Page 9 of 11 FirstFirst ...
7
8
9
10
11
LastLast
  1. #161
    The Undying Breccia's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    NY, USA
    Posts
    39,907
    Quote Originally Posted by Mihalik View Post
    What usually happens is that there's some statistic or article speech or something where they go like "US becoming more diverse and that is a good thing", then the brownshirts and the hwhites with "economic concerns" take that and run with it to "Look! The Dems want to exterminatus the hwhite race!".
    Well then it's a good thing @tehdang is such a genuine poster and crtiical thinker that he'd never do that. He'd post something that's exactly what he says it is -- a Democrat actually saying white replacement is good. He would neeeeeeeeeeeeeever attempt to back down on things he actually wrote by moving the goalposts, no siree.

    Just you wait. Backing for his claims will be here any minute.

  2. #162
    I'm afraid my last post was infracted, and while I do enjoy hearty arguments on these subjects, I do think the subject of associating conventional right-wing political personalities with white supremacist shooters borders on trolling and baiting at its core. Passions are high. Certain otherizing of disfavored groups, and refusal to come to grips with the scope and magnitude of assertions are somewhat expected. I don't think responses and full consideration of the content of posts favors a future free and open conversation. It's with regrets that I have to suspend this line of thought for now, but perhaps in the future it can be resumed, with some guardrails. Any disagreements can be made in PM.

    The sadness is that it matters to politics as it's a subject of current Democratic party pushes on censorship, not to mention hoping for political gains by smearing political opponents with the evil that was perpetrated.
    "I wish it need not have happened in my time." "So do all who live to see such times. But that is not for them to decide. All we have to decide is what to do with the time that is given us."

  3. #163
    Quote Originally Posted by tehdang View Post
    I'm afraid my last post was infracted, and while I do enjoy hearty arguments on these subjects, I do think the subject of associating conventional right-wing political personalities with white supremacist shooters borders on trolling and baiting at its core. Passions are high. Certain otherizing of disfavored groups, and refusal to come to grips with the scope and magnitude of assertions are somewhat expected. I don't think responses and full consideration of the content of posts favors a future free and open conversation. It's with regrets that I have to suspend this line of thought for now, but perhaps in the future it can be resumed, with some guardrails. Any disagreements can be made in PM.

    The sadness is that it matters to politics as it's a subject of current Democratic party pushes on censorship, not to mention hoping for political gains by smearing political opponents with the evil that was perpetrated.
    Fucking hysterical.

    Conservative victimhood in the face of being shown just how awful it is is a core to the platform.

  4. #164
    I Don't Work Here Endus's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Ottawa, ON
    Posts
    78,900
    Quote Originally Posted by tehdang View Post
    I'm afraid my last post was infracted, and while I do enjoy hearty arguments on these subjects, I do think the subject of associating conventional right-wing political personalities with white supremacist shooters borders on trolling and baiting at its core.
    Not when those "conventional right-wing political personalities" are pushing the exact same rhetoric that inspired the shooter.

    There's a legal term for that.

    It's called "incitement".

    What Tucker Carlson's been doing is pretty easily comparable to, say, what Charles Manson did with his followers; he identified targets and laid out the justification for the use of violence against them, and then kept his hands clean while his followers took action on his behalf. He worked the same defense at court you are trying to make for these figures, and Manson's arguments failed.

    The chief difference is that Manson was speaking to 100 closely connected people, whereas Tucker Carlson talks to millions of disconnected people. Which, really, isn't that meaningful a distinction; it's a semantic detail in the kind of incitement and stochastic terrorism, not an argument that one should be allowed to continue without legal consequence.

    Certain otherizing of disfavored groups, and refusal to come to grips with the scope and magnitude of assertions are somewhat expected.
    The only people being "othered" here by the rest of us are violent bigots who either are actively, or support (whether passively or actively) the attacking of innocent people. Every single pro-lifer, for instance, supports violence against women. Every single last one of them. You can't tear away women's basic human rights without that action being violence.

    And the "othering" is just a recognition of exactly what those abusive, sadistic assholes are actually doing or supporting being done. That's it. Just clarity on the facts.

    You're projecting the malice of those in those groups. Not making an actual case based on reality.

    I don't think responses and full consideration of the content of posts favors a future free and open conversation
    Good. No one wants an "open conversation" with people who support violent white supremacist terrorism and mass murders. Your views are execrable and violent and abusive and cruel, for no purpose but that violent cruelty.

    Nobody wants a "conversation" with people like that, because they're not people anyone wants anything to do with. And you're not entitled to any conversation. At all. With anyone.

    It's with regrets that I have to suspend this line of thought for now, but perhaps in the future it can be resumed, with some guardrails. Any disagreements can be made in PM.
    Or I can take you to task for this abominable misrepresentation of the truth right here in public, thanks. I've got nothing to hide.

    The sadness is that it matters to politics as it's a subject of current Democratic party pushes on censorship, not to mention hoping for political gains by smearing political opponents with the evil that was perpetrated.
    There we go, evil "censorship" bullshit, again. Again; if you don't support child pornography being openly displayed in public and broadcast to everyone, including children, then you too support "censorship" and know why your own argument is dishonest.

    As for the "smearing"; it's not a smear if it's the truth. If you're a white supremacist and/or white nationalist (a Venn diagram that's a circle, if we're honest), then you're supportive of this kind of evil. You're why this kind of thing happens. Your politics, your ideology, your worldview.

    And that is an argument that applies to nearly all Republican leaders today, and a lot of talking heads like, very blatantly, Tucker Carlson.

    But hey, if you won't take it from me or anyone else on my "side", because of blind partisanship, how about Liz Cheney? https://twitter.com/Liz_Cheney/statu...59124840558592

    You're not the victim, here. You said a lot of truly awful things and need to take some personal responsibility for that abusive conduct towards other posters here.


  5. #165
    Quote Originally Posted by tehdang View Post
    I do think the subject of associating conventional right-wing political personalities with white supremacist shooters borders on trolling and baiting at its core.
    Yeah man, except when those political personalities are literally repeating the same rhetoric from extreme-right ring circles to the largest TV audience, while consistently lying (like outright, abject lies without any attempt to fact-check using internal Fox resources that exist, and that had previously been telling their teams when they were pulling material sourced from neo-nazi boards which was ignored by said team) and framing everything in apocalyptic, combative terms.

    Then we can look at the mirroring language and say that, while maybe Tucker Carlson, for example, wasn't the inspiration for said shooters: They're both drawing from a lot of the same "intellectual" wells.

    Quote Originally Posted by tehdang View Post
    Passions are high.
    Generally happens at the point where we have difficulty keeping count of the number of avoidable mass-shootings in this country, especially when more than one have stemmed from a particular political ideology.

    Quote Originally Posted by tehdang View Post
    The sadness is that it matters to politics as it's a subject of current Democratic party pushes on censorship
    Are you trying to tie violating the rules and getting a slap on the wrist in these forums to "Democratic censorship"? For reals?

    Quote Originally Posted by tehdang View Post
    not to mention hoping for political gains by smearing political opponents with the evil that was perpetrated.
    This thread was started about series of articles posted before the mass shooting. We're just connecting the obvious dots to tie it to a current event.

    No amount of polite phrasing changes what your fundamental arguments are.

  6. #166
    Quote Originally Posted by Vegas82 View Post
    When a racist like the Buffalo shooter paraphrases Tucker’s monologues it’s not so much connecting dots as calling the sky blue.
    I'll argue whether or not he heard of this stuff on Tucker. It's very likely he did. But it's also likely he heard about the "great replacement" conspiracy theory on neo-nazi boards or far-right telegram chats.

    I'm trying to say it doesn't matter. Tucker Carlson and a racist neo-nazi are repeating the exact same rhetoric at the end of the day.

    Which I guess for some folks is still difficult to connect those two dots, even when it's come with a TLDR and an extensive guide on how to connect two dots based on hundreds of previous examples of connecting two dots.

  7. #167
    Quote Originally Posted by Edge- View Post
    Generally happens at the point where we have difficulty keeping count of the number of avoidable mass-shootings in this country, especially when more than one have stemmed from a particular political ideology.
    Thanks for the confirmation.

    Are you trying to tie violating the rules and getting a slap on the wrist in these forums to "Democratic censorship"? For reals?
    "Democratic party" as in why I think it still deserves discussion at some point.

    We're just connecting the obvious dots to tie it to a current event.
    I'm aware of what you're all claiming to do. My disagreements were stated and can be re-read at any time, as is my post explaining my reasons for suspending it now.
    "I wish it need not have happened in my time." "So do all who live to see such times. But that is not for them to decide. All we have to decide is what to do with the time that is given us."

  8. #168
    Quote Originally Posted by tehdang View Post
    I'm afraid my last post was infracted, and while I do enjoy hearty arguments on these subjects, I do think the subject of associating conventional right-wing political personalities with white supremacist shooters borders on trolling and baiting at its core. Passions are high. Certain otherizing of disfavored groups, and refusal to come to grips with the scope and magnitude of assertions are somewhat expected. I don't think responses and full consideration of the content of posts favors a future free and open conversation. It's with regrets that I have to suspend this line of thought for now, but perhaps in the future it can be resumed, with some guardrails. Any disagreements can be made in PM.

    The sadness is that it matters to politics as it's a subject of current Democratic party pushes on censorship, not to mention hoping for political gains by smearing political opponents with the evil that was perpetrated.
    Republicans are kind of open about their allegiances. MGT is open she fully supports the Q movement and people like her are the ones getting elected.

    That being said, I kind of agree with you. Democrats don't really push for dangerous ideas like at a leadership level but you can see exactly what type of policies and stuff they are pursuing. Remember defund the police? That entire campaign was really stupid and resulted in an increase in crime that still persists and now their proponents ,entirely unaware of the implications of what they actually proposed, were forced to roll it back

    Which kinda sours me on a lot of the progressive movement. They are so incredibly wealthy that they don't really put a second thought on the policies they push (which don't really affect them) and have to be forced to roll it back when the consequences inevitably hit. When you live in a rich neighborhood that doesn't have any crime as is you don't really care if the police check on you since you are already paying for private security lol

    There are a bunch of similar policies you can pin point but the whole defund the police one is funny and sad to me.
    Last edited by NED funded; 2022-05-17 at 02:23 AM.

  9. #169
    I Don't Work Here Endus's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Ottawa, ON
    Posts
    78,900
    Quote Originally Posted by tehdang View Post
    Thanks for the confirmation.
    Funny how a mass murder of innocents by a white supremacist might get people a little emotional.

    It's almost like the rest of us have something called "basic human empathy".

    "Democratic party" as in why I think it still deserves discussion at some point.
    It doesn't The bleating about "censorship" from the same folks who lost their collective shits about the Dixie Chicks daring to say they didn't like Bush, or Kathy Griffin doing a gross photoshoot, is just obvious bad-faith garbage.

    Everyone supports censorship. Literally everyone.

    You just don't want violent white supremacists to be censored; to have their messages of white supremacy and encouraging further violence shut down so that further innocents might not face future attacks.

    That's what you're opposing the censorship of. Not censorship as a concept. Because, I repeat; everyone supports censorship.

    I'm aware of what you're all claiming to do. My disagreements were stated and can be re-read at any time, as is my post explaining my reasons for suspending it now.
    Your "reasons" were bad-faith if not outright dishonest equivocations. They don't hold up. You're lying, and we know you're lying, and we've demonstrated that to everyone else following along already.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by NED funded View Post
    That being said, I kind of agree with you. Democrats don't really push for dangerous ideas like at a leadership level but you can see exactly what type of policies and stuff they are pursuing. Remember defund the police? That entire campaign was really stupid and resulted in an increase in crime that still persists and now their proponents ,entirely unaware of the implications of what they actually proposed, were forced to roll it back
    There's literally no correlation, there. Crime rates have shifted regardless of whether a particular municipality engaged in any "defunding" of police, because there isn't a correlation between the two. Stop pushing blatant disinformation.

    https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/...ay/9054639002/
    https://www.motherjones.com/crime-ju...ng-the-police/
    https://www.salon.com/2021/02/01/did...certainly-not/

    Don't parrot counterfactual propaganda bullshit and pretend you're a moderate.


  10. #170
    Quote Originally Posted by Endus View Post
    There's literally no correlation, there. Crime rates have shifted regardless of whether a particular municipality engaged in any "defunding" of police, because there isn't a correlation between the two. Stop pushing blatant disinformation.

    https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/...ay/9054639002/
    https://www.motherjones.com/crime-ju...ng-the-police/
    https://www.salon.com/2021/02/01/did...certainly-not/

    Don't parrot counterfactual propaganda bullshit and pretend you're a moderate.
    This is not blatant disinformation. This is literally the self admitted failure of the mayors of those cities that have now been forced to reinstitute those budgets

    Defund the police was the extremist movement. It wasn't pushed by mainstream democrats who just sat quietly while they let it happen and in fact they pushed back against it on the national level. Sorry but if you support defund the police you are the extremist and unhinged individual.

  11. #171
    Quote Originally Posted by NED funded View Post
    This is not blatant disinformation. This is literally the self admitted failure of the mayors of those cities that have now been forced to reinstitute those budgets

    Defund the police was the extremist movement. It wasn't pushed by mainstream democrats who just sat quietly while they let it happen and in fact they pushed back against it on the national level. Sorry but if you support defund the police you are the extremist and unhinged individual.
    Should be easy for you to provide examples then.

  12. #172
    The Undying Breccia's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    NY, USA
    Posts
    39,907
    Quote Originally Posted by tehdang View Post
    "Democratic party" as in--
    *ahem*

    Quote Originally Posted by tehdang View Post
    It's with regrets that I have to suspend this line of thought for now, but perhaps in the future it can be resumed, with some guardrails.
    By the way, you're the only one tying a man quoting Carlson, driving to a black neighborhood, firing wildly into the crowd yelling the N-word with the Democratic party.

    For which, despite being challenged on multiple fronts, you have not yet once even attempted to defend. You said some other guy said racism some other time. That's not a defense.

    There is a much easier way to not defend something, then to publicly and repeatedly announce you have no defense. It's to simply not bother trying. Your "both sides" argument has failed in every single way. Give up.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by NED funded View Post
    Sorry but if you support defund the police you are the extremist and unhinged individual.
    Hmm, I'm having trouble remembering, was the "defund the police" movement a call to completely defund all police departments in all places for no reason? Or was it something more targeted, something more specific?

    Maybe you remember? Be honest. If you can't remember, maybe you shouldn't use it as a talking point?

  13. #173
    I Don't Work Here Endus's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Ottawa, ON
    Posts
    78,900
    Quote Originally Posted by NED funded View Post
    This is not blatant disinformation. This is literally the self admitted failure of the mayors of those cities that have now been forced to reinstitute those budgets
    That's a lie.

    The point made there is that there is no correlation whatsover between any defund the police programs and any increase in crime rates.

    You claimed there was, and there is no such correlation. That's a very fundamental lie about some very basic facts.

    Defund the police was the extremist movement.
    Ironically, thinking Defund the Police was "extremist" is, itself, an extremist view.

    It's literally just the idea that police departments have had too many additional responsibilities added onto their docket, like mental health calls and social work, and those responsibilities should be handed back off to professionals in fields better associated with said issues, and leaving police to handle criminal justice duties alone.

    If you think that's "extremist", then you're the extremist.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defund_the_police
    https://www.brookings.edu/blog/fixgo...it-have-merit/
    https://www.brookings.edu/blog/how-w...lice-debunked/


    So again; you're just lying about basic facts, to push an extremist disinformation campaign.
    Last edited by Endus; 2022-05-17 at 03:51 AM.


  14. #174
    Quote Originally Posted by tehdang View Post
    I'm afraid my last post was infracted, and while I do enjoy hearty arguments on these subjects, I do think the subject of associating conventional right-wing political personalities with white supremacist shooters borders on trolling and baiting at its core.
    "Conservatism and white supremacists have no connections whatsoever" Are you kidding? What reality do you live in? You living in your own little world would be the only explanation to not understand right wing terrorism happens far more often than any other in America and that it links back heavily to Republicans and their rhetoric. It's astonishing how much you're willing to ignore.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by NED funded View Post
    Remember defund the police? That entire campaign was really stupid and resulted in an increase in crime that still persists and now their proponents ,entirely unaware of the implications of what they actually proposed, were forced to roll it back
    The thing that didn't really happen somehow increased crime?

    Dontrike/Shadow Priest/Black Cell Faction Friend Code - 5172-0967-3866

  15. #175
    The Undying Breccia's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    NY, USA
    Posts
    39,907
    The racist 'replacement theory' tied to the Buffalo shootings has increasingly become a right wing media rallying call

    Notice the article/headine doesn't say "but some other guy said racism some other time so both sides".

    The conspiracy theory, which has roots in France and also targets Jewish people, has become a common far-right ideology and has been connected to multiple mass shootings carried out by white supremacists, including the 2018 Pittsburgh synagogue shooting, 2019 mosque shootings in Christchurch, New Zealand, and the 2019 shooting at a Walmart in El Paso, Texas.

    Although the Buffalo attack is still under investigation, the references to replacement theory in the document and its echoes in right wing media show how a racist and anti-Semitic conspiracy has been mainstreamed. Its central ideas are now promoted not just by violent extremists, but by right wing media personalities like Fox News host Tucker Carlson.

    "I mean, this is really ugly stuff, and it's really extremely similar to what is in this guy's manifest," said Matt Gertz, a senior fellow at Media Matters for America, a nonprofit media watchdog that has tracked the spread of replacement theory on Fox News.
    Link to Media Matters.

