1. Hi there, Guest

    Only registered users can really experience what DLP has to offer. Many forums are only accessible if you have an account. Why don't you register?
    Dismiss Notice
  2. Q4 2019 Story Competition is kicking off!

    Prompt:
    Foreign Magical Regions (Setting outside of Britain)
    Get writing Folks!
    Dismiss Notice

Antifa vs Neo-Nazis

Discussion in 'Politics' started by point09micron, Aug 17, 2019.

  1. Dirty Puzzle

    Dirty Puzzle DA Member DLP Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2016
    Messages:
    161
    Gender:
    Female
    Location:
    Northern Hemisphere
    High Score:
    0
    ...You might wanna check the wording, or maybe I'm just tired and reading it wrong, because it sounds like you're agreeing with me? Do you mean just as false?

    Regardless, the logic isn't wrong. I don't think it means we need to abandon the idea of no political violence or calling out people who have legitimately done something wrong, but if we acknowledge that's the case, we can actually makes steps to clamp down on political violence instead of just throwing our hands up, saying "well fuck it man", and letting both extremes duke it out on Main Street.

    Is there a reason that we have to be as purposefully obtuse about it as possible? The people who "take it that way" used to be the people that came to that conclusion regardless. I've seen enough recently to know that more and more people are being persuaded. Some of them my age (college), and some of them even Gen X and Millennials. Would it not be easier to achieve your own stated goal by employing even basic rhetorical principles? I honestly don't see the point in putting in the worst way possible and then giving people the middle finger when they take it wrong.
     
  2. Raiko

    Raiko Fifth Year DLP Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2011
    Messages:
    149
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Nashville
    I really hate the "fine people on both sides" argument. There are a million and one excellent arguments against Trump. But when you use the fine people argument people can go and read the transcript and you just further entrench people into their beliefs.

    It causes them to drown out and not believe anything the media says about him. It's part of the reason people in his voter base stopped giving a shit about what the media said about him. Now if you want to argue that people are stupid for ignoring some of the horrible shit he has said, you won't get an argument for me.
     
    Last edited: Sep 10, 2019
  3. Agayek

    Agayek Half-Blood Prince DLP Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2009
    Messages:
    3,510
    I mean that I chose my example carefully, as they're both expressions of the same underlying conceit that is employed by both the left and the right, just applied to different situations. At the core of both ideas is a concept that detrimental behavior needs to be called out as detrimental and the perpetrators of such should be ostracized in order to discourage more such behavior.

    At the end of the day, given the realities of human nature, that does, in fact, mean that such behavior is a minor contributing factor to 'the opposition'. After all, someone attacking you tends to make you look favorably on the people who oppose them.

    But at the same time, the only alternative to opposing detrimental behavior is to indulge yourself or ignore it and hope it goes away. Neither of which is particularly useful when it comes to stopping the detrimental behavior. And when you weigh creating an environment that minority fosters opposition against an environment that fosters detrimental behavior, you must then weigh that against your morals and decide which one you believe to be the best to pursue.

    Which, ultimately, is a long-winded way to say that the argument you have presented can be used, without alteration, to support the idea that antifa's demonstrations against nazis simply creates more nazis and they therefore must cease all efforts immediately. Which I would hope you could recognize why I find it very silly.
     
  4. Dirty Puzzle

    Dirty Puzzle DA Member DLP Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2016
    Messages:
    161
    Gender:
    Female
    Location:
    Northern Hemisphere
    High Score:
    0
    Does the difference in body counts not change the narrative? We've had Antifa equivalents since WW2 in different forms, but never have people engaged it this heavily since the Civil Rights movement. The same logic doesn't apply because one side actually has a body count of hundreds, and one doesn't have a single confirmed murder. How does that not alter the situation?

    You're also forgetting that prejudice isn't logical. Antifa is a) reactionary, and b) white supremacists aren't going to recruit less or more if Antifa stops because the Richard Spencer types aren't rational. The logic doesn't apply in reverse.
     
  5. Agayek

    Agayek Half-Blood Prince DLP Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2009
    Messages:
    3,510
    Yes it does? Your logic is, fundamentally, "opposition to X creates more X, therefore you can't oppose X". Which means I must ask, if opposing antifa's violent mobs only creates more antifa, why does opposing nazis not create more nazis?

    Antifa being reactionary is irrelevant (assuming it's even true); any kind of opposition to something is reactionary. You can't oppose something that doesn't exist, after all.

    As for the body count, that's both irrelevant, as anyone who would sign up with either aren't going to care about that, but also just not really true. We've had lots of far-left violence in the US, especially in the late-60s and early-70s (look up the Weather Underground and their bombing spree for the low-hanging fruit there), it just doesn't get anywhere near the publicity.
     
  6. Dirty Puzzle

    Dirty Puzzle DA Member DLP Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2016
    Messages:
    161
    Gender:
    Female
    Location:
    Northern Hemisphere
    High Score:
    0
    Antifa could vanish off the face of the planet tomorrow, and prejudiced people would use something else to justify their unjustifiable position. To say that Antifa spurs as many people to swing far right as neo-Nazis spur people to swing far left is pretty ridiculous, but the benefit is that neo-Nazis can hide behind "we can't tolerate violence" when really their ideology is violence.

    You're also disregarding friend/enemy distinction, since some skinhead could revoke the life tomorrow and stop showing up to white supremacist rallies and Antifa would never bother him again, but if you're LGBT+ or non-white, they lose or you die.

    I'm still not endorsing political violence—as evidenced by the Weather Underground example you gave. Is it that controversial to say: the way we treat Antifa in the media directly benefits right-wing white supremacists, and there's a way to both condemn political violence and hold neo-Nazis accountable for their violent, threatening, and antagonizing behavior. Why is it ridiculous to put forth the notion that most people show up to counter-protest with Antifa because Richard fucking Spencer and his crackpot of crazies independently stage a rally that is inherently provocative and galvanizing? The what-about-ism between the right and left is a little much.

    You can't expect people to agree with you if your position is: "All political violence is bad. Yes, I understand some of you are being murdered and some of your churches and mosques and synagogues are being blown up, but if you pour a milkshake on a skinhead, you're a fucking thug and barely better than Nazis. Am I gonna do anything about the Nazis, then? Oh, not really. But fuck Antifa."
     
  7. Agayek

    Agayek Half-Blood Prince DLP Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2009
    Messages:
    3,510
    No? There's no "what about" going on; no one has made any excuses for the neonazis and far right being shitheads. That's a strawman you've pulled out of your ass. The far right has a bunch of reprehensible stances that, in a just world, would never have existed in the first place.

    Literally no one is arguing with you on that.

    The point of contention here is that the crux of the argument you've presented is "opposition to something encourages more of it", and I find the very idea of that to be ridiculous. Saying "opposing antifa violence only encourages more antifa violence" is exactly the same as saying "opposing neonazi violence only encourages more neonazi violence"; it's kinda-sorta-but-not-really true in a very specific edge case of "this guy's already an extremist but hasn't admitted it to himself", and patently absurd in all other situations.
     
  8. Mishie

    Mishie Fat Dog

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2009
    Messages:
    519
    Location:
    Australia
    So legit question guys, do I really need to go and relink that twitter thread which had photo and video evidence showing that a decent chunk of those times where Antifa allegedly attacked Neo-Nazi's peacefully demonstrating, that actually what had happened was that they'd gone to counterprotest and in an absolutely shocking turn of events, the Neo-Nazi's weren't huge fans and decided to start a fight, and when they lost went to twitter to cry.

    Or how about this newer one https://twitter.com/FeralHog420/status/1166251687293739008 which talks about how that poor, defenseless victim Andy Ngo kinda sorta preempted that tragic milkshaking by helping his Neo-Nazi pals cripple someone? That seems like something that could be sliiiightly connected to what happened.
     
  9. Dirty Puzzle

    Dirty Puzzle DA Member DLP Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2016
    Messages:
    161
    Gender:
    Female
    Location:
    Northern Hemisphere
    High Score:
    0
    Maybe you in this specific thread, but that overarching attitude is dismissive of neo-Nazis, and the political establishment can repeat over and over again that "NAZIS ARE ALSO BAD" but not do anything to condemn them beyond lip service, and I'm—in a shocking turn of events—not going to believe them. You might understand and believe the far right is awful, but your rhetoric clues people into a larger, overarching dismissal of the groups you're calling reprehensible. That's what I've been saying this whole time. It's unknowingly dog-whistling. I'm trying to tell you that if you remove the dog-whistle, you might be able to actually cut back on the political violence you're against because people leaning left won't hear a dog-whistle and assume the worst. I am literally not asking for your view on political violence to be changed, that's why I'm so bewildered this is so contentious.

    It's not though. On paper, it sounds that way, but reality is a little bit more complicated than that. Are you really here to claim that everyone who shows up to counter protest with Antifa is as irrational as neo-Nazis? Because for your claim to be true, that means it has to be equally likely that a) the people who join white supremacist groups could've theoretically been rational people before joining, and b) the people who temporarily join up with Antifa could've theoretically been rational people before joining (again, almost always temporarily). And that's simply not true. A rational person is much more likely to say, "Gee, these Nazis in town are fucking everything up, the government won't do anything about it, and I won't tolerate it" than they are to say, "Wow the job loss sure is all the fault of ethnic minorities, lets advocate to oppress and kill them". Is that the hill you wanna die on?

    Regardless of their means, their ends are different. That inherently changes the nature in which your scenario plays out.
     
  10. Chengar Qordath

    Chengar Qordath The Final Pony ~ Prestige ~

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2008
    Messages:
    1,271
    High Score:
    1,802
    Honestly, I'm not sure what you want at this point. We can say Nazis are bad, and yet we're still all closet Nazis dog-whistling them? What would it take to convince you that everyone who doesn't parrot your talking points isn't a secret Nazi?
     
  11. ScottPress

    ScottPress The Horny Sovereign ~ Prestige ~

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2013
    Messages:
    256
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    The Holy Moose Empire
    High Score:
    1,826+3348
    It just seems like the progressive substanceless argument to me: everything is problematic, nothing one ever does is enough. You make a counterargument, they move the goalposts. Everything is a white supremacist dogwhistle unless you are explicitly a far left progressive yourself. It's why milk and vanilla ice cream are problematic, as well as probably wearing a white shirt, and it's why if you don't at least support everything done by the far left, you're still right of them, which might as well mean you're far right.
     
    Last edited: Sep 10, 2019
  12. Dirty Puzzle

    Dirty Puzzle DA Member DLP Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2016
    Messages:
    161
    Gender:
    Female
    Location:
    Northern Hemisphere
    High Score:
    0
    Considering I've kept the same argument since my very first post, in which I pointed out it was your rhetoric that is the bigger problem (which is so easily tweaked it's laughable), I have moved no goalposts. Do I personally think punching a Nazi is anything but a good day? No. But y'all bitch and moan about being called Nazis or white supremacists, but when someone points out that it's your own rhetoric preemptively painting you that way, suddenly it's someone else's fault for calling you out on it. Unfortunately language is descriptive, and is it a shame that some legitimate political arguments are regurgitated into taglines by the alt-right and spread as dog-whistles? Yes. And we should still have those debates (which we are). But if you constantly parrot alt-right rhetoric, people might accidentally think you're more friendly to the alt-right. And generally speaking, the people participating at counter-protests with Antifa are usually those that kind of have to be on the lookout for who could potentially harm or kill them.

    You can whine about it, or you can make minor adjustments to how you present your argument, and suddenly people won't be hear a dog-whistle. And the real fun part here is that centrists and moderates won't notice they're parroting dog-whistles and repeat alt-right taglines without the understanding that a) they're dog-whistling, and b) there is an argument to be had, which may even be correct, and it's getting lost.

    Centrists and moderates historically skew right, not left. Legislation that's happening in this past presidential term is proof enough of that. Roll back trans healthcare protections? Change the definition of domestic violence? Roll back some Dodd-Frank protections? Killing environment protections that were partly enacted because the effects of pollution disproportionately affect poor and minority communities? What's that if not right? What's that if not doing exactly what Nazi fucks want?

    And to reiterate for the nth time here: I'm telling you what is happening and what will happen. Stick your head in the sand if you want. A basic understanding of how language and rhetoric work might take you farther.
     
  13. Arthellion

    Arthellion Lord of the Banned ~ Prestige ~

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2017
    Messages:
    506
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Georgia, USA
    High Score:
    2398
    One fundamental thing the Founders, soldiers, civil rights activists, etc. have fought and died for over the course of American history is the right to free speech even if that speech is inflammatory. It's enshrined in our constitution.

    If you prefer a nation that cracks down on unacceptable speech, there are plenty out there.

    This value was decided for America long before we were born. It's fine to disagree with it, but this is not something that will change. The way you beat neo-nazis is you do one of three things:

    1. Fight them with speech. Speak truth. Destroy their arguments.

    2. Ignore them. Many neo-nazis are people desperate for attention.

    3. Love them. Develop relationships with them. Love beats hatred. https://www.fastcompany.com/1679670/neo-nazi-rehab-how-do-you-change-the-mind-of-an-extremist
     
  14. ScottPress

    ScottPress The Horny Sovereign ~ Prestige ~

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2013
    Messages:
    256
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    The Holy Moose Empire
    High Score:
    1,826+3348
    This is the core of the disagreement here, it seems.

