exterminate the Jews or any other Nazi-like thing.
It is not right to punch someone who wants to emulate the Mongols or Vikings.
It is not right to punch someone who says that some people, whatever their origin, are subhuman.
In jurisdictions which allow a 'fighting words' affirmative defense, it may be legal*, but being legal does not make something right - everything mentioned above is, after all, legal to say, but in no way right.
If you weren't ignorant, you'd be able to recite any of a number of reasons why those ideas are very wrong. If you weren't stupid, you'd be able to come up with your own on the spot. [Initiating] violence is the last refuge of the incompetent. Or, perhaps, the first refuge of the hateful, and you certainly seem to be full of hate yourself, whether or not the others you name are too.
Finally, opposition to fascism has no merit in itself; rather, it is fascism's gross lack of merit, particularly with regards to human rights, that makes it rational and necessary to oppose. Do not attempt to justify fascist tactics in the name of opposing fascism. The methods themselves are evil, regardless of the purpose.
*I am not a lawyer; this is not legal advice.
So its ok to break the law as long as its against someone you dont agree with? Because someone voted for Trump its ok to trample their rights?
You anti-fascist fascists are the kind of people would would protest the slaughtering of animals in a slaughterhouse by going in there and beating all of the animals to death. Because fuck the man!
Do you the proverbial you know what i hate other people speaking even though there is supposed freedom from some ashole waannna be godlike entity name governmental needing taxes and what not. It is taxes and probates on things man can not curb!
I remember when we used to shoot nazis on sight. What happened to that idea?
Yes, Madonna is an ignorant loud mouth and what she said was deplorable. I won't buy her music or go to her shows. Mind you, since I'm more a Pink Floyd/King Crimson/Beatles/Rush kind of guy, the odds of me ever supporting Madonna in any way were pretty negligible. But this all looks whataboutery to me. The fact that Madonna is a ludicrous and nasty person doesn't make Milo any less ludicrous and nasty, though I'll state quite openly that I find the insanity at UC Berkeley to have done nothing but give Milo yet another undeserved medal on his chest, and I hold any rioter, regardless of ideology, in contempt.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
I remember someone even trying to prove Milo wasn't a racist because he likes to sleep with black man. It was pointed out that that would have made meant many of the slave owners in the American South weren't racists.
Now now now, let's break this down. By the accepted leftist logic, penetrative intercourse is an act of violence inflicted upon the receiver of the penetration under any circumstances, whether there is consent or not. So it would make sense that Southern slave owners would be racist, as they would be the ones penetrating the slaves and therefore dominating them through violence, which is the standard modus operandi of a racist.
However, someone who hates black people would not voluntarily place themselves in a situation where they would be violently dominated by a black person. Penetrative intercourse is violently dominating by its inherent nature. Milo not only voluntarily allows black men to anally penetrate him, he lets them do so exculsively, and enjoys the act itself. This is not the trademark of a racist. Your argument might hold water (I mean, not that any of this is true but it's what leftists believe) if he were not the receiver but the perpetrator of the anal penetration, but he's made it clear on numerous occasions that he only allows black men inside him.
How do you explain this apparent paradox?
Holy fuck quite the converse. Tion
Are you suggesting that people like you, who think that Trump is a disaster waiting to happen, voted for him because you were upset with an unrelated group?
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
Go ahead, speak you Nazi views.
Just don't be surprised when someone targeted by your abhorrent bullshit punches you. Fuck you, it's always correct to punch Nazis
But you know this is just sweeping what you dislike under the rug, right?
It's this kind of approach that got Trump in power and probably will get him reelected.
It would also have proven that many black slave owners were not racist. Of course we know that isn't true. They were all obviously racist.
When the only tool you have is a claw hammer every problem starts to look like the back of someone's skull.
So the chance that a guy might out a trans person is equal to smashing building windows, setting fires, and assaulting people?
I think the safety of the students was completely ignored when the police and local government let masked and armed mobs engage in violent insurrection specifically designed to curtail freedom of speech. That kind of attack is unacceptable in my opinion.
No need to argue. I understand that as long as you are getting your way you will support the means and you will find a way to justify it.
When the only tool you have is a claw hammer every problem starts to look like the back of someone's skull.
So a subreddit that bans people for having dissenting views is bitching that a private company banned their subreddit, ostensibly for their dissenting views? I wouldn't have any sympathy for them even if they weren't a bunch of fucking nazis.
Someone, please come up with a rationalization for how the subreddit's banning of dissent doesn't count because it's different when reddit does it.
... the gamergate candidate.
"If you look at what our Congress is doing for tech, it's failing. It's putting all of us in danger," game developer Brianna Wu told CNN, adding "It's so imperative that people of my generation, native to technology, that we step up and make our voices known."
Some of us, though we are aware of gamergate and reddit, just don't give a flying goddam rat's ass.
The big question: "Is Lindsay Lohan in rehab or not?"
It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
Alt-rightists, instead of creating their own subreddit, should have taken over the mainstream of the site like the alt-left did, i.e. downvoting opinions that aren't vehemently anti-Trump on /r/politics, posting politically charged content to non-political subreddits like /r/pics and then brigading in support of it, etc.
Could it be that some people thought that Clinton was worse in part because of the things mentioned by Zak3056?
Could it be that some people think an unknown is not as bad as a known bad?
FFS. Why is there no introspection to be had by the left?
... people who are committed to reddit do not fully appreciate how insignificant they are to those of us outside of reddit.
It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
Best I can figure out is that a lefty beat the snot out of a righty. When the righties decided to stand up for themselves and expose the guy that beat up them up, the lefties running the impartial community cried foul and banned the righties.
The terms left and right are entirely arbitrary and could have been replaced with 'round' and 'square' party. Individual issues mean nothing. Its just a pissin contest to exact as much vengeance on the other side because the other guys are all 'evil'
JFK was more conservative than Trump issue wise, and Nixon was more liberal than Hillary in a lot of respects. None of that matters because you need to rise up and get behind your flag of choice. The other guys are the bad guys, and your side needs to fight to destroy those no-good-nicks that hate freedom and democracy.
