Politics thread (USA Elections 2016) - Page 250

if you accept the multiverse theory, baal's statement could be logically correct.

On July 14 2020 20:37 CurbStomp wrote: I wouldn't trust the polls on these kind of touchy subjects. When you say you don't support BLM bad things may happen. If i lived in the US and got a call saying if I support BLM I would probably say yes to protect myself and my family. Seeing how saying "all lives matter" can get you shot, I don't think this is unreasonable position.

So you're saying you would say no, because... that phone call could be monitored by black people and they are going to storm in your house and shoot you in the head for saying you don't support BLM? Would that be before or after taking your medication for paranoid schizophrenia?

All 3 polls were conducted online by the way.

On July 14 2020 18:00 Loco wrote: Show nested quote + On July 14 2020 07:03 Baalim wrote:   On July 14 2020 00:21 blackjacki2 wrote: I think it's pretty clear that extremists on both sides want to accelerate racial divisions towards a race war and the mainstream media wants it more than anyone so they can slurp up those juicy profits. The ironic thing is that these people marching us unconsciously into this Helter Skelter under good intentions while the extreme-right laugh their asses off seeing the left do what they never could archieve, they already built their thought police and pushed back race relations 5 decades... now they are probalby just waiting for Antifa to build the ovens lol. This is another example of you trusting your intuitions/the garbage you are fed on your social media feed instead of looking at the actual data. "Poll: Support for Black Lives Matter doubles since 2016" : https://thehill.com/homenews/news/502...-lives-matter-doubles-since-2016-poll Another poll: " The Black Lives Matter movement, which is back in the headlines amid the nationwide protests, receives wide support. Two-thirds of U.S. adults say they support the movement, with 38% saying they strongly support it." https://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2020/...-for-the-black-lives-matter-movement/ And yet another. " American public opinion can sometimes seem stubborn. Voters haven’t really changed their views on abortion in 50 years. Donald J. Trump’s approval rating among registered voters has fallen within a five-point range for just about every day of his presidency. But the Black Lives Matter movement has been an exception from the start. Public opinion on race and criminal justice issues has been steadily moving left since the first protests ignited over the fatal shootings of Trayvon Martin and Michael Brown. And since the death of George Floyd in police custody on May 25, public opinion on race, criminal justice and the Black Lives Matter movement has leaped leftward. Over the last two weeks, support for Black Lives Matter increased by nearly as much as it had over the previous two years, according to data from Civiqs, an online survey research firm. By a 28-point margin, Civiqs finds that a majority of American voters support the movement, up from a 17-point margin before the most recent wave of protests began. " https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2...hot/black-lives-matter-attitudes.html This is why you don't get your news from InfoWars pundits, people.

How is this a rebuttal to anythign I've said? Did I say that BLM support has gone down or something?

On July 14 2020 17:13 Loco wrote: Show nested quote + On July 14 2020 07:21 Baalim wrote: wtf were 20 images neccesary to post about some racist fox news witer? who cares ffs. Yes. For the people who are able to pay attention to them, they explain precisely why you have been sharing so much white supremacist propaganda and trivialized how much gains they have made at every opportunity as the culture war intensified, just like your neo-fascist mentor Molyneux, and his accelerationist, Grand Wizard of the KKK-supporting white nationalist mentor Murray Rothbard. As for Rothbard's mentor, Ludwig von Mises, I'll let him speak for himself: "It cannot be denied that Fascism and similar movements aiming at the establishment of dictatorships are full of the best intentions and that their intervention has, for the moment, saved European civilization. The merit that Fascism has thereby won for itself will live on eternally in history. But though its policy has brought salvation for the moment, it is not of the kind which could promise continued success." Those posts explain why you would use the word "racist" here and say "who cares", ironically. This guy right here was not just a racist, like some grandmother who thinks Mexicans are lazy and they have too many children. He felt too limited by the racist platform of Fox News, he had to take his work home, to the Internet's greatest fascist cesspool (8chan). Imagine being so full of hate that it's not enough for you to have your hateful views be broadcasted on the #1 most watched show in America, but you also have to spew that hatred online anonymously. This is the show that you are trying to trivialize: "During the second quarter of 2020, Tucker Carlson Tonight garnered an average audience of 4.33 million viewers, the largest for any program in the history of cable news." it is also a show that we know Trump adores and has shaped his decision making. It's not hard to imagine how outraged you would be if a show withthe largest audience for any program in the history of cable news had for its top writer someone on the authoritarian left who frequently posted about guillotines, gulags, killing all business owners, etc on an internet forum that cheers on people who go on shooting sprees to kill libertarian businessmen. We would be hearing about it for months to come. And if we were to add to that that they have a direct connection to the most powerful president in the world? You'd never get over it. But here, because it's a white supremacist, mysoginist incel, it's "who cares". That you care enough to trivialize it speaks for itself. The last Tweets are actually from a guy I know who is a right-wing libertarian and who went to fight in Rojava and who hasn't taken that tragic path that you have taken, but he highlights why so many of you do.   On July 14 2020 07:21 Baalim wrote: Always funny to see the far-right quote Huxley and Orwell as if they were on their side. It's not a real quote by the way, I have the book and it's not in there.

