Page 7 of 16 FirstFirst ...
5
6
7
8
9
... LastLast
  1. #121
    Quote Originally Posted by Reverb256 View Post
    No, this article contains no evidence of white supremacism or ethno-nationalism.
    Well, there's that whole part about colluding with white supremacists...

  2. #122
    If only it was anyone other than Buzzfeed...they are the ones who published a huge expose on trump being a russian spy who pees on hookers. Of course it all turned out to be made up and the New York Times made fun of them.

  3. #123
    Quote Originally Posted by Machismo View Post
    Well, there's that whole part about colluding with white supremacists...
    Who? Bannon? There's no evidence that Bannon or Trump are white supremacists. That's what I'm talking about. Z-E-R-O.

  4. #124
    Quote Originally Posted by paralleluniverse View Post
    Not the Trump organization, the Trump administration.

    Kusher and Ivanka did government business on private email.
    ugh...have we not been having a discussion for several pages now about using biased sources? Link the real source so we can discuss it.

  5. #125
    Quote Originally Posted by Ishayu View Post
    The Jewish man is an anti-semite despite working with and being friends with dozens of Jews? That's very interesting. Do tell me more about that.

    He does clearly believe that the west's native population is white and that people should stop making a big deal out of this. For this, he is branded a racist and white supremacist.

    He does oppose Islam because Islam opposes western liberal and conservative values, including Christian values. That I guess falls into your definition of "Islamicphobic", even though he's not irrationally afraid at all. He's a freedom-loving gay jew. Any muslim community will hang him from the rafters, and he knows this.
    He's Catholic, his grandmother was Jewish.

    Well, when you push an agenda of fear and hatred of Islam, that tends to be recognized as Islamophobic...

    He's not a freedom-loving gay Jew. He's a gay Catholic who supports freedom of speech, and severe nationalism... a strikingly anti-freedom stance.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Reverb256 View Post
    Who? Bannon? There's no evidence that Bannon or Trump are white supremacists. That's what I'm talking about. Z-E-R-O.
    You seem to be moving goal posts. Bannon is the editor of Breitbart, a news site that has been pushing the white nationalist agenda and anti-Islam agenda for quite some time.

  6. #126
    Quote Originally Posted by Ishayu View Post
    He does clearly believe that the west's native population is white and that people should stop making a big deal out of this. For this, he is branded a racist and white supremacist.
    He can believe that all he wants, except that he is just flat out wrong since any reasonable definition of "the West" must include the USA, Canada, and Australia.

  7. #127
    Quote Originally Posted by Martymark View Post
    If only it was anyone other than Buzzfeed...they are the ones who published a huge expose on trump being a russian spy who pees on hookers. Of course it all turned out to be made up and the New York Times made fun of them.
    So, are you unwilling to discuss anything that was actually mentioned in the article?

  8. #128
    Do you think that people need to be bigots in order to be concerned about literal threats by ISIS to send fighters as refugees?

    Yeah, Breitbart is nationalistic but I don't see any ETHNO-nationalism peddled by it. Prove me wrong. And don't give me that 'le dogwhistle' crap.

    Ethno-nationalism cannot work for North America, and is not desired by any real nationalists.

    There's nothing wrong with [non ethno-]nationalism in the context of North America.

    Also, nobody sees a problem with ethno-nationalism for the Japanese or Israelis, strangely enough.

    Seems like a double-standard.
    Last edited by Reverb256; 2017-10-06 at 03:26 PM.

  9. #129
    Quote Originally Posted by Machismo View Post
    So, are you unwilling to discuss anything that was actually mentioned in the article?
    I think that's the basic idea. Find a better source if you want a good dialogue.

    Dude...I'm not going to come in here with a Fox News source and then bash anyone who doesn't want an "honest" discussion about the story. I would fully expect to get flamed, and rightfully so.

    Find a better source.

  10. #130
    Quote Originally Posted by Ragedaug View Post
    I think that's the basic idea. Find a better source if you want a good dialogue.
    Considering they are the ones who broke the story, and are the initial source, that's not an option. One would think it would be better to discuss the actual information, and if they can refute it, great. So far, they haven't tried to refute it.

    You know as well as I do, they want to attack the source, because the material goes against their narrative, and they don't want to have to deal with it. It wouldn't make a difference if the source had been CNN, the NYT, the Washington Post, or just about anyone else.
    Last edited by Machismo; 2017-10-06 at 02:52 PM.

  11. #131
    The Insane Daelak's Avatar
    15+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Nashville, TN
    Posts
    15,964
    Quote Originally Posted by Reverb256 View Post
    According to whom? I'm not going to go off of rumours and speculation. I need damning evidence.
    He is the chief at Breitbart, a conservative blog who's readership also overlaps with reddit users who visit the donald, and other white supremacist blogs and subreddits. The content provided at Breitbart is the internet's dog whistle call for all white supremacists in the US to congregate in their echo chamber.

  12. #132
    Quote Originally Posted by Reverb256 View Post
    Do you think that people need to be bigots in order to be concerned about literal threats by ISIS to send fighters as refugees?
    There's a "reply" button you can use.

    Everyone is a bigot about something. I think that if someone supposedly supports freedom, then they should support it for others, as well. Nationalism is an anti-freedom stance. It restricts the free markets, it restricts individual freedoms. That is the stance that they are taking, which is more authoritarian than it was in previous years.