Show me one statement I made which is not factual. When media cherry picks portions of a topic to fit an agenda, showing the rest of the topic is valid and correct. I'm not a Kelly Ann Conway fan, but that is exactly what her statement meant. Let me give you an easy example. The recent moratorium on immigration is touted as anti Muslim, racist, etc... ignores very basic facts.
Facts: The US does not run out and investigate people trying to enter the US. Like every other country in the world we rely on the country of origin to provide paperwork and validate status for any person trying to enter. The countries on the list are _all failed States_ who can not provide information on people traveling in and out of their countries with any reliability. Do you think there is any reliable Government agency in Syria or Libya who can validate that people leaving their countries are not criminals? (READ: That does not imply that everyone in a State is a criminal, it states explicitly that there is no way to validate the status of the foreign Government with any reliability.)
Given that set of facts most Americans (last poll was around 65%) understand why there is a travel ban and take no issue with it. Liberal media however won't provide any factual information on how immigration works, nor will them or the leftist politicians, explain the real issue. Instead, it's fear mongering opinions based on very little factual information.
I'm as critical and cynical of my Government as anyone you can find. At the same time, I will defend what is right when it's right. On this issue, and considering that the US is the largest target for terrorism in the world, I will defend them. Now if they had banned immigration from all 50 majority Muslim countries, or established religious testing (as some fear mongering liars have been attempting to claim), I would be fighting against the administration.
-The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.
Plenty on the left that feel similarly, or in the center even. Keep fanning the flames and supporting unconstitutional acts and they'll change their minds. Then you will lose because of people like you.
Citation needed.
Every single talk that Milo has given on his tour is up on Youtube in it's entirety. Every single one.
Here I'll help you out .. please provide a few examples ... I'm sure if he's a "serial outer" who is trans-phobic and wants to promote hate against trans people then you can easily find some examples from any number of his videos.
There are only two things that come to mind that even remotely come close to being in the same ballpark as what you describe.
The first are cases where University professors have abused their authority by threatening their students with poor grades for having the wrong political opinions. Here is an example.
And I can think of one example involving a trans student, and in that case Milo's accusation was that this person was not genuinely trans but instead was abusing both the law and University policy by threatening legal action if they did not allow them access to the girl's change-room. For a bit of perspective: my closest friend, former business partner and computer programming mentor came out as a trans woman 2 or 3 years ago and today gets hit on by straight men because she "passes" easily as a woman. A few years ago she was a 240lbs hairy fat guy, and today is ~150lbs and looks like a hot chick. It wasn't easy. The transition was long and arduous but she made the effort to transform herself into the woman that she knew inside that she is. And today other women accept her as female because she makes every effort to live her life as a woman. The person Milo was calling out, from what I remember, was making no attempt to transition. It looked like a guy in a dress and from the point of view of the female students it appeared to be a guy trying to abuse the system to get access to the girl's change-room. Even if we give them every benefit of the doubt and assume that they had not yet began hormone therapy and had just recently decided to transition, it is still inaccurate to call Milo an "outer" as this person had already "outed" themself and created a spectacle by threatening legal action against the University before making any sort of reasonable attempt to transition and become accepted by the other female students as a trans-woman.
If there are other examples that I am missing of "serial outing" then please by all means, they should be easy to find.
He claimed the audience (total number of people watching) was greater. And this was, according to Akami, the largest live streamed event ever. So Spicer was correct: the audience for Trump was bigger. "Alternative facts" are the things the media leaves out of their reports so they can lie by omission to create a false narrative ("lol no one likes Trump") instead of a true narrative ("Trump's audience was fine and he is supported by many people.") Remember, the mission of the media is to persuade with propaganda, not to inform with facts.
And what Spicer claiming that the crowd in DC was the largest ever? Or that that it had the most television viewers (hint: Reagan's first had 41M)?
* http://www.snopes.com/trump-inauguration-viewership/
No one was denying that Trump's was "fine", or that he had quite a bit of support. It's the "largest ever" hyperbole that many people find silly.
Are they Nazis too? Since when does enforcing border security make one a Nazi?
Donald Trump won the presidential election and is doing everything he said he would do. He's hardly pulling the wool over anyone's eyes.
"Total disregard for the law" - What laws has President Trump broken? Every single action he has taken he has the authority to take.
Obama expanded executive authority every chance he got. Did you complain about any of that over the last 8 years or was that OK since he was playing for your team?
She wasn't even a Trump supporter, she had on a hat that made fun of his MAGA slogan. She was presumably pepper sprayed because it looked similar to the Trump hats.
There's one good thing coming out of all this, with Brexit in UK and Trump in America a sect of people starting thinking that was alright to be openly racist and alright to try to bend stories to their will and tell it as "facts". Well, now we know who you are, thank you because it was very hard to know that we could be standing next to a moron if they kept it bottled up and only hint it when they got drunk and let the animal come out. For showing your true colors, thank you.
You voted for a racist. You are a racist, regardless of the rest of your politics.
I don't respond to AC's.
If I dox someone in a "alt-left" board they will shut the whole board down? Jesus don't tell 4chan!
Ah who am I kidding, never happen. Kind of like the guy who posted a white/black racist tweet with only key words changed and guess which account got closed and which didn't even get the tweet removed...
The problem is that everything that isnt 200% politically correct is labelled "nazi", from actual scary stuff to slight divergence in opinion. Then it's "ok to punch it". It's what they also call virtue signaling.
