Here's a friendly tip; Nazis winning elections does not make them not-Nazis, nor does it make their views acceptable or defensible.
Using Nazis to make the point given an example we can (hopefully) agree is malicious in its goals.
It's you using a blatant appeal to popularity to avoid having to justify your views rhetorically. It's dishonest pablum, and thus meaningless.
We believe they're few in number relative to the rest of the country and even other Republicans because we've looked at the data, while you're talking about feelings. Trump and FOX are really great at the illusion of broad support, but illusions didn't save him in 2020, either.
Conservatism consists of exactly one proposition, to wit: There must be in-groups whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect. There is nothing more or else to it, and there never has been, in any place or time. --Frank Wilhoit
He lost, and his numbers are smaller now--maga Republicans are about 10-15% of the population, and in point of fact, I actually see Trump as the inevitable result of decades of race-baiting, fear-mongering, transparent lies, and dog-whistled white nationalism (you all must be so relieved and excited that you don't have to bother keeping it on the DL anymore), so your mind reading skills are bad, too. As Endus points out, even popularity doesn't justify or excuse authoritarianism.
Last edited by Levelfive; 2022-09-04 at 08:59 PM. Reason: typo
Conservatism consists of exactly one proposition, to wit: There must be in-groups whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect. There is nothing more or else to it, and there never has been, in any place or time. --Frank Wilhoit
"Trump's moderate" HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
I see someone stopped taking their medication. It's the only way one would think he's a "herald."
"Guys, you should give the Nazis a seat, else they'll just take a seat anyways." Well that's stupid.
Dontrike/Shadow Priest/Black Cell Faction Friend Code - 5172-0967-3866
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?!"
Hillary Clinton warned us that the "basket of deplorables" were a threat to American democracy. She was simply offering a reasonable analysis based on the available evidence — and she paid an enormous political price for daring to tell that truth in public.
Not in regards to Clinton but that stuck out to me, cos truth is exactly what the public is not given. At least not an incentive to be given or accepted.
The polarization will be such a weight on the US and given time more than likely be its downfall in certain important aspects outside military and economic power.
Try throwing around governing transparency, freedom of press, rule of law among others even today and its met by laughter.
But soon after Mr Xi secured a third term, Apple released a new version of the feature in China, limiting its scope. Now Chinese users of iPhones and other Apple devices are restricted to a 10-minute window when receiving files from people who are not listed as a contact. After 10 minutes, users can only receive files from contacts.
Apple did not explain why the update was first introduced in China, but over the years, the tech giant has been criticised for appeasing Beijing.
Conservatism consists of exactly one proposition, to wit: There must be in-groups whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect. There is nothing more or else to it, and there never has been, in any place or time. --Frank Wilhoit
A good question.
I would say: talk to them - and find common links; and try to ensure that they aren't left behind (economically and socially).
Calling people 'deplorables' is rarely a good strategy, regardless of the truth. Some, as Barbara Walters in her Civil War-book say that regulating social media platforms is part of the solution - but I'm doubtful as it heavily relies on the "the good guys" being in control.
If we're talking on the national scale, that's the approach Neville Chamberlain pushed for with appeasement.
Ask France how that worked out for everyone.
Why? Because the deplorables might get angry enough to get violent?Calling people 'deplorables' is rarely a good strategy, regardless of the truth.
If it's because it bothers them, their positions involve far more abusive attacks on innocents, so they can put up with being correctly and properly described until they voluntarily stop being abusive dickweeds to innocent people. You seem to be ignoring that this is all a response to pre-existing malicious conduct and abuse by these individuals. Calling them "deplorable" isn't firing the first rhetorical shot.
And if you've tried this and they've dug their heels in and refused to engage in the same good faith?
Is it alright to call a spade a spade at that point? Or should we continue to be worried that calling a spade a spade will result in the spade getting violently angry because they were called a spade?
We didn't just start from: "Everything is normal and everyone is nice." and skip straight to, "Roughly half of Trump's supporters are a basket of deplorables.". There's a ton of things that happened between those two moments over the decades. This wasn't some sudden heel-turn by MAGA Republicans, it was a decades-long process that arguably began as early as the Nixon/Agnew days.
Also, this isn't a case where someone's kindly Republican grandma is being labelled a "deplorable" out of nowhere.
Gramma has been bitching about why she can't get a "nice white waiter who understands English", she's shunned and disowned her granddaughter for coming out as trans, and she's been bemoaning that there's no one in the younger generation willing to take up granddad's Klan hood like a good white patriot.
Deplorables are earning the moniker through their actual actions. Like you said; we aren't starting from zero and the label's coming out of nowhere. It's being applied as a reaction to years, often decades of abuse and hate perpetrated by those being so labelled.
The idea that being correctly identified as a bad person is somehow "worse" than the horrendous acts they've been committing is just fucking ridiculous.
Wrong. I wasn't talking about appeasement, but about finding common ground.
Added: and you missed the other parts. Germany paid a heavy price for WWI; changing that may have averted WWII - but it was too late when Neville Chamberlain got into power. The Marshall plan showed a better way after WWII.
- - - Updated - - -
You see if you have missed anything, and re-asses and try again.
You should be working towards winning, not futile symbolic victories.
Hillary Clinton allegedly claims that using the phrase helped her lose and Trump win. Do you question her analysis?
Last edited by Forogil; 2022-09-06 at 08:38 PM.