    See, I don't think I am -- unintentionally or not -- dog-whistling at Nazis. The way I talk about these things is fine. If you hear a problem in what I say, it's your problem. If you are willing, please give some kind of specific example from the thread where I or anyone else said something that a neonazi would hear and think we secretely agree with them.

    I don't have a problem moderating my own words when I think it's warranted, but then I don't see how my words warrant moderation here. Since you say the rhetoric is "so easily tweaked it's laughable", where and how would you tweak it, and how would the tweaking help oppose neonazis?
     
  15. Dagro

    Dagro Third Year

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2007
    Messages:
    89
    The centrist stance here taken make sense on paper, but as was pointed out, at some point there is going to be a tip. If you let it go too far suddenly you have a atmosphere where it is not just 'a bunch of nutcases in their basement'. If you can't visit certain neighbourhoods, look a certain way or just be yourself. I think the potential for that is hard to see if you are not affected yourself. In Europe we have problems with neo-nazis for a long time and here in germany there have been and are places where they are very successful in that.

    For example they tried (and you can argue in parts very succesfully) to establish 'no go areas' or 'national liberated zones', the aim is to establish a stigma of fear around a local area for minoritys and whoever they deem as non-desirable. This leads to people avoiding that area, making it even easier to pick on the last remaining few 'enemys' they have. Now there is no law that if you are black for example, you can't go there, but chances are if you live in the area you are going to know you can't go there. This is only possible because of a silent majority in those parts, that is either sympathic to the perpetrators or indifferent to the victims (or both).

    Further think about these structures over multiple generations, what if at some point the police, clerks, city officials etc. have these ideas or sympathies? The german state stamped down on all structures that tried stuff like this, but the idea is still around and even the knowledge that these types are in your area is scary. (You will know most often) It changes how you behave, feel and see other people around you.

    Best case society as a whole is always active, demonstrating and loudly trying to disabuse the very notion that this nightmare actually might ever become reality(again). I don't see this happening (worldwide), in fact Europe has never been so scary since the refugee crisis.

    Antifa has been around here for a few decades, there are established structures and the movement had a lot of time to evolve, learn & grow(especially from mistakes). This has not been the case in the US yet and I think there still has to be a lot of learning on parts of activists. There are going to be problems, things going to far etc. and it is up to the activists to find a common ground and define a way of resistance that they as a majority can accept.

    One thing about masked face: Some people here don't seem to understand who the activists are dealing with. If they can get your identity chances are they will violently attack you. In that sense the black block protects you, as your presence protects the person next to you. To make it some kind of "rwar these masked thugs" or "too afraid to show their face" is laughable if the alternative is attacks on your or your family. And honestly, with your gun laws and the crazy you have promoted, the violent terrorist attacks etc. that fear is more than justified. What I want to say, if you are active against neo nazis, in the US, you would be really stupid not to mask your face.
     
  16. Dirty Puzzle

    Dirty Puzzle DA Member DLP Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2016
    Messages:
    161
    Gender:
    Female
    Location:
    Northern Hemisphere
    High Score:
    0
    I actually don't. I highly value our 1A rights. I'm looking the long road because apparently no on else is. I don't want them weakened at all. It protects everyone, and I'm not ignorant enough to think you can weaken 1A protections for just some people. What no one is understanding is that the people getting murdered, the people whose synagogues and mosques are being bombed and shot up, the people who are being victimized—those people aren't going to tolerate lip service when the government turns around and does nothing about very real threats, and especially when the government makes it easier for people to victimize them. The exact same thing is happening to the 2nd Amendment and I'm just as against weakening that. But something has to give. If we keep sitting on our hands, we'll lose those rights. Maybe we shouldn't be rolling back trans healthcare protections if we want trans people to not think they have to take drastic measures, as an example.
    --- Post automerged ---
    To start, this just isn't true. Everyone encodes and decodes speech. Just like an author has no direct influence about how an audience reads their work after it's published, you can't control what meanings others take from your words, but you still said them. If I wrote a fictional book with an accidentally racist portrayal of a black woman, and my audience pointed it out, there is no defense in "I didn't mean to", even if it's genuine. I live in a culture where it's very easy to fall on stereotypes by accident, and in that scenario I'd say, "I apologize, I didn't mean it that way, how can I fix it?"