That behavior creates more actual fascists on both sides. Congrats.
its probably because many muslim countries actually enforce sharia law, while zero christian countries do. not only that, but christian countries are far from being 90%+ christians (we're not in the 1700's). the base of the christian religion are not hate and murder also - the bases of the muslim religion actually are.
heck, the clothing tradition itself is oppressing, and they fully support it. "hide your wife".
maybe the "moderate" muslims should think about creating their new version of the religion that has no sharia law, and none of the rest of the scary stuff, if they don't believe in it. that'd help a lot with acceptance, to not claim you associate yourself with a belief that promotes oppression and murder at it's core don't you think?
finally.. a lot of muslims are white, but really, its not hard to find the women muslims. its like finding trump supporters (MAGA red caps).
(also, religion sux in general)
Yes, yes, but can you deal with it? Can you deal with people being different and having different opinions?
Throwing tantrums, overreacting and acting like a crybaby is not dealing with it.
I believe alt-right is a right wing rejection of neoliberalism. The rejection of neoliberalism is both a right and left concept. The decision to shut it down dissenting voices is neoliberalism in action.
“Neoliberal democracy. Instead of citizens, it produces consumers. Instead of communities, it produces shopping malls. The net result is an atomized society of disengaged individuals who feel demoralized and socially powerless.
In sum, neoliberalism is the immediate and foremost enemy of genuine participatory democracy, not just in the United States but across the planet, and will be for the foreseeable future.” - Noam Chomsky.
> These people are dividing the country, and creating a climate of tension and violence way more than the alt-right.
YOURE DIVIDING THE COUNTRY!
NO, ***YOU'RE*** DIVIDING THE COUNTRY!
(Hey, guess what... You are POTP.)
Not surprised. Reddit will protect criminals of all types, provided that they're leftists.
Twitter supports and protects racists - by smearing their critics with the "Hate Speech" label.
Once a site starts to ban its own users, many other users will have to try self-censorship to keep their accounts.
That gets boring and feels like work. Why stay on an interactive social media site if you have no free speech or freedom after speech?
As a site becomes more safe, more regulated by teams of SJW, more boring users will seek fun, interaction and content on other better sites that support freedom of speech.
The fun, desire for and enjoyment of real free speech does not go away when teams of SJW ban users and accounts on one site.
The site that had the SJW censorship will just be used as a safe space for brands, governments, faiths, cults and celebrities.
A bland safe space for marketing, brands, advertising and big government does not attract fun new users.
What will the teams of SJW like to ban next? Cartoons that would be considered blasphemy? Politics? No mention of Tiananmen Square and 1989?
Do SJW have a long list of words, terms they want banned? Protect all celebrity marketing by ensuring only positive movie reviews can be found?
The only people that like INGSOCJUS are the ones that practice it on others.
Twitter supports and protects racists - by smearing their critics with the "Hate Speech" label.
but it is believed to be attempts to dox the protestor who punched a white nationalist during a TV interview at Donald Trump's inauguration.
Sure, online suspect hunts are not the most reliable or smartest or safest ideas in the world, but good fucking grief... trying to find someone who appears to have committed battery on camera is "doxing" now? And is an offense worthy of sub deletion?
Or did I miss something and the police caught him, but for some reason are not releasing his information in a publicly available arrest report?
"who are frankly sick and tired of the political climate where we're called misogynist racists because we simply disagree with your "progressive" politics."
The same thing happens on the fringes both the left and right, it's just the names that change.
However, I've lost count of the number of times I've heard someone say they're not a misogynist or a racist, but then make blatantly misogynist or racist comments in their following comments. I've come to understand that a lot of the time, when people complain about these terms, it's because they know they're negative terms, and don't want to be called a negative term, but they have little understanding of what the term actually means. I'm sure the same thing happens on both the left and right.
However I do find it strange that a large number of people are effectively willing to let the place burn (by electing someone they know will have negative consequences), because they're tired of being called names. That seems more like an excuse after the fact, after realising their mistake at being conned by empty and/or contradictory promises.
How about theTrump scum who just killed 6 people is a Mosque in Canada, an alt-right terrorist.
http://news.sky.com/story/cana....
Knock that one down, you dumb fuck.
Here's their new home: http://voat.co/v/identitarian
And here's an alternative even more dedicated to free speech: http://voat.co/v/alternativeright
Most of us in the alt-right movement hate violence, and just don't want whites to become a minority in EVERY last country.
Outer of trans women? You mean like Adelaide Kramer who's already known as a trans woman because she publicly complained about not being able to user her "identified" bathroom because she still has a penis? He did not mock Adelaide for being trans but for refusing to use her biological bathroom, and cites examples of knowing trans women that have no problem with doing so.
It is always right to punch a Nazi. It always has been and it always will be.
That inflexible level of thinking sounds very right wing and authoritarian to me. Hmm. Are you a nazi? Does that mean I can punch you?
You are so concerned about some hateful shit of a girl getting pepper sprayed... where were you when peaceful protesters on college campuses were getting hosed down with pepper spray by an agent of the state for a simple sit in?
Well, I was saying that was an abusive act that should be illegal. I'm saying that a woman stood being interviewed getting assaulted is an abusive act that is illegal.
And here you are saying Anit-fascist like its a fucking bad thing
Some people may be, but I'm not. I can't be arsed trying to differentiate the fascists from the cunts that pretend they're not fascists. I focus on actions.
Attacking someone for saying something you dislike? That is wrong. I don't give a flying fuck which side of the political spectrum you're on, stop assaulting people.
There's nothing about Trump in that article. You're not even fucking trying, this is pure fucking projection.
Get a grip on reality, your mental health is at risk here.
Some of us aren't Marxist ideologues who want to ban heterosexual white men from existing. That's the problem here, and what people on "the right" keep missing: there are plenty of us out here who just want to level the playing field as best we can, but are frankly sick and tired of the political climate where they're called SJW snowflakes because we simply disagree with your "conservative" politics.
You've lost the hearts and minds of a vast number of people since the election and only won that election because of the profoundly anti-democratic Electoral College system. Instead of taking that lesson to heart, you've doubled down on it.
Take that as you will.
So, really, what's the problem here? Some ideologies are just unacceptable. ISIS have their own internet places, altright can have theirs. Breibart, I think it's called.
You'd not see TYT or the aggressive progressives given some regular space on breibart.com, would you.
Because there are more muslim majority countries than 7. So he's lying as are you about "all muslims are affected". Moreover, out of 19 attacks in the USA by muslim terrorists, 18 of them are from countries in the ME and NOT on the list. So when it's claimed to be targeting places where the USA has seen attacks come from, he's lying.
There's no shade of truth here. Plain flat out lying.
Shit, you guys should be HAPPY that we're digging our own graves here.
Bottom line. It doesn't work any more.
It's the 21st Century, time to start having politicians subscribe to issues the populous moves as relevant instead of a hidden autocracy determining the direction of the establishment. Left and Right simply means 'other interests' where 20% dictate what happens to the other 80% of us. Where Left is supposedly attached to communists and Right supposedly attached to capitalists economic systems in a political environment designed hundreds of years ago twisted over time to ignore the constitutional foundations that keep society stable.
Perhaps it is time to upgrade our thinking about the two party system, and consider the left and right approach in the same way we look at if we prefer black and white movies over color movies.
The alt-whites are the opposite of the SJW. It's "the Right" coming to terms with their homosexuality and using it just as poorly as "the Left" has. From what I can gather SJW forget that their freedom of speech ends where my human rights begin, you can't make me use your gender pro-noun unless I like you.
What I see the alt-whites doing is attacking culture, which is just as bad, just different bad. I'm white, I like my culture, imperfectly it tries to include people and protect human rights. I don't mind people trying to change it however I don't think that destroying it is a good idea either.
My ism, it's full of beliefs.
But they were accepted by the people because the progressive on the other side was not available.Bernie would have done it, Trump will only do it if he thinks it won't hurt his finances.
"The left" lost because they thought that they needed more right wing platform in their politics. Trump won because he didn't give a shit about what he said or promised, so he could freely promise progressive platforms. Trump isn't doing progressive stuff. Well, one: telling drug companies they need to cut prices, that Medicare and Medicaid will negotiate prices now.
That's VERY left wing.
From Trump.
Is the meaning of the word "fascism" lost on you? It doesn't mean "persons whose views I disagree with" or even "people willing to use political violence". it refers specifically to the melding of capitalism and authoritarian nationalism. It is inseparably a right-wing ideology
Basically anyone with a stupid mustache, yes.
It is always right to punch a Nazi. It always has been and it always will be.
See Popper's "The Open Society" - basically you can not give unlimited tolerance to intolerance, or else the Nazis gain control and there is no more tolerance allowed.
At some point, you have to use violence to resist intolerance, and yes this does seem paradoxical. The point is that true Nazis are not amenable to reasoned debate (any more than ISIS), and I don't imagine many people here think we should only ever talk to ISIS and never use violence against them.
To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
No, we didn't vote for him either. You're proving him correct here by assuming he's "the enemy" because he disagrees with you.
I'll take the bait. Voted for Obama twice, didn't vote for Hilary or Trump; made my "protest" vote for Johnson specifically because I am tired of several groups of have-nots ganging up on other groups of have-nots or possibly have-somes because they resemble those that have-lots. If that makes any sense..
You voted for a racist.
I did? That's news to me. I haven't voted for a two-party presidential candidate in over 15 years.
You are a racist, regardless of the rest of your politics.
Like I said: instead of listening to the message, you're doubling down.
What part of "shall not be infringed" is so hard to understand?
A "message" that we should go back to racial and gender discrimination is not a message I'm interested in, thanks.
I don't respond to AC's.
But I truly pity you because you have become a tool of the same people who wish to create the chaos and anxiety in people through the mass media. You are not just part of the problem - YOU ARE THE PROBLEM.
Alienating a substantial number of people regardless of political stripe because of the actions of a few is ironically the exemplification of the behavior those who were banned were accused of. It's also a detriment to the returns investors expect from a website and a breach of fiduciary duty.
The media coverage is ridiculous, and focus instead on actual fake stories of people who are pretending to be assaulted by Trump supporters, a claim, as far as I know, always unfounded. End of rant. Good luck America.
What about the story a couple days ago where a Trump supporter murdered some people because of his alt-right views
It's bizarre how I say "there is justification for not inviting him" and idiots read "rioting and arson are justified."
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
The left is all about racial and gender discrimination, against white males.
I have often heard that black people *can't* be racist, because racism equals power + prejudice...
It's also a known fact that many black people voted for Trump...
Are they racist too?
While I prefer to challenge people like Yiannopoulos in public, in this case I can see a reasonable justification for not inviting him to speak.
He was invited by a student group at a public university and had every right to speak.
safety of students
Bull-fucking-shit. Students safety were threatened not by the speakers, but the intolerant assholes violently protesting against him.
Freedom of speech just means the government cant arrest you for saying it.
Maybe learn some shit before you open your mouth.
"In America, first you get the sugar, then you get the power, then you get the women..." -H. Simpson
If you voted for someone who you thought was a walking disaster you are a complete idiot and I really don't care what you think.
This isn't about the last election, this isn't about Hillary, this is about Nazis... This is about blatant out right racist assholes who should not be given the insane amount of protection that they are given. The KKK can parade around "openly" exposing death to tons of American citizens, people like you and me and they are protected for it but if a few black people get together to say "hey, how about you stop shooting us in record numbers" and they get beaten and arrested. That shit is fucked up... that is as anit-American as it gets.
These aren't people who are simply fiscally conservative, they are hate mongers, they would have huge swaths of Americans eliminated simply for the color of their skin, and if you support them, if you stand with the hate mongers, then you are just as bad as they are.
"In America, first you get the sugar, then you get the power, then you get the women..." -H. Simpson
Are you talking about Stalinists? People who would have folks killed en-masse? Then sure, punch away. But if you are talking about Democratic socalists who believe that our social saftey net should be a little more secure and better protect the most vulnerable among us but do not preach that we should have people killed for their race or religion... no, those are not people you should punch.
Its really not that complicated.
"In America, first you get the sugar, then you get the power, then you get the women..." -H. Simpson
Don't confuse "legal" and "right" .
It was once legal to own slaves and illegal to help them escape from their masters. It was never right to own slaves and it was right to help them get to freedom.
"In America, first you get the sugar, then you get the power, then you get the women..." -H. Simpson
A "message" that we should go back to racial and gender discrimination is not a message I'm interested in, thanks.
Again, you keep calling me a misogynist racist and you don't know anything at all other than "[I] didn't vote for HIllary Clinton and object to repeatedly being called a misogynist racist to the point that I reject your entire agenda."
Since you appear to either be a troll (I'll assume not) or simply want me to virtue signal, here you go: I think that judging people by the content of their character rather than the color of the skin is a pretty good dream, and we should all buy into that. I think the idea that women should be chained in the kitchen is laughable. I support gay marriage and gays in the military (and speaking of the military, I think that women being eligible for all combat roles is a long overdue change).
Put simply: I believe that PEOPLE should have every opportunity to do whatever it is that they want to do, regardless of sex, race, or creed, and everyone else should stay the fuck out of their lives rather than trying to tell them how to live them.
I DO have a problem with "safe spaces" trumping (no pun intended) free speech. I DO have a problem with throwing people out of school simply based on accusations and without any kind of due process. I DO have a problem with an executive branch ruling by fiat ("Dear Colleague") to enable the above. I DO have a problem when people riot because they think someone should not be allowed to speak (at Berkeley of all places!) I DO have a problem that when I say "all lives matter" I'm presumed to believe that black lives (or even blue lives) do not.
I'm assuming your next response will be to call me a racist again (I expect you'll key in on the last thing I said there). If so, don't bother. I won't be responding to you again. If not, hey, maybe you're one of the few rational people left in the world, and the two of us can have a nice conversation.
What part of "shall not be infringed" is so hard to understand?
Its pretty clear that you don't know what a Nazi is. Perhaps you should read up on WWII and the Holocaust and get back to me.
"In America, first you get the sugar, then you get the power, then you get the women..." -H. Simpson
Oh, so you're advocating punching people that are 90 years and older? Me, I'd hope that any crimes they've committed have already been assessed and appropriate justice served.
Just that, if you're using the term to mean anybody younger than that then you're clearly not talking about WWII or the holocaust.
Even in 1945 I don't think it would be appropriate to punch someone purely because they were a nazi party member. Which crimes did they commit, and how about applying some justice there.
Arbitrary violence is not justice.
Don't take me wrong, the ban is perfectly justified, but it's always right-wing fascists who get punished.
Perhaps that is because it is they who wants a race war?
If right-wing fascists where to disappear tomorrow then the violent antifascists would also go away.
If the violent antifascists where to disappear tomorrow then the right-wing fascists would still remain.
Why not just ban the doxxer instead of the whole sub-reddit?
... in which case all the conduct agreements of Reddit are out the window (i.e. I'm not going to follow Reddit anti-dox rules and get thrown into the slammer for aiding and abetting, etc).
If alt-right is gertting used as a blanket way to refer to Republicans and/or conservatives, is the government banned too?
It sounds a little ridiculous, but I'm wondering if that is what reddit is doing.
And no, I don't trust reddit to decide what is good and bad for me. It sounds like the "doxxer" was trying to apprehend a criminal
Democrats forced their candidate through, to the detriment of the Bernie supporters. Republicans tried their best to do it to Trump and failed. I whole-heartedly believe he got the nomination in part because people were trying to make a statement to the RNC that they can't control everything and get their way. I know your post history, so I know you lean left. I doubt you'd be willing to give Trump any credit even if he complied with ever pet issue you had. You simply want to be correct about everything rather than have things be what they really are. The left has been overplaying their hand for a long time now. They have worn out the patience of the rest of the country who is tired of names, accusations and ridiculous violence and riots.
All this arguing over white nationalism. I think Africa needs more diversity. There aren't nearly enough white people in Africa. Any takers? Why are we not pushing that narrative? Why do so many think that it is inherently wrong to have a white majority country and yet so many are perfectly happy to leave black majority countries as they are and never once encourage white migration to black countries to shore up their lacking diversity numbers?
These are simple questions, why are they not asked?
Another point: In what world does anyone think that bringing all these poor people to the United States is going to help the status quo?, These people outbreed and create more poverty than we import so that we are making zero impact in their home countries while impovershing our own. How is that helping the rest of the world? This is obviously a plan to merely destroy the way of life in the United States and everyone who believes that we can import away all the poverty from the rest of the world by weakening ourselves into a country like the rest have destroyed... well, you are severely deluded. We will simply become an impoverished trash heap just like every other country and for whatever reason about half of this country claims to want that by the way they cast their votes.
An actual intelligent and well informed response. And here I thought the smug and elitist liberals had cornered the market on all intelligence and factual knowledge.
-- "I'm not in a hurry; I'm in Hawaii." The Homeless Guy
Of course not. Your notion would be plain silly. What is recognized is that there is alienation happening. Part of those who are repulsed by the defamation and abuse may not feel Trump is the nightmare he is showing himself to be. Mainstream discourse has lost those people because mainstream discourse has allowed the abusive name calling to be accepted.
Good thing homogeneity of religion is required to be a threat elsewise someone could accuse a Christian nation of having dominated a Muslim one. I'm not arguing for the "side" you so ridiculously attempt to describe here. I am just pointing out some absurdity in your assertion.
If you voted for someone who you thought was a walking disaster you are a complete idiot and I really don't care what you think.
As noted elsewhere in this thread, I did not vote for the walking disaster.