Did you see me posting 20 pictures when Bernie sander's campaign directors were recorded talking about communism and gulgas etc?

Dude nobody gives a shit about your "guilt by association" pseudo-arguments, It's unsettling that you haven't realized it, I suppose since these things perhaps work in your reddit leftie circles to cancel people you use them, but to normal people they mean nothing, and its quite a thing to do for someone who pushes the ideas of the worst mass murders in history.

On July 14 2020 21:19 Stroggoz wrote: if you accept the multiverse theory, baal's statement could be logically correct.

perhaps in this multiverse theres a universe where your ideas wouldn't end up in the deaths of millions.

Bet that black guy was no angel, who cares.

On July 15 2020 01:40 Baalim wrote: Did you see me posting 20 pictures when Bernie sander's campaign directors were recorded talking about communism and gulgas etc?

whataboutism + false equivalence fallacy

Why is it a false equivalence fallacy?

Because none of the things I've mentioned have their equivalent in the example you mentioned.

1) Bernie Sanders is not president. Trump is.
2) Bernie Sanders was not influenced by a couple Marxist-Leninists who did some canvassing for his campaign. Trump is influenced by Fox News greatly.
3) Tankies (State capitalist apologists) don't have the most popular show on cable news history. Quite the opposite, they are extremely marginalized in the US and hold no power.

Dude nobody gives a shit about your "guilt by association" pseudo-arguments, It's unsettling that you haven't realized it, I suppose since these things perhaps work in your reddit leftie circles to cancel people you use them, but to normal people they mean nothing, and its quite a thing to do for someone who pushes the ideas of the worst mass murders in history.

"Normal people don't care about your guilt by association arguments"

> Proceeds to make the worst form of a guilt by association argument by also lying about my associations, lol.

It's like a little family tree, you know? You come from a family of duplicitous criminals who advocated the worst of things and it's worth pointing out precisely because you have not denounced them, instead you trivialize their crimes or defend them. That's why it's a problem, and it's worth pointing to the history of your family. It's also enriching because it provides a bigger picture of the current culture war dynamics at play.

No one that I associate with has anything to do with the family tree that you pretend I belong to, you just make it up. I have your real "origin story" while you have a completely made up version. If you could actually read stuff that pertains to the real world maybe you could do that too and I could learn a thing or two from you. Not going to happen if you keep spending your time looking at memes and fascist propaganda on Twitter though.