    A nationwide study from The Associated Press-NORC Center released this month found that people who supported ideas central to the white supremacist conspiracy theory were far more likely to be viewers of Fox News and the far-right networks OANN and Newsmax than other news outlets.
    Link to AP study.

    According to a recent investigation by The New York Times, Carlson amplified the theory during more than 400 episodes of his Fox News show, "Tucker Carlson Tonight," which was the second-highest rated cable news show in the US in the first quarter of this year, according to Adweek.
    Link to the NYTimes.

    If anyone is reading this who still wants to try "but some other person said racism some other time" they're more than welcome to find sources to back them up at least as good as those three I cited and linked. Failure to do so means your lack of defense can be summarily handwaved, and that you give permission to do so.

  16. #176
    The Undying Cthulhu 2020's Avatar
    15+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Rigging your election
    Posts
    36,799
    Quote Originally Posted by tehdang View Post
    Save your Trump diatribes for a Trump topic.

    Read the context of somehow racism is a conservative concern.

    Self identifies as a leftist and goes on to critique leftists as a leftist. Where leftists go wrong.
    The biggest way to identity a conservative masquerading as a liberal is if they use the word "leftist". Leftist is almost exclusively used among conservative circles and in conservative propaganda. Nobody on the left actually uses the word seriously, and only says it to quote neo nazis or serve some other explanation of their activities. Anyone who unironically identifies as "leftist" is lying. Because it's a pejorative that conservatives use.

    I realize they think they're being clever by doing this, but they're really not.
    2014 Gamergate: "If you want games without hyper sexualized female characters and representation, then learn to code!"
    2023: "What's with all these massively successful games with ugly (realistic) women? How could this have happened?!"

  17. #177
    Quote Originally Posted by Cthulhu 2020 View Post
    Anyone who unironically identifies as "leftist" is lying. Because it's a pejorative that conservatives use.
    I've always found it a bit strange that "leftist" is such a common thing to hear, and yet no one says "rightist."

  18. #178
    Over 9000! Santti's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Finland
    Posts
    9,112
    Quote Originally Posted by Cthulhu 2020 View Post
    Anyone who unironically identifies as "leftist" is lying. Because it's a pejorative that conservatives use.
    Ehhhh, I don't really see it as a pejorative. It's a simple word for "left-leaning". I know conservatives use it like it's an insult, which just makes it more funny than anything else. It's just another word for communist for them, making it all the more hilarious.

    Granted, I'm not entirely sure I've seen people use that word to describe themselves, specifically (myself included). Not something I've made a mental note of. But I could see people do that to give a very rough indication on where they stand, politically.
    Last edited by Santti; 2022-05-17 at 08:17 AM.
    Quote Originally Posted by SpaghettiMonk View Post
    And again, let’s presume equity in schools is achievable. Then why should a parent read to a child?

  19. #179
    The Undying Cthulhu 2020's Avatar
    15+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Rigging your election
    Posts
    36,799
    Quote Originally Posted by Santti View Post
    Ehhhh, I don't really see it as a pejorative. It's a simple word for "left-leaning". I know conservatives use it like it's an insult, which just makes it more funny than anything else. It's just another word for communist for them, making it all the more hilarious.

    Granted, I'm not entirely sure I've seen people use that word to describe themselves, specifically (myself included). Not something I've made a mental note of. But I could see people do that to give a very rough indication on where they stand, politically.
    I'm more pointing out that every time someone self-identifies as a "Leftist" it's a conservative masquerading. And it seems to hold up for this guy as well.
    2014 Gamergate: "If you want games without hyper sexualized female characters and representation, then learn to code!"
    2023: "What's with all these massively successful games with ugly (realistic) women? How could this have happened?!"

  20. #180
    Quote Originally Posted by Bakis View Post
    Not sure what your point is. Look at incarceration not to mention the very constitution of the US is based upon. Women being merely citizens and black not even considered citizens at all.
    UK had a Jim Crow era for example?

    The whole US system is white.
    The foundation is all white with to various degrees sincere attemps via amendments to go in another direction.

    Edit: just to make it clear, UK, France, Sweden, Hungary, every country suffer from racism in one form or another. My point was that the US system is built to and modified to keep it so as far as being justifiable. I mean it hardly a coinsident that "suddenly" *cough* there is a mass effort of rewriting electoral maps in order to limit people of color to vote..
    I'd think the most crucial difference is the level of violence. Many places in Europe are extremely racist and xenophobic but overt violence against minorities is just not nearly as common.

Posting Permissions

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