This isn't about the last election, this isn't about Hillary, this is about Nazis... This is about blatant out right racist assholes who should not be given the insane amount of protection that they are given. The KKK can parade around "openly" exposing death to tons of American citizens, people like you and me and they are protected for it but if a few black people get together to say "hey, how about you stop shooting us in record numbers" and they get beaten and arrested. That shit is fucked up... that is as anit-American as it gets.
These aren't people who are simply fiscally conservative, they are hate mongers, they would have huge swaths of Americans eliminated simply for the color of their skin, and if you support them, if you stand with the hate mongers, then you are just as bad as they are.
I do thank you for the civility of saying "if" a lot in your post. Unlike the other guy who keeps calling me a racist, at least you have the courtesy to assume it's possible that I might not be one.
We agree entirely about the right to protest. It IS outrageous that people are being shot by the police without cause. It IS outrageous that people would be beaten and arrested for protesting that fact. But a lot of people aren't protesting, they're rioting. The comment that got me involved in this discussion (about "some hateful shit of a girl getting pepper sprayed") sums up my position neatly. I watched the video, the "hateful shit of a girl" says she's out there to make a statement, just like the protesters are, and she gives credit to the ones doing so peacefully... whereupon she is pepper sprayed by one of your nazi fighters who is on the side of the angels. Forgive me if I don't see them the same way.
As for the KKK, they're hateful shits and the world would be better off without them. That doesn't mean they don't have rights. Our principle of free speech is supposed to be based on the notion that "I disagree with what you have to say, but will defend to the death your right to say it." Instead, we have people screaming that their safe spaces just can't stand up to words, but don't seem to mind beating people using those words. Again, who is the threat here? Because despite all the claims of Naziism (and I do agree that Trump could EASILY go in that direction) the only people I see being violent here are the ones that seem to be on your side of the divide.
What part of "shall not be infringed" is so hard to understand?
Name another religion that has more than 2 countries...
Lefties treat Islam like righties treat global warming.
It's always right to punch a Nazi.
"It's always right to punch a Communist. It's always right to punch an SJW. It's always right to punch a religious nutjob."
Screw you. You are what's wrong with this country. When you hear something you don't agree with, you try to shut them down with force instead of having a rational discussion.
Apparently people can't support border controls now, because talking about it turns them into racists and nazis. But guess what? The majority of people in this country still want functioning borders and a social support system that hasn't been overwhelmed by illegal immigrants.
"Troll" with no AC-posted comment, really? That's amazing. I don't have any sympathy for the guy; I just don't have sympathy for the guy who attacked him, either.
If the speculation is true and Reddit deleted subs in an attempt to protect the identity of a criminal from becoming known, that at the very least is a subject worth debating.
Is a "Muslim hoard" a place where someone keeps all their Muslims and won't share them with anyone?
-Forrest Cameranesi, Geek of all Trades
"I am Sam. Sam I am. I do not like trolls, flames, or spam."
Oh, no, somebody call the waaaahmbulance! White males don't have enough privilege!
I don't respond to AC's.
Oh, no, somebody call the waaaahmbulance! Somebody is complaining about privilege!
And one of the primary inspirations for the Black Lives Matter movement is a cop killer and 'domestic terrorist' on the FBI's Most Wanted List, with a $2M reward on her head, according to the original founders and promoters of the hashtag and larger movement.
This isn't a conspiracy theory. A *attributed* quote from Assata Shakur is on their homepage and if you head over to Youtube, you can hear this very line being chanted in unison at dozens of different BLM protests. The women in question are widely considered to be the founders and coordinators of BLM and have given countless interviews and speeches on the subject, including one at TED (not even TEDx, but straight TED.)
But guess what? I don't assume that the majority of people who support Black Lives Matter are pro-terrorism. It's a tiny fraction. It's a tiny fraction that happens to be running the show, but a tiny fraction nonetheless.
And the same goes with the alt-right and actual racists and actual Nazis. Trash the founders all you want, but it's going to end very, very badly if the left continues to treat the entire movement and label as a monolith.
So the number of terror incidents with Muslim perpetrators is roughly equal to the number committed by "Evangelicals" and "Conservative Catholics"?
Really?
And the country with "Evangelical Law" would be? And the country with Catholic Law is? Please, enlighten us with a point by point comparison of Sharia Law and "Evangelical" law.
You have no safety net for your people.
Here's the figure for 2012: more than $2 trillion was transferred from the top 40 percent of families to the bottom 60 percent. https://taxfoundation.org/dist...
How many additional trillions must be transferred before you'll acknowledge that there's a safety net? Serious question.
Here's an interesting piece by a U.K. citizen that asks, and answers, the question "given that the United States spends vast amounts of money alleviating poverty then how come there is still any poverty in the United States?"
http://www.forbes.com/sites/ti...
I wouldn't tag the Black Panther Party as Democrats either. "Group X votes for Party Y" is not the same as "Group X represents Party Y". We know the site mods lean left, but please try to keep you biases in check.
Not surprised. Reddit will protect criminals of all types, provided that they're leftists.
Some of them apparently think enough to protect the narrative on Slashdot by modbombing.
Twitter supports and protects racists - by smearing their critics with the "Hate Speech" label.
The stupid asshole went in front of the CIA, stood with his back to their wall of nameless but honored dead and whined about how nobody believed how big, beautiful, fantastic & historic his inauguration audience was.
But why do you care? Why does anyone else? Trump is an asshole and a dope. Even most of the people who voted for him seem to be very ready to acknowledge this. Anyone who is still bemoaning his character criticizing the brass on the Titanic as being insufficiently polished.
It's insane that this is still going on not only after the election, but after the transfer of power. It was beating a dead horse 6 months ago, but apparently we need to pulverized the poor equine into molecule-sized bits. Again and again and again, Trump gets the mainstream media and the left yelling over irrelevancies whilst multiple bigger issues (not all, but many) slide under the radar. This isn't a neutral thing that's happening here. Every minute wasted on topics like this is a minute that could've been spent on substantive criticism.