  13. #133
    Quote Originally Posted by Machismo View Post
    So, are you unwilling to discuss anything that was actually mentioned in the article?
    So this is some victory for the Left? This is how they deflect from their association with groups like Antifa? By painting Milo as some anointed champion of the Right, and then taking him down? I think the majority of people on the Right think Milo is a tool, so what has really been gained here?

  14. #134
    Quote Originally Posted by Machismo View Post
    Considering they are the ones who broke the story, and are the initial source, that's not an option. One would think it would be better to discuss the actual information, and if they can refute it, great. So far, they haven't tried to refute it.
    If Buzzfeed is the only source, then I would assume it's a false story until it can be verified. So again. No discussion is possible.

  15. #135
    The Insane Daelak's Avatar
    15+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Nashville, TN
    Posts
    15,964
    Quote Originally Posted by Reverb256 View Post
    Do you think that people need to be bigots in order to be concerned about literal threats by ISIS to send fighters as refugees?

    Yeah, Breitbart is nationalistic but I don't see any ETHNO-nationalism peddled by it. Prove me wrong.

    Ethno-nationalism cannot work for North America, and is not desired by any real nationalists.

    There's nothing wrong with non-ethno-nationalism in our context.

    Also, nobody contests that there is nothing wrong with ethno-nationalism if you are Japanese or Israeli, interestingly enough.
    Yes, because we already have an incredibly robust intelligence apparatus that can identify unsavory, dangerous people that want to emigrate here.

    There is plenty of ethno-nationalism peddled by Breitbart, through the use of dog whistles and carrying the banner of Obama illegitimacy and birther conspiracy for years. The readership overlaps with users who frequent subreddits catered to white nationalists and white supremacists. The language of the Trump campaign dog whistled to whites in rural rust belt counties, where white populations were in excess of 85%.

  16. #136
    Quote Originally Posted by Direpenguin View Post
    So this is some victory for the Left? This is how they deflect from their association with groups like Antifa? By painting Milo as some anointed champion of the Right, and then taking him down? I think the majority of people on the Right think Milo is a tool, so what has really been gained here?
    You are the one trying to deflect, I do love the irony.

    As for me, I don't support Antifa in any way... so that narrative just fell apart.

    It's a victory for anyone who has been saying that Breitbart and Milo are disingenuous asshats, who have been pushing the bullshit agenda of white nationalists.

  17. #137
    How does nationalism conflict with individual freedoms? Do you only have a problem with borders?

    Would you like to abolish nations altogether and subject everyone in the world to a one-size-fits-all authoritarian, unaccountable, corporate system of governance?

    Because that's what you get if you abolish nations.
    Last edited by Reverb256; 2017-10-06 at 02:59 PM.

  18. #138
    Quote Originally Posted by Ragedaug View Post
    If Buzzfeed is the only source, then I would assume it's a false story until it can be verified. So again. No discussion is possible.
    So, the goal is to disregard the source, and ignore the information. Thanks for proving my point.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Reverb256 View Post
    How does nationalism conflict with individual freedoms? Do you only have a problem with borders?

    Would you like to abolish nations altogether and subject everyone in the world to a one-size-fits-all authoritarian, unaccountable, corporate system of governance?

    Because that's what you get if you abolish nations.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Oh okay, so white people are inherently bad now?
    The point of nationalism is to restrict free markets and free movement...

    As for your comment "Oh okay, so white people are inherently bad now?" I never said that, you are simply trying to argue something I never said. You seem to do that a lot. Oh well, you really do like to deflect.

    Are you unwilling to talk about the material within the article?

    Use the "reply" or "reply with quote" buttons, please.

  19. #139
    Oh okay, so white people are inherently bad now? That's what the cancerous ideology of neomarxism wants everyone to believe, the ignorant racist stereotype that white people think they're better than everyone else.

    White people should be encouraged to have a clear conscience -- and flaunt it -- in the face of these blatant lies.

    Manipulators hate it when you have a clear conscience; it makes you more difficult to control.

    You are so naive to want borders gone, it's unbelievable. You must be oblivious to the fact that malice/evil exists in this world and decent people need to be protected from it. The environment we're used to (where people are generally civil due to shared expectations of such) does not exist everywhere in the world. How do you propose to protect people from a nation-state that wants to invade and kill them without any border control? This is why anarchism with no pragmatism is idealistic and Utopian; foolish ignorance of Human nature.
    Last edited by Reverb256; 2017-10-06 at 03:06 PM.

  20. #140
    The Insane Daelak's Avatar
    15+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Nashville, TN
    Posts
    15,964
    Quote Originally Posted by Reverb256 View Post
    How does nationalism conflict with individual freedoms? Do you only have a problem with borders?

    Would you like to abolish nations altogether and subject everyone in the world to a one-size-fits-all authoritarian, unaccountable, corporate system of governance?

    Because that's what you get if you abolish nations.
    Because in a nationalist state, if you do not meet the subjective definition of a person that is considered a nationalist, you will be scapegoated, targeted, detained, processed, and eliminated. This definition can change with the course of who the nationalist leaders are in order to consolidate power and silence dissidents.

    No one would be subjects in a hypothetical borderless world with a democratically elected system of governance that more likely than not be operated through AI or ASI. It is the next step in complex societal hierarchy that has stemmed from hunter gatherer villages.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •