Car ploughs through protesters at Charlottesville Alt-Right rally

[Thepersona]

Because they are useful as a tool for socioeconomic analysis, and just because the system is unfeasible from a holistic standpoint does not mean -elements- of it are impractical or even unethical.

I mean, they could be possible in a post-scarcity society, with a super-computer doing the micromanagement of said group of people

[Pannonian]

Nazism is blamed on Marx though.

Then you can of course name some credible sources for a claim that almost any historian would outright rebuke?

[Jimusmc]

so it was in self defense: he was going slowly, then someone hits his car with a bat and that made him speed up before he got mobbed

https://twitter.com/realGETrump/stat...86309901144064

[Elegiac]

so it was in self defense: he was going slowly, then someone hits his car with a bat and that made him speed up before he got mobbed

https://twitter.com/realGETrump/stat...86309901144064

The video evidence does not corroborate this story.

[JohnBrown1917]

so it was in self defense: he was going slowly, then someone hits his car with a bat and that made him speed up before he got mobbed

https://twitter.com/realGETrump/stat...86309901144064

The stuff your kind comes up with....

[Gandrake]

So Nazi's from all over America is okay..
But counter-protesters from the region are "libtards without jobs"?

And so what?
Hitler also played a big part in my history, doesn't mean we would allow statues of him to be erected.

not american or virginian history and by no stretch of the word any kind of hero

everything was fine until about a month ago people are suddenly getting offended by a statue that has been sitting here for more than 100 years. whole thing is beyond stupid. The KKK and people with nazi flags showing up is stupid but so are a handful of ingorant & uneducated people crying about how the statue reminds them of slavery when they and no one they know were ever slaves. they'd think you were full of shit if you told them blacks fought as free men for the confederate army or totally lose it if you told them how ignorant they sound thinking a war was fought to keep them in the fields picking cotton

[LMuhlen]

not american or virginian history and by no stretch of the word any kind of hero

everything was fine until about a month ago people are suddenly getting offended by a statue that has been sitting here for more than 100 years. whole thing is beyond stupid. The KKK and people with nazi flags showing up is stupid but so are a handful of ingorant & uneducated people crying about how the statue reminds them of slavery when they and no one they know were ever slaves. they'd think you were full of shit if you told them blacks fought as free men for the confederate army or totally lose it if you told them how ignorant they sound thinking a war was fought to keep them in the fields picking cotton

If a statue brought this shitstorm, allow me to disagree... Everything was not fine.

[Aica]

You really don't know anything about Robert E Lee. The subject of tearing down his statue is comical to me, considering how much he has done for America, both before and after the Civil War.

I'd like to bring this up, as it caused me to do some research on Robert Lee. That (admittedly brief and shallow) implied that, at the very least, his post-war activities were a force for good in the USA. In relocating the statue, did the town decide that his being a general in the war far outweighed whatever good he produced afterward?

Where did the statue go, anyway?

[Venant]

Things went wrong when some idiot southerns believed they actually won the war.
The North was way too nice to them.

And what do we learn?
Being nice to extremism ends up in deaths.

You do realize that if General Lee had just said 'screw you' to the North and went into the swamps to fight a guerrilla style insurgency, we wouldn't have a country right now and the world would either be dominated by Nazis or Soviets. The North was 'nice' to them because they needed reconciliation.

Oh, and many of these statues existed as gestures of that reconciliation, why they were actually created was to aid the peace process, not to glorify secession.

[burzian]

Oh, and many of these statues existed as gestures of that reconciliation, why they were actually created was to aid the peace process, not to glorify secession.

That's a disingenuous point to make given that it's not at all the case for the statue in question, which was finished and dedicated 59 years after the end of the war.

[Shadowmelded]

Oh, and many of these statues existed as gestures of that reconciliation, why they were actually created was to aid the peace process, not to glorify secession.

Something Lee himself was against (statues and memorials to the Confederacy). The second point is just flat out wrong. The vast majority of statues were erected after reconstruction.

[Glorious Leader]

You do realize that if General Lee had just said 'screw you' to the North and went into the swamps to fight a guerrilla style insurgency, we wouldn't have a country right now and the world would either be dominated by Nazis or Soviets. The North was 'nice' to them because they needed reconciliation.

Oh, and many of these statues existed as gestures of that reconciliation, why they were actually created was to aid the peace process, not to glorify secession.

Thats funny. Sherman was marching through decimating the south. The north had won the war. They didnt need shit from the south.

[Skroe]

You do realize that if General Lee had just said 'screw you' to the North and went into the swamps to fight a guerrilla style insurgency, we wouldn't have a country right now and the world would either be dominated by Nazis or Soviets. The North was 'nice' to them because they needed reconciliation.

Oh, and many of these statues existed as gestures of that reconciliation, why they were actually created was to aid the peace process, not to glorify secession.

That's a ridiculous rewriting of history. The mid-to-late 19th century is littered with powerful countries breaking the backs of insurgencies, particularly in Africa, in exactly the conditions you describe.

The Union would have just done with the British Empire or the French did and burnt the entire South to the ground. The "contemporary style" insurgency you're imagining and transposing 100 years early only "works" because the more powerful country operates within difficult constraints of not engaging in warfare against the population (rather, just the enemy force).

You might as well be saying "Lee woulda won if they turned some cannon balls into a 19th century suicide vest and used suicide bombers".

- - - Updated - - -

Thats funny. Sherman was marching through decimating the south. The north had won the war. They didnt need shit from the south.

Oh yeah that's right. Sherman's preview night of the Shape of Wars To Come broke Southern Morale and horrified the population.

SO basically Venant would require an entirely different set of people.

- - - Updated - - -

so it was in self defense: he was going slowly, then someone hits his car with a bat and that made him speed up before he got mobbed

https://twitter.com/realGETrump/stat...86309901144064

You should be ashamed of yourself.

- - - Updated - - -

Posted this in the other thread, but it belongs here too..



Seems he is able to condemn terrorism, just not when it's against Americans.

To the Alt-Right racists here and around America, only brown people commit terrorism.

[Glorious Leader]

That's a ridiculous rewriting of history. The mid-to-late 19th century is littered with powerful countries breaking the backs of insurgencies, particularly in Africa, in exactly the conditions you describe.

The Union would have just done with the British Empire or the French did and burnt the entire South to the ground. The "contemporary style" insurgency you're imagining and transposing 100 years early only "works" because the more powerful country operates within difficult constraints of not engaging in warfare against the population (rather, just the enemy force).

You might as well be saying "Lee woulda won if they turned some cannon balls into a 19th century suicide vest and used suicide bombers".

- - - Updated - - -



Oh yeah that's right. Sherman's preview night of the Shape of Wars To Come broke Southern Morale and horrified the population.

SO basically Venant would require an entirely different set of people.

- - - Updated - - -



You should be ashamed of yourself.

- - - Updated - - -



To the Alt-Right racists here and around America, only brown people commit terrorism.

Venant would need to stop trying to write alternate history when hes barely cognizant of actual history. To be fair thats true for most people and for some reason these would be sci fi writers have been popping out of the wood work recently.

[-Nurot]

what jewish people have been getting killed in the USA? i must of missed the news article i know what ideology has been killing people in the last few years and its on the left

- - - Updated - - -



road rage is not terrorism

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Road_rage

if it comes out that the attack was planned that's very unlikely based on the man being mentally unstable and the type of incident that took place ill change my mind but until then its not terrorism

Because you can prove pre-meditation if he didn't tell anyone in the minutes prior when he decided to do it right?

So you're claiming Jewish people can have death threats shouted at them and be discriminated against as long as they don't die?

How classy..... Is that applicable to any group of people you don't like or just the Jewish?

Oh please, do tell, which ideology did you just decide is on the left and is killing people?

---Update---
Oh you mean black lives matter? Is that who you mean. So go ahead and cite actual evidence of their members killing police. I understand that you're assuming, that because they're black, they're in Black Lives Matters, so please provide some actual evidence on this one.

