Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[smjjames]

A single guy road-raging his car into a march hours after the rally = the entire rally endorsing and planning a terrorist attack. The ISIS comparison remains ridiculous

Did you miss the part where I mentioned the guy had a 900-strong explicit Facebook fan club labeling him an American Hero less than an hour after he'd been identified?  Yeah, I can't directly associate that as being the very same people who were in Charlottesville, but it is quite explicitly people in the same ideological grain.

Dear god almost a thousand people on the internet hold shocking opinions.

That group looks like it was renamed to "Justice for James Alex Fields Jr", and is up to about 4500 members.

So... umm... when someone actually murders people, you deny that it means anything because

A single guy road-raging his car into a march hours after the rally = the entire rally endorsing and planning a terrorist attack. The ISIS comparison remains ridiculous

But when 4500 people actively state their support for the guy afterwards, presumably out of ideological sympathy, that's still not considered an endorsement from his political bloc.  It's just "people having shocking opinions on the internet".

So ok... I give up... I can see there there is literally no conceivable metric by which you'll see anything wrong or cause for concern, until there are actually public lynchings or government-aided genocide efforts.  And even then, I halfway believe you'll frame it as the fault of scary leftist mobs.

Some people (not pointing at any Bay12ers) would certainly go and blame it on leftist mobs because hyperpartianship, and antifa.

[Folly]

Loathe as I am to defend Trump, I cannot agree with the criticism he is receiving for failing to name specific groups and disavow them. It's not the President's responsibility to decide which ideological groups are good or bad. Trump denounced the violent actions, and that was an entirely sufficient response to this situation.
Also, he responded within hours of the violence ramping up, and was harshly criticized for not saying anything sooner. That is just utterly ridiculous. People are just grasping at any little thing they can think of to hate Trump at this point. The man is on the brink of instigating a nuclear war, he should have some leeway when it comes to responding to other issues right now.

"It's not my place to decide whether ISIS or the democratically-elected government if Iraq is good or bad. Both have their flaws, and there is hatred and violence from many, many sides here."
See how ridiculous that sounds?

This does not sound ridiculous at all to me. It is not America's place to stop ISIS or anyone else from believing what they choose to believe, only to stop them from doing what they do when their actions involve violence.

Loathe as I am to defend Trump, I cannot agree with the criticism he is receiving for failing to name specific groups and disavow them. It's not the President's responsibility to decide which ideological groups are good or bad. Trump denounced the violent actions, and that was an entirely sufficient response to this situation.

Everything else aside, no, I'm pretty sure it actually is an american president's responsibility to acknowledge neo-nazis and whatnot as bad. We nuked people because of the mess their shit kicked off, we're kinda' committed at this point. He also denounced the violent actions of both sides, in a case where one side actually bloody killed someone. In an act of domestic terrorism. Trump's response was insufficient to the magnitude of the issue by a long damned shot.

So today Trump is telling Neo-Nazi's that they are not allowed to believe in white-supremacy. Tomorrow, he is telling you that you have to publicly pray to a god of his choosing and obey that god's rules under penalty of deportation. See how that slippery slope works? The government is here to keep the peace, but under no circumstances should they ever be allowed to start telling people what is or is not acceptable to believe. That freedom is one of the fundamental liberties that has set this nation apart and allowed it to redefine the concept of basic human rights.

[SalmonGod]

They're emboldened to parade openly because they have that right as American citizens.

Also the one-sided condemnation when a counter-protest is stifling the white nationalist's free speech, but no mention of this on the other side, except to point out that when they massively outnumbered and beat up a handful of counter-protesters the night before, it was only to prove that the situation wasn't as bad as I was making out.

[ChairmanPoo]

You know, there are things I don't like about current leftist movements in the US....   But I sure as hell won't support or pay the least lip service to a f*ing nazi rally.

The pleas of some people saying that they're "peaceful nazis" eeehh.... yeah, fucking sure. Are you channeling Chamberlain's spirit all of a sudden or something? Seriously, this idea of peace loving fascists carrying sticks in self defense is as asinine as you can get. I can only imagine that those spouting this kind of reasoning are either daft, or, (more likely) in their heart of hearts they are fellow travelers.

[FearfulJesuit]

But the President making a statement, however forceful, isn't the Government telling anyone to believe something. Politicians are allowed to have and express political beliefs; otherwise, how are they supposed to be politicians? Trump's response isn't the Establishment Clause at work, it's craven moral bankruptcy. If Neo-Nazis start getting sent without due process to re-education camps, we can talk.

[RedKing]

So ok... I give up... I can see there there is literally no conceivable metric by which you'll see anything wrong or cause for concern, until there are actually public lynchings or government-aided genocide efforts.  And even then, I halfway believe you'll frame it as the fault of scary leftist mobs.

But SG, the government is aiding genocide efforts...aimed at European-Americans and their proud heritage! That's what this is all about, after all -- the out of control liberal leftist government trying to eradicate Southern heritage and make white people forget they're white.

[SalmonGod]

That freedom is one of the fundamental liberties that has set this nation apart and allowed it to redefine the concept of basic human rights.

Did you just argue that the United States re-defined basic human rights to include the right to actively proclaim that we should deny basic human rights to certain people?

[smjjames]

That freedom is one of the fundamental liberties that has set this nation apart and allowed it to redefine the concept of basic human rights.

Did you just argue that the United States re-defined basic human rights to include the right to actively proclaim that we should deny basic human rights to certain people?

You're taking it out of context from the rest of his post. At least it looks like you're narrowing on that specific part of it and thus taking it out of context.

[Arx]

That has to be a right. Unless you want to deprive certain people of the right to expression because what they want to express is their desire for others to lose rights, in which case we're back to it not being okay to take away rights. Understandably, you want to make an exception for actual Nazis, but that's missing the point of fundamental rights (that is, their fundamental nature).

[SalmonGod]

That freedom is one of the fundamental liberties that has set this nation apart and allowed it to redefine the concept of basic human rights.

Did you just argue that the United States re-defined basic human rights to include the right to actively proclaim that we should deny basic human rights to certain people?

You're taking it out of context from the rest of his post. At least it looks like you're narrowing on that specific part of it and thus taking it out of context.

The context was Folly implying that the president shouldn't make public statements to the effect that you shouldn't believe in white supremacy, because that would be a hinderance to the public's ability to freely choose what they believe.  I guess the connection wasn't directly made, but I see this as a free speech related stance.

[Playergamer]

That freedom is one of the fundamental liberties that has set this nation apart and allowed it to redefine the concept of basic human rights.

Did you just argue that the United States re-defined basic human rights to include the right to actively proclaim that we should deny basic human rights to certain people?

Did you just argue that basic human rights don't include the right to free speech and assembly?

So ok... I give up... I can see there there is literally no conceivable metric by which you'll see anything wrong or cause for concern, until there are actually public lynchings or government-aided genocide efforts.  And even then, I halfway believe you'll frame it as the fault of scary leftist mobs.

But SG, the government is aiding genocide efforts...aimed at European-Americans and their proud heritage! That's what this is all about, after all -- the out of control liberal leftist government trying to eradicate Southern heritage and make white people forget they're white.

I won't see anything as cause for concern until innocent bystanders are being hurt. I see no evidence that this rally would've hurt innocent bystanders if it was properly handled by the police. Instead, they infringed on the rights of the rallygoers and turned their city into a Weimar-like warzone.

You know