    A neo-Nazi knows you don't agree with them. But they know that their victims can't always tell the difference, and it's an amazing alienation tactic, as evidenced by 70% of this entire thread.

    But not a problem at all. I'm going to use @Chengar Qordath , @Agayek , and your points together because for the most part y'all seem to be agreeing. If it doesn't apply to you, skip it. This is gonna be long because I'm going point by point.

    I get this was amended later in the thread, I'm just going to point out: this is generally the neo-Nazi tagline spread around.

    We're coming back to the "in practice", but it's more relevant in other posts.

    Except they aren't. Look. The people that generally join Antifa have been pushed there because they see people being murdered and killed, see the government doing nothing about incitement (which is not protected under free speech, and was last visited in Brandenburg in '69 and imo was decided wrongly), and figure: if the government won't do anything, and most people are letting it slide, we're gonna go beat the shit out of a Nazi.

    Targeting people unfairly? Arrest them. Engaging in violent protests? Nobody said don't arrest them. But that contemptuous, semi-disgusted tone right up there? Didn't see you using it with the neo-Nazis. It is easily construed as dismissive. Say specifically that you condemn political violence, oppose Antifa anarcho-communist philosophy, and that letting people off regardless of political leaning isn't feasible or productive. Because that disgust? That dismissal? That translates to police sending protesters to the hospital, and for more than minor injuries. Makes people think you could sympathize with a Nazi, and it's just not worth the risk.

    I'm just going to leave this here. Gonna call that a yikes.

    So context shows it's general disgust, but it did have to be clarified, and if you're the possible target of alt-right violence, you may not stick around to find out which.

    The second point is simply untrue as a blanket generalization, and regarding this extreme example we're talking about, completely falls apart. "Don't be a shithead" you say. LGBT, ethnic minorities, disabled people, religious minorities all respond, "Okay, then we're gonna need some discriminatory laws and systemic injustices to be fixed. Here's the problem, this is why it's a problem, and it's egregious." The political establishment does jack shit for decades upon decades. Eventually, people get sick of it. Eventually, you've exhausted all peaceful means. Eventually, a Nazi shows up in your town and you punch him in the fucking face. In response they get: "Them being a shithead doesn't mean you can be." Right.

    Throwing your hands up like this is real nice if it's not your life on the line. It's decrying everyone, thinking that's a tenable position to have, and offering no solutions. At best it's privileged disgust with all of it; at worst it's sitting back and letting the right get away with people that way.

    Those public rallies are inherently incitement. You admitted in this thread that they galvanize their base. If no one shows up to counter, it's implicit allowance. If they do, it's really likely something will go down. I don't know how much you know about use of force and its really blurry nature, especially when it goes down, but it's almost never easy to figure out who or what started it. And honestly? A person's life is worth more than a business' window.

    It's a lose-lose scenario where they've chosen not to lose quite as badly.

    This keeps getting hammered home, and there was one example of disgust at Nazis. When you're sensitive to this kinda thing, you avoid people who speak like this. I'm just telling you how it is.

    This is baffling to me. Their methods are not the worst, or even close to the worst, we've seen employed in even recent history, and a few beaten up people does not a violent pack of thugs make. Other leftists have done worse than Antifa. They have no fatalities to their name, and barely a few instances of protest violence, of which there's no consensus on who started it. Half a dozen incidents of mistaken identity at worst. Nor is it normalization, which Antifa acknowledges themselves.

    I'd think anarcho-communism, anti-capitalism, and some of their other dumb political philosophies would be the biggest issue. But this does tip your hand, does it not? This right here signals that you don't dislike Antifa for their cause, you dislike them because "violence only begets more violence". A dangerously passive stance to have when on the other hand we have neo-Nazis.

    1: Legality =/= morality. When these rallies just barely skirt under the Brandenburg test, and are (to anyone paying any attention) obviously meant to incite violence, imminent or otherwise, it's hard to tell people: "Not illegal. Sorry. Nothing we can do about this. It's not imminent enough until someone attempts to kill you." Even though that can effectively bar people from certain places for fear of their lives.

    2: Should. The justice system isn't fair or impartial, and conservatives generally love to keep it that way. This here is my point. If you're condemning political violence in the same breath you're condemning police brutality (where it occurs, I know that's its own can of worms), you're golden. That just usually isn't the case.