On July 15 2020 01:33 Baalim wrote: Show nested quote + On July 14 2020 18:00 Loco wrote:   On July 14 2020 07:03 Baalim wrote:   On July 14 2020 00:21 blackjacki2 wrote: I think it's pretty clear that extremists on both sides want to accelerate racial divisions towards a race war and the mainstream media wants it more than anyone so they can slurp up those juicy profits. The ironic thing is that these people marching us unconsciously into this Helter Skelter under good intentions while the extreme-right laugh their asses off seeing the left do what they never could archieve, they already built their thought police and pushed back race relations 5 decades... now they are probalby just waiting for Antifa to build the ovens lol. This is another example of you trusting your intuitions/the garbage you are fed on your social media feed instead of looking at the actual data. "Poll: Support for Black Lives Matter doubles since 2016" : https://thehill.com/homenews/news/502...-lives-matter-doubles-since-2016-poll Another poll: " The Black Lives Matter movement, which is back in the headlines amid the nationwide protests, receives wide support. Two-thirds of U.S. adults say they support the movement, with 38% saying they strongly support it." https://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2020/...-for-the-black-lives-matter-movement/ And yet another. " American public opinion can sometimes seem stubborn. Voters haven’t really changed their views on abortion in 50 years. Donald J. Trump’s approval rating among registered voters has fallen within a five-point range for just about every day of his presidency. But the Black Lives Matter movement has been an exception from the start. Public opinion on race and criminal justice issues has been steadily moving left since the first protests ignited over the fatal shootings of Trayvon Martin and Michael Brown. And since the death of George Floyd in police custody on May 25, public opinion on race, criminal justice and the Black Lives Matter movement has leaped leftward. Over the last two weeks, support for Black Lives Matter increased by nearly as much as it had over the previous two years, according to data from Civiqs, an online survey research firm. By a 28-point margin, Civiqs finds that a majority of American voters support the movement, up from a 17-point margin before the most recent wave of protests began. " https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2...hot/black-lives-matter-attitudes.html This is why you don't get your news from InfoWars pundits, people. How is this a rebuttal to anythign I've said? Did I say that BLM support has gone down or something?

lol....

you said "the extreme-right laugh their asses off seeing the left do what they never could archieve, they already built their thought police and pushed back race relations 5 decades"

So, "the left", AKA BLM and their supporters, pushed back race relations 5 decades, doing the work of the far-right, which would be to destroy the gains they had made throughout those 5 decades, yes?

How can you simultaneously gain so much popular support by white people (and across the board) and at the same time having racial relations regress/deteriorate? The answer is... you can't. The majority of the people you will encounter, if you are black, are now more favourable than ever to your cause. When the race who is most systemically discriminated against has made such big gains, that is the definition of an improvement in race relations. Facts don't care about your feelings.

What metric are you using to make this ridiculous statement? Is the argument that the racists and fascists in the US are more infuriated now than ever, and that makes race relationships worse than before? rofl. That's the only alternative explanation, except that directly contradicts your statement that the extreme-right are laughing their asses off. Are they happy about the current situation or not? They can't simultaneously be happy that the left has destroyed race relations for them, and at the same time be upset that BLM has made great gains in the public eye.

Please give us some concrete evidence of this "race relations have just gone back 5 decades" narrative of yours. I can't be the only one who is very curious to see what you'll come up with. What is the logic and what is the data that you have?

I don't put a lot of weight into polls that are taken immediately after something emotionally triggering. It's like doing a poll on gun control after a shooting like Sandy Hook. You get more people in support of gun control then you get more gun nuts running to the gun stores to buy more guns before they get banned. In a few months the support for gun control mellows out and all you are left with is a bunch of gun nuts with a lot more guns.



Per the NYT article the data for this graph was provided by an online research firm called Civiqs. I went to Civiqs website to see if they had any newer data and you can already see regression in the trend from pretty much immediately where the graph cuts off:

On July 15 2020 04:14 Loco wrote: whataboutism + false equivalence fallacy Why is it a false equivalence fallacy? Because none of the things I've mentioned have their equivalent in the example you mentioned. 1) Bernie Sanders is not president. Trump is. 2) Bernie Sanders was not influenced by a couple Marxist-Leninists who did some canvassing for his campaign. Trump is influenced by Fox News greatly. 3) Tankies (State capitalist apologists) don't have the most popular show on cable news history. Quite the opposite, they are extremely marginalized in the US and hold no power.

They were running the campaign of a presidential candidate you supported, thats far more important than a writer in a TV show.
Insane heaps in your faulty logic, "writer of FoxNews write shit on 8Chan, Trump watches 8chan, ergo Trump was influenced by this person zomg"
No, they were just running the campaign of a man who had good odds of becoming the president, far more dangerous.

"Normal people don't care about your guilt by association arguments" > Proceeds to make the worst form of a guilt by association argument by also lying about my associations, lol. It's like a little family tree, you know? You come from a family of duplicitous criminals who advocated the worst of things and it's worth pointing out precisely because you have not denounced them, instead you trivialize their crimes or defend them. That's why it's a problem, and it's worth pointing to the history of your family. It's also enriching because it provides a bigger picture of the current culture war dynamics at play. No one that I associate with has anything to do with the family tree that you pretend I belong to, you just make it up. I have your real "origin story" while you have a completely made up version. If you could actually read stuff that pertains to the real world maybe you could do that too and I could learn a thing or two from you. Not going to happen if you keep spending your time looking at memes and fascist propaganda on Twitter though.

Denounce them? I've never praised these people and when I've done so (Stefan) you keep trying to bring him up every time you can, so you are lying.

You've praised murderous dictators multiple times, didn't you talk highly of Castro and talked about Chavez's honest face and all the good things he did? hypocritical piece of shit, how dare you ask others to denounce random people to pass your purity test.

On July 15 2020 04:44 Loco wrote: you said "the extreme-right laugh their asses off seeing the left do what they never could archieve, they already built their thought police and pushed back race relations 5 decades" So, "the left", AKA BLM and their supporters, pushed back race relations 5 decades, doing the work of the far-right, which would be to destroy the gains they had made throughout those 5 decades, yes? How can you simultaneously gain so much popular support by white people (and across the board) and at the same time having racial relations regress/deteriorate? The answer is... you can't. The majority of the people you will encounter, if you are black, are now more favourable than ever to your cause. When the race who is most systemically discriminated against has made such big gains, that is the definition of an improvement in race relations. Facts don't care about your feelings. What metric are you using to make this ridiculous statement?

The metric you are using to gauge race relations is support of BLM lol, I think it is a sign of polarization, the BLM and ALM sides wrog and each day more entrenched, both armies growing bigger isnt a sign of peace, but of war.

There are many metrics to use, hate crimes for example.

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2019/jul/30/us-hate-crime-rising-report
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2...e-crimes-2018-latinos-transgender-fbi

And this isnt counting all the violence in the protests that were race-driven.

Is the argument that the racists and fascists in the US are more infuriated now than ever, and that makes race relationships worse than before? rofl. That's the only alternative explanation, except that directly contradicts your statement that the extreme-right are laughing their asses off. Are they happy about the current situation or not? They can't simultaneously be happy that the left has destroyed race relations for them, and at the same time be upset that BLM has made great gains in the public eye.

The majority of the far-right people are not happy about it, but the more sophisticated ones, the more sophisticated ones are, there was a right-wing meme running around asking their ranks to not engage in counter-protests to BLM, but to sit back and enjoy the show as the looting and burning alienated people into their hands, so yes, you can bet your ass that people like Richard Spencer absolutely loved these protests, you'd have to be very gullible not to see it.

You believe that far-right movement is growing and is emboldedned, but at the same time you think race relations are at its best and progressivly improving, how is that possible when the evil Nazis are stronger than ever?

On July 14 2020 22:26 Loco wrote: Show nested quote + On July 14 2020 20:37 CurbStomp wrote: I wouldn't trust the polls on these kind of touchy subjects. When you say you don't support BLM bad things may happen. If i lived in the US and got a call saying if I support BLM I would probably say yes to protect myself and my family. Seeing how saying "all lives matter" can get you shot, I don't think this is unreasonable position. So you're saying you would say no, because... that phone call could be monitored by black people and they are going to storm in your house and shoot you in the head for saying you don't support BLM? Would that be before or after taking your medication for paranoid schizophrenia? All 3 polls were conducted online by the way.

I was thinking that the caller could be a BLM extremist and flips out and thinks I'm a fascist when I don't support such a violent group. You yourself are good example of an unstable lefty who sees fascists everywhere. Also, my schizophrenia is not the paranoid type.

On July 15 2020 17:06 CurbStomp wrote: Also, my schizophrenia is not the paranoid type.

Raeghar / Beast_BG is this you?

On July 15 2020 17:06 CurbStomp wrote: Show nested quote + On July 14 2020 22:26 Loco wrote:   On July 14 2020 20:37 CurbStomp wrote: I wouldn't trust the polls on these kind of touchy subjects. When you say you don't support BLM bad things may happen. If i lived in the US and got a call saying if I support BLM I would probably say yes to protect myself and my family. Seeing how saying "all lives matter" can get you shot, I don't think this is unreasonable position. So you're saying you would say no, because... that phone call could be monitored by black people and they are going to storm in your house and shoot you in the head for saying you don't support BLM? Would that be before or after taking your medication for paranoid schizophrenia? All 3 polls were conducted online by the way. I was thinking that the caller could be a BLM extremist and flips out and thinks I'm a fascist when I don't support such a violent group. You yourself are good example of an unstable lefty who sees fascists everywhere. Also, my schizophrenia is not the paranoid type.

Right, people working on polls so often choose that job knowing that they won't be able to do it because they couldn't tolerate to see certain results. And we see them engaging in violence all the time! Too bad those were all self-administered online surveys.

I live in Canada, I don't see them everywhere dude. Most people here are pretty moderate. I "see them everywhere" on Liquidpoker because they are here; their twitters and their talking points are shared. Even down to usernames, Mr. "curb stomp".

On July 15 2020 19:45 Baalim wrote: Show nested quote + On July 15 2020 17:06 CurbStomp wrote: Also, my schizophrenia is not the paranoid type. Raeghar / Beast_BG is this you?

I dont know these people.

On July 15 2020 06:21 blackjacki2 wrote: I don't put a lot of weight into polls that are taken immediately after something emotionally triggering. It's like doing a poll on gun control after a shooting like Sandy Hook. You get more people in support of gun control then you get more gun nuts running to the gun stores to buy more guns before they get banned. In a few months the support for gun control mellows out and all you are left with is a bunch of gun nuts with a lot more guns. Per the NYT article the data for this graph was provided by an online research firm called Civiqs. I went to Civiqs website to see if they had any newer data and you can already see regression in the trend from pretty much immediately where the graph cuts off

Yup, and does that regression of a couple points look like 5 decades of race relations progress being erased to you? You think this is something fascists are laughing about and celebrating right now?

On July 15 2020 07:14 Baalim wrote: They were running the campaign of a presidential candidate you supported, thats far more important than a writer in a TV show. Insane heaps in your faulty logic, "writer of FoxNews write shit on 8Chan, Trump watches 8chan, ergo Trump was influenced by this person zomg" No, they were just running the campaign of a man who had good odds of becoming the president, far more dangerous.

I understand that it's impossible for you to process this news properly since you agree with nearly 100% of what Tucker Carlson says on his news show. If I had your ideology I would also be in denial just like you are and attempt to trivialize it. Cognitive dissonance is very powerful.

No, one drunk guy talking about burning shit down and telling people they need to be armed (which you have no problem with) and another guy talking about how violence is likely to erupt and the crimes of the USSR were exaggerated by the US is not extremely damning for Bernie Sanders.Even if you found the most hardcore tankie canvassing for Bernie Sanders it would not matter, because he has a near 0% chance of being in a position of power.

When someone is directly influencing the country and fueling hatred, it's more important than a minority of people without power and without the possibility of influencing the country. Marxist-Leninists who did some canvassing for Bernie would not have been able to impact Bernie's policies, you think it's more important only because you paranoidly imagine that they could find themselves within his cabinet. This is unlike Trump, who's actually in power, and who's had white supremacists in his cabinet, like Bannon who served as White House Chief strategist.

Blake Neff was connected to literal fascists who openly advocated for the creation of ethnostates. He wasn't just being racist on the internet. And he was the chief writer for the most popular program in cable news history. There is no equivalence between that and some Bernie Sanders campaign bullshit here.

No, I'm not making a logical extrapolation, there is a ton of direct evidence that Trump is influenced by Fox news. His policies with regards to the Coronavirus and the strikes against Iran, and his BLM speeches were all things that were shaped by Fox News hosts including Carlson. For example:

Between the lines: Trump — or rather his speechwriter Stephen Miller — framed the president's opposition to the Black Lives Matter protest movement using the same imagery Carlson has been laying out night after night on Fox.

Trump vs. Carlson: Below are grabs from Carlson monologues over the past month, followed by quotes from Trump's July 3 speech.

Carlson: "For more than a month, mobs of violent crazy people have roamed this country, terrorizing citizens and destroying things."
Trump: "Angry mobs are trying to tear down statues of our Founders, deface our most sacred memorials, and unleash a wave of violent crime in our cities."
Carlson: "The education cartel, enforced on your children, enforces their demands."
Trump: "In our schools, our newsrooms, even our corporate boardrooms, there is a new far-left fascism that demands absolute allegiance."
Carlson: "Few people ever could have imagined that Teddy Roosevelt would be canceled. Roosevelt was the most popular president in American history."
Trump: "One of their political weapons is 'Cancel Culture.'" And in a separate part of the speech, "Theodore Roosevelt exemplified the unbridled confidence of our national culture and identity. ... The American people will never relinquish the bold, beautiful, and untamed spirit of Theodore Roosevelt."
Carlson: "For weeks we've asked, 'Who will stand up for this country?' And the answer we're learning is Americans. Americans will. It's up to them. Small groups of citizens are beginning to come forward to defend their laws, defend their history and their culture."
Trump: "They think the American people are weak and soft and submissive. But no, the American people are strong and proud, and they will not allow our country, and all of its values, history, and culture, to be taken from them."
Carlson: "The Cultural Revolution has come to the West."
Trump: "Make no mistake: This left-wing cultural revolution is designed to overthrow the American Revolution."

https://www.axios.com/donald-trump-tu...c279-9b53-47a2-bb92-b026f18cbffd.html

Denounce them? I've never praised these people and when I've done so (Stefan) you keep trying to bring him up every time you can, so you are lying. You've praised murderous dictators multiple times, didn't you talk highly of Castro and talked about Chavez's honest face and all the good things he did? hypocritical piece of shit, how dare you ask others to denounce random people to pass your purity test.

No, I never talked highly of Castro. I never talked highly of any authoritarian leader, but I did recognize that Chavez was the least bad out of them. I did the opposite of praising Chavez every single time you've brought it up in the last year, I've criticized him and said I did not support his ideology and his oppression of the anarchists. Same with Castro. I linked to articles that denounce them. Twice. There seems to be something wrong with you, you cannot process new information. It's not difficult to understand that I do not support people who would have oppressed me and thrown me in jail for being an anarchist.

You were the one who praised "the miracle of Pinochet's Chile", who advocated for a coup in Venezuela against a democratically elected president, who praised NAFTA despite its murderous impacts, who praised the decision to move troops away from Northern Syria knowing full well that a fascist dictator could resume his campaign of racial genocide as a result (which is still ongoing and is a complete joke to you), who claimed that the murderous fascist Bolsonaro is not nearly as dangerous as other left-wing leaders in Latin American, who supported a white supremacist organization in ICE, etc.

You have absolute contempt for the poor, which is why Chavez is a black and white figure to you, he is just a tyrant. When millions are lifted out of extreme poverty and they get educated, this means absolutely nothing to you, unless you can claim that capitalists are responsible for it. It always comes down to this. The existence of poor and marginalized people does not register in your brain, their opinions and their experiences do not matter the slightest bit, when they choose to elect someone democratically this has no meaning to you, it's always better to have a right-wing leader, preferably an extremely wealthy businessman to lead a country. Unless the poor are brainwashed enough to confirm your well-known existing biases, you will never talk about them.

You are the ultimate hypocrite, you claim to believe in liberty, but you don't believe in civil liberties for everyone. You don't respect life. Life has to serve the economy for you, the economy does not have to serve life. You believe in purchasing into life. Rights and privileges only for those who can afford them. This is the foundation of your ideology, which is inherently tyrannical. You have effectively turned an abstraction, a collective myth -- money -- into God. And God is just, he works in mysterious ways, and that allows you to sleep like a baby at night.

You don't denounce white supremacists because they are natural allies of Libertarianism and An-Caps, period. You have more in common than
not, and you both hate anti-capitalists more than anything else. They also provide you with some of your news and entertainment, the latter of which you live for, so of course you feel protective of them.

Between anarchists destroying property and wanting more equality and fascists killing minorities and trying to create ethnostates, you have a very easy choice. The one with the "best intentions" is always worse for you. It's preferable to have monsters in the open for you than "possible monsters who deceive with good intentions". Any move to the left is immediately assumed to be working towards authoritarian communism which is 100 times worse to you than neo-fascism/ethnostatism.

On July 15 2020 19:50 Loco wrote: Show nested quote + On July 15 2020 17:06 CurbStomp wrote:   On July 14 2020 22:26 Loco wrote:   On July 14 2020 20:37 CurbStomp wrote: I wouldn't trust the polls on these kind of touchy subjects. When you say you don't support BLM bad things may happen. If i lived in the US and got a call saying if I support BLM I would probably say yes to protect myself and my family. Seeing how saying "all lives matter" can get you shot, I don't think this is unreasonable position. So you're saying you would say no, because... that phone call could be monitored by black people and they are going to storm in your house and shoot you in the head for saying you don't support BLM? Would that be before or after taking your medication for paranoid schizophrenia? All 3 polls were conducted online by the way. I was thinking that the caller could be a BLM extremist and flips out and thinks I'm a fascist when I don't support such a violent group. You yourself are good example of an unstable lefty who sees fascists everywhere. Also, my schizophrenia is not the paranoid type. Right, people working on polls so often choose that job knowing that they won't be able to do it because they couldn't tolerate to see certain results. And we see them engaging in violence all the time! Too bad those were all self-administered online surveys. I live in Canada, I don't see them everywhere dude. Most people here are pretty moderate. I "see them everywhere" on Liquidpoker because they are here; their twitters and their talking points are shared. Even down to usernames, Mr. "curb stomp".

Dude you really think I'm far right 'cause i posted some gif? Living in Finland, enjoying all that this welfare state has to offer. All I have to do is say the word and I get pretty fair disability pension for life, I get free medication, free therapy, free education. Even if I murdered someone, I'd be out in 14 years while doing most of the time in a "open prison" (i don't know how to translate) where I could study, go to sauna 3 times a week and watch TV/play some console. These are achievements made possible by social democratic policies.

But because I don't want some fucking Iraqi rapists come here and take advantage of the generous system, I'm "far-right".

On July 15 2020 07:37 Baalim wrote: Show nested quote + On July 15 2020 04:44 Loco wrote: you said "the extreme-right laugh their asses off seeing the left do what they never could archieve, they already built their thought police and pushed back race relations 5 decades" So, "the left", AKA BLM and their supporters, pushed back race relations 5 decades, doing the work of the far-right, which would be to destroy the gains they had made throughout those 5 decades, yes? How can you simultaneously gain so much popular support by white people (and across the board) and at the same time having racial relations regress/deteriorate? The answer is... you can't. The majority of the people you will encounter, if you are black, are now more favourable than ever to your cause. When the race who is most systemically discriminated against has made such big gains, that is the definition of an improvement in race relations. Facts don't care about your feelings. What metric are you using to make this ridiculous statement? The metric you are using to gauge race relations is support of BLM lol, I think it is a sign of polarization, the BLM and ALM sides wrog and each day more entrenched, both armies growing bigger isnt a sign of peace, but of war. There are many metrics to use, hate crimes for example. https://www.theguardian.com/society/2019/jul/30/us-hate-crime-rising-report https://www.theguardian.com/society/2...e-crimes-2018-latinos-transgender-fbi And this isnt counting all the violence in the protests that were race-driven.   Is the argument that the racists and fascists in the US are more infuriated now than ever, and that makes race relationships worse than before? rofl. That's the only alternative explanation, except that directly contradicts your statement that the extreme-right are laughing their asses off. Are they happy about the current situation or not? They can't simultaneously be happy that the left has destroyed race relations for them, and at the same time be upset that BLM has made great gains in the public eye. The majority of the far-right people are not happy about it, but the more sophisticated ones, the more sophisticated ones are, there was a right-wing meme running around asking their ranks to not engage in counter-protests to BLM, but to sit back and enjoy the show as the looting and burning alienated people into their hands, so yes, you can bet your ass that people like Richard Spencer absolutely loved these protests, you'd have to be very gullible not to see it. You believe that far-right movement is growing and is emboldedned, but at the same time you think race relations are at its best and progressivly improving, how is that possible when the evil Nazis are stronger than ever?

You're linking two random articles that aren't even from this year, I'm not even going to bother looking at them, since it has nothing to do with your claim that the recent protests have made race relations worse than they have been in the last 50 years.

The polarization was always there, because structural racism was always there. There is no option to not be polarized when certain people believe you're subhuman and you shouldn't be allowed to live in "their" city, and the norm is that some people don't have the same rights and protections as other people. BLM has not created more polarization, it has only forced the sleeping masses to see what was always under the surface and forced them to engage in discussions about it. In doing so, it has shifted the Overton window slightly to the left.

Yes, I believe the far-right has grown in the past years, but I don't believe they have made gains from these past few weeks, let alone the kind of gains you claim they have made. Some might be enjoying the chaos and hoping that it will open up a space for them to gain something, but as of right now they are losing the cultural battle. Corporations follow popular opinion, so the anti-racist branding they use now is informing the new generation, and the far-right have lost a lot of their "gateway" people online who were banned for hate speech. Social media is the best way to recruit people on your side so that's a very hard blow that can't be understated. The people who were banned are more emboldened than ever, sure, but this is not a problem, because they are also more disempowered than ever. They will never have the reach that they used to have while being on those smaller platforms. The danger is that there will be more isolated hate crimes from the most extreme members of the far-right out of fear and desperation, it's not related to a cultural regression.

On July 15 2020 20:28 CurbStomp wrote: Show nested quote + On July 15 2020 19:50 Loco wrote:   On July 15 2020 17:06 CurbStomp wrote:   On July 14 2020 22:26 Loco wrote:   On July 14 2020 20:37 CurbStomp wrote: I wouldn't trust the polls on these kind of touchy subjects. When you say you don't support BLM bad things may happen. If i lived in the US and got a call saying if I support BLM I would probably say yes to protect myself and my family. Seeing how saying "all lives matter" can get you shot, I don't think this is unreasonable position. So you're saying you would say no, because... that phone call could be monitored by black people and they are going to storm in your house and shoot you in the head for saying you don't support BLM? Would that be before or after taking your medication for paranoid schizophrenia? All 3 polls were conducted online by the way. I was thinking that the caller could be a BLM extremist and flips out and thinks I'm a fascist when I don't support such a violent group. You yourself are good example of an unstable lefty who sees fascists everywhere. Also, my schizophrenia is not the paranoid type. Right, people working on polls so often choose that job knowing that they won't be able to do it because they couldn't tolerate to see certain results. And we see them engaging in violence all the time! Too bad those were all self-administered online surveys. I live in Canada, I don't see them everywhere dude. Most people here are pretty moderate. I "see them everywhere" on Liquidpoker because they are here; their twitters and their talking points are shared. Even down to usernames, Mr. "curb stomp". Dude you really think I'm far right 'cause i posted some gif? Living in Finland, enjoying all that this welfare state has to offer. All I have to do is say the word and I get pretty fair disability pension for life, I get free medication, free therapy, free education. Even if I murdered someone, I'd be out in 14 years while doing most of the time in a "open prison" (i don't know how to translate) where I could study, go to sauna 3 times a week and watch TV/play some console. These are achievements made possible by social democratic policies. But because I don't want some fucking Iraqi rapists come here and take advantage of the generous system, I'm "far-right".

I also don't want Iraqi rapists to come here, I recognize the problems associated with first generation immigrants fleeing from war-torn countries, but it doesn't translate to racism for me, whereas it does for you.

Why would you not want refugees to have access to free education? What's more likely to turn people into criminals (or keep them crimiinals): a free education or a lack of education? The ability to make a good living or extreme poverty?