[primalmatter]

Because you can prove pre-meditation if he didn't tell anyone in the minutes prior when he decided to do it right?

So you're claiming Jewish people can have death threats shouted at them and be discriminated against as long as they don't die?

How classy..... Is that applicable to any group of people you don't like or just the Jewish?

Oh please, do tell, which ideology did you just decide is on the left and is killing people?

Has motive actually been established ?

I am curious to see what we are dealing with.

[-Nurot]

Has motive actually been established ?

I am curious to see what we are dealing with.

Someone who idolized Nazis and was part of a hate group drove hundreds of miles to a pro-white rally and coincidentally hits a group protesting his protest.

His only way "out" of the death penalty is going to be an insanity plea. Good luck ever getting him to admit that he did because he was pissed now, his lawyer wouldn't let him, even if that's the reason.

Everyone has already set up his defense for him, and for his sake he better hope it works.

[primalmatter]

Someone who idolized Nazis and was part of a hate group drove hundreds of miles to a pro-white rally and coincidentally hits a group protesting his protest.

His only way "out" of the death penalty is going to be an insanity plea, good luck ever getting him to admit that he did because he was pissed now, even if that's the reason.

Everyone has already set up his defense for him, and for his sake he better hope it works.

Hmm didn't know that. I assumed it but rumors are flying around and I didn't know a offical statement was out.

[-Nurot]

Hmm didn't know that. I assumed it but rumors are flying around and I didn't know a offical statement was out.

He was from Ohio, why does that require an official statement.

He was photoed with a hate group wielding their shield. They denied that he was part of the group, but he even showed up wearing the group uniform. So while he might not be one of them, he was fine showing up and standing with them based on what they believed in. Had he not killed anyone they were more than fine with him identifying as one of them.

He was fond of Adolf Hitler, Nazis and white supremacists, so says a former teacher and several classmates. At this point if he was part of any official hate groups, or was just part of an online hate group where he found out about the protest, what difference would it make?

He even beat his mother, so we can check off prone to violence.

I didn't know the police literally had to announce what state you're from for people to believe it now.

None of that requires an official statement, unless of course you just think they're just on a picnic in Barcelona........

I for one don't care if he premeditated for days, decided 5 minutes prior, or just acted on a whim.

Rumors, would be when the alt-right tried to pin it on a liberal teen, claiming it was a false flag, before we found out who he was.

[ArguesWithStrangers]

I think I get your point.

I tend to stay away from terms like "SJW" and "identity politics" mainly because it is completely ubiquitous in the current political climate. The very same people who scream about liberals being SJWs, or Democrats resorting to identity politics... are doing the exact same thing. At the end of the day, it's a dodge, and is often followed up by an attempt to feel like a victim.

Having more babies is fine. Preserving a culture is fine. Trying to force out other cultures via government force is where I draw the line. There are many cultures who maintain themselves without the need to attack and bash others. One of the best examples is the Amish. They are tiny, but they are highly respected, and they let others live their lives. They are not trying to dominate other cultures, merely maintain their own.

Then you have the people who wish to restrict the freedoms of others in order to maintain their cultures. You see it best with wanting to strictly limit immigration, ban gay marriage, restrict people based on religion, or enact their cultural beliefs into law. That's where I have the real issue. The second you seek to limit someone else's culture (I am not speaking about harmful action), then it's no longer about preserving a culture.

I agree completely, but I'd add one thing. A country is not morally required to allow unrestricted access to their soil simply because they enjoy a comparibly high level of affluence. If, for example, Sweden were to say, we're no longer going to accept immigrants from non-nordic countries because we have a small, largely homogenous population and want to maintain its unique character, they're not necessarily being racist. They're just people in their own land setting their own terms with regards to who comes there. Clearly the US could never do this kind of thing along ethnic lines with any credibility because we're enormous and already very diverse, but we can restrict access for other reasons such as employablity, criminal background, and demonstrated willingness to assimilate.