    Pedophiles, rapists, and terrorists all get adequately handled by the justice system in most cases. (Though you see people using other means about rapists because that didn't used to be handled either. You used to get your closest male friend/relative and tell him to beat the shit out of whoever raped you. The justice system adequately started picking those cases up to the best of its ability, people stopped beating up rapists in the street. Same goes for most crimes. As society recognized unacceptable things and the justice system prosecuted them, people didn't have to take it into their own hands.)

    Everyone knows. It's lose-lose. And as evidenced, it's such an amazing alienation tactic on the part of the alt-right.

    This just looks so bad. It echoes every actual Nazi on the Internet and in real life, especially when it's such hyperbole. They're masked so the alt-right doesn't find them. I've established how hyperbolic "violent vigilantes" is.

    Ah. Finally the crux. They aren't. Maybe they are for you. How many people have died in just US mass shootings this year? How many trans people murdered? How many immigrants have died in ICE custody (because they fled countries we destabilized)? How many minorities (unjustifiably) shot by the police? For that matter, how many lynchings in the last 50 years? Your social norms may be holding up, but yours are also the last to go. Someone else in this thread pointed out: this isn't peace for the people joining Antifa.

    Lol. Remind me who's in the White House?

    Again, maybe for you. [Insert MLK quote from earlier.]

    You're right, but it's really not that hard to keep people away from either extreme. Some common decency and some strategic reenactment of some of the repealed healthcare protections, civil rights clauses (like accessibility requirements), and fix that weird and lowkey fucked up change to the definition of domestic violence, as a start. Maybe stop labeling Antifa and BLM terrorist organizations lmao. Maybe not echo every point by point argument spread by neo-Nazis with explicit purpose to hijack centrists/moderates. You have to be really explicit to distance yourself from that when you're understandably debating an issue the alt-right has hijacked.
     
  17. Stenstyren

    Stenstyren Professor

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2009
    Messages:
    453
    If everyone that's center-left, center, right, far right and nazis all seem to be dog-whistling Nazis to you, perhaps it's your sensors that need a bit of tuning? It's not Scotts fault (well, in this case anyway) that you believe him to be a nazi, it's you who've read him wrong.

    Edit: Well, ninjad I guess.
    So, in the long post just above this I think we get down to the crux of the problem. You believe that current laws are not up to the task of protecting certain minorities and as such, Antifa and other organizations are needed to do this protection outside of the law.
    I can understand, and even sympathise with this viewpoint in the short term, though I stand opposed to it in the longer run due to the risk of having a full-scale war going on within society.
     
    Last edited: Sep 10, 2019
  18. Dirty Puzzle

    Dirty Puzzle DA Member DLP Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2016
    Messages:
    161
    Gender:
    Female
    Location:
    Northern Hemisphere
    High Score:
    0
    Considering I've been beaten up for not listening to my instincts, I stopped ignoring them. Maybe that makes me too sensitive. I think it's self preservation. It's what I've been trying to get across.

    Here: I'll drop this too. https://foreignpolicy.com/2018/10/27/the-deadly-consequences-of-dog-whistle-politics/

    Shit, here's another. https://www.vox.com/the-big-idea/2016/11/7/13549154/dog-whistles-campaign-racism
     
  19. BTT

    BTT Second Year ~ Prestige ~

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2011
    Messages:
    78
    Location:
    Cyber City Oedo
    High Score:
    1204
    ScottPress has been posting transphobic memes for absolute ages, as well as flinging shit everywhere about the "regressive left", whatever the fuck that that's supposed to mean. He's no innocent centrist.
     
  20. Arthellion

    Arthellion Lord of the Banned ~ Prestige ~

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2017
    Messages:
    506
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Georgia, USA
    High Score:
    2398
    Honestly, attacking moderates as being nazis is more likely to push them over to the nazi point of view than your own...
    --- Post automerged ---
    Scott's by no means an innocent centrist, but he's hardly a nazi/nazi sympathizer or hell even a conservative.

    THere is honestly no -true- conservative on this site. We've run them all off or banned them. Which is honestly kinda dangerous because then this becomes an echo chamber with no new information/perspectives being disseminated. Some of us who lean right of center try to offer that perspective, but some such as yourself/psychotic cat etc. seem to be trying to censor even that.
     
Loading...
Similar Threads
  1. NoxedSalvation
    Replies:
    63
    Views:
    10,901