Some have branded him a genius for this, but he's exhibited such doltish behavior elsewhere that this is seems extremely implausible. And yet it keeps happening.
Maybe on this one, specific tactic Trump is a genius. Maybe his business dealings has given him good instincts about how to exploit certain psychological flaws related to the bike shed effect.
Making a deal with the devil is still making a deal with the devil. If you're going to go with "the ends justify the means tactic", then you need to do what you conservative types (not repub or lib but CONSERVATIVE) tell us liberals to do and stop crying like a bitch in your safe space and man the fuck up. Own that shit. No one is gonna take you seriously when you tell us you just like the hood and robe because white is your color and you don't *actually* agree with clan politics. And then you rail against "safe spaces" while simultaneously "object to repeatedly being called a misogynist racist to the point that I reject your entire agenda." and "I'm presumed to believe that black lives (or even blue lives) do not." Sounds like you want a nice, inclusive atmosphere where it's safe to be the person you truly are. I wonder what we'd call such a place? Also, why ARE you still bitching? Trump won, get over it. And if you didn't vote for Bernie or Hilldawg, well, then you aren't with us, you're agin us. It was cool when GWB used that phrase so it's fine we do that now right?
It's bizarre how I say "there is justification for not inviting him" and idiots read "rioting and arson are justified."
It's karma.
You keep telling people don't they mean what they say (people who say "I'm not racist" aren't REALLY not racist, the alt-right aren't REALLY concerned about immigration or the economy, GamerGate isn't REALLY about ethics, they're all just racists/sexists/white-nationalists!)
It's only appropriate now that nobody takes your word at face value, and just make up whatever they think you really mean.
Whenever you say "I'm not an SJW" or "I support free speech", people hear it the same way as a racist going "I'm not a racist, but..."
When you use terms like "Free Speech Warriors", MRAs, alt-right, white-nationalist, etc. People see those terms to mean "somebody I don't like and btw I'm a idiot"
Now it seems like you're trying esteem-by-association, which is odd since you started off criticizing them with guilt-by-association.
I take it back. Lay off of the Adderall; I think you're having an episode of stimulant-induced psychosis.
I'm actually quite in the mood to find the good fight but this isn't even fun. You're too far off the mark of what I'm even saying for this to be interesting, sporting or at all useful to anyone.
Too bad you're forgetting what you're trying to prove isn't something TED would investigate.
The onus is on you to stop acting like a dumbass, stop trying to put words in my mouth, and put up or shut up re: the claims of these women, and/or their open admiration and promotion of the words of Assata Shakur, and/or the leftists who support BLM without bothering to find out what the movement (or the individual protests in that movement) is actually about. That doesn't make them *guilty*; it makes them *lazy* and a liability in the coming culture wars.
But why do you care? Why does anyone else? Trump is an asshole and a dope. Even most of the people who voted for him seem to be very ready to acknowledge this. Anyone who is still bemoaning his character criticizing the brass on the Titanic as being insufficiently polished.
It's insane that this is still going on not only after the election, but after the transfer of power. It was beating a dead horse 6 months ago, but apparently we need to pulverized the poor equine into molecule-sized bits. Again and again and again, Trump gets the mainstream media and the left yelling over irrelevancies whilst multiple bigger issues (not all, but many) slide under the radar. This isn't a neutral thing that's happening here. Every minute wasted on topics like this is a minute that could've been spent on substantive criticism.
Some have branded him a genius for this, but he's exhibited such doltish behavior elsewhere that this is seems extremely implausible. And yet it keeps happening.
Maybe on this one, specific tactic Trump is a genius. Maybe his business dealings has given him good instincts about how to exploit certain psychological flaws related to the bike shed effect.
Because he's not (yet) an Emperor and he didn't elect himself. Those of his supporters who claimed they were only trying to "shake things up" need to be reminded what they've done and we should NOT allow his behavior to become normalized or to treat him like some autistic savant.
The Republicans who opposed him - the "Never Trumps" were NOT Democrats or liberals - but who now kiss the ring also need to be reminded - I hope enough that they'll look past their lust for power & at the character of the president to whom they fawn.
Also, don't think that "beating a dead horse" has no impact; persistence often counts. Nearly all of the criticisms & "facts" that the GOP & rightwingnuts kept harping on about Obama were *entirely* fictional and they made 5 MILLION of his voting base vanish in just 4 years - and triggered the LARGEST EVER change of House seats in just TWO.
Of course voter suppression played a role but wasn't the only factor.
Pain is merely failure leaving the body
I take it back. Lay off of the Adderall; I think you're having an episode of stimulant-induced psychosis.
You do jump quickly to these types of vituperative remarks. Have you considered making a resolution not to use them?
I'm actually quite in the mood to find the good fight but this isn't even fun. You're too far off the mark of what I'm even saying for this to be interesting, sporting or at all useful to anyone.
Oh? You may be in the mood for something, but in terms of effectiveness in your debating, you're flailing around like somebody punching at shadows.
Which if your goal was to fail, means you are a success.
The onus is on you to stop acting like a dumbass, stop trying to put words in my mouth, and put up or shut up re: the claims of these women, and/or their open admiration and promotion of the words of Assata Shakur, and/or the leftists who support BLM without bothering to find out what the movement (or the individual protests in that movement) is actually about. That doesn't make them *guilty*; it makes them *lazy* and a liability in the coming culture wars.
Yes, yes, there are thoughtless morons in every tent. None of the ones involved with BLM got elected president of a country with nuclear warheads.
Still, that truth (an old one st that, older than Godwinâs) won't make Black Lives Matter into any kind of official or organised group, won't make your aspersion any less of a lie, nor will it make a softball interview anything other than what it is.
BTW, you should look up COINTELPRO. Education is useful.
You do jump quickly to these types of vituperative remarks
ACs are subhuman. You should get down on your knees and thank god you received any reply at all. Also, since there is near zero intellectual engagement here, snark is the only thing that's keeping me coming back.
None of the ones involved with BLM got elected president of a country with nuclear warheads.
"Trump is bad and a moron and a liar and I wouldn't be surprised if he were a rapist." Are you happy? Are you happy with your *life*? How old are you, seriously? As I said in my other reply, I think most intelligent people reach a stage where talking about how much the American right sucks loses all amusement or illusion of usefulness. The American mainstream right is a permanent reactionary force. They *can't* change. The left can.
Still, that truth (an old one st that, older than Godwinâs) won't make Black Lives Matter into any kind of official or organised group
Again with the idiocy. This is keeping me coming back as well, because it's such a dumbassed thing to say it's a little amusing. It's like putting a [citation needed] flag on water being wet. You offer no rebuttal whatsoever; you just say "that isn't proof!" Well sorry, I've already spent 15 seconds being your Google monkey today. That's 15 seconds more than most ACs get.
softball interview anything other than what it is.
You actually expect them to grill them on whether they're lying? Why doesn't the local news grill NASA about whether the moon landings are faked and the moon is actually made of overripe gouda? This is hysteria, an actual mental disease if you aren't in fact trolling. There's no reason at all to suspect BLM isn't centrally organized (plus a bunch of lazy retweeters and pundits who don't know any better, plus some percentage of independently organized protests who have appropriated the BLM label but have differing agendas.) You might as well claim that PETA doesn't exist as an organization for all the sense you're making. No, I'm not going to give you more proof, because it's not up for discussion any more than the Earth being older than 6,000 years is up for discussion. At the end of the day, you're perfectly free to stick your own head up your ass or not. This isn't even an argument.
Nearly all of the criticisms & "facts" that the GOP & rightwingnuts kept harping on about Obama were *entirely* fictional and they made 5 MILLION of his voting base vanish in just 4 years - and triggered the LARGEST EVER change of House seats in just TWO.
...
I'm trying to figure out how to reply "maybe it's sloppily-aimed rabidity like that" in a polite and gentle enough manner that you'll read this and understand that I'm anti-Trump as well and be able to process and at least tolerate what I'm saying.
The point is to rant about the things that matter, not the things that don't. Spending time about the character flaws that ultimately don't much matter helps Trump. People who are unsure about them look at the criticism on page 1 and nod with satisfaction, happy once they realize that the story is irrelevant or even utter nonsense. The world isn't burning after all! It's just silly liberals getting their panties in a twist over bullshit. Most of them don't continue slogging all the way to page 3 to see the stories on climate change or the SCOTUS. I've witnessed this sort of thing firsthand.
Not making a big fucking deal about his silly, stupid lies about the crowd is actually really, really important. It's not "normalizing" him; it's making room for the criticisms that actually goddamn matter whilst simultaneously making the anti-Trump position as a whole seem more serious and respectable to those who aren't paying close attention.
The 5 million missing voters is largely the result of differences on the left, not the right. This should be very obvious because there were even more missing voters (8 mil I think? I forget) compared to 2008. Loss of enthusiasm is a loss of turnout, even if they hate Trump.
If you don't know any former Obama supporters who went Trump, please find some and talk to them. I am related to three of them. (All female, as it happens.) Understanding their reasoning is the key to understanding why so many people weren't motivated to bother showing up, I believe.
Oh, yes, well, lets find you one on the many articles that do show him to be a Trump supporter.
Just one of many.
http://www.independent.co.uk/n...
I suggest you get a grip on reality, Trumplethinkskin.
No single strategy is going to turn the tide but to be reasonable about everything is going to cost the Dems, the left & liberals a LOT.
Despite the sound beating the GOP get in 2008, they turned the tables very quickly and the Dems have to do the same.
The disadvantage the Dems have is that many districts in Red states or states with GOP governors are gerrymandered up the wazoo and getting courts to examine and overturn those is very time consuming.
The Dems won't get control of redistricting until after the next census by which time Mango Mussolini and his cabal of liars, lunatics & enablers will have had many chances to do a lot of damage. Much as it galls me, following the GOP playbook of the Obama years may just be the way the game will have to be played for a while.
Or, you can play to lose, which is very noble.
Pain is merely failure leaving the body
This isn't a symmetrical war. The Democrats have the youth (for now), intelligent people, and strong footholds in academia and the media. What they do NOT have are the ability to easily tap a huge contingent of far-left nutters for power or a proficiency with lies and hyperbole.
Don't go invading Russia in the winter. Being more proactive and confrontational than Obama means just that; using better tactics, not altering your ideology or truth standards or rationality. For instance, and this is just a small example, I spoke out repeatedly in favor of the Democrats openly supporting an electoral college rebellion. There was a perfectly reasonable case to make there and even if it failed, the awareness this would have raised might have led to eventual reforms. And I also think it would've been interesting if Obama had simply appointed a SCOTUS of his choosing, forcing the Republicans to sue and the SCOTUS to rule on whether "advice and consent" actually means that Congress can indefinitely delay matters. Roberts might have carried the day; who knows.
You can't beat the Republicans at their own game. Just play hardball, not shittalk. The fact that people like you seem to think that talking about Trump's inauguration crowd lies will do any damage whatsoever to him just goes to show what novices the left are at this.
Good thing you put "the left" in scare quotes, as Democrats and their sycophants are right-wingers. Current case in point: all the outrage from Dems over Trump's travel ban, Dems who DGAF when Obama was bombing them.
You understood my intent perfectly. "The left" is how they are labelled, but most people outside of the US do not think the US has a left wing. It was a convenient label (which is generally accepted in political debate in the US, regardless of whether or not it is accurate) and not a political statement, so I quoted it to indicate such.
What part of "shall not be infringed" is so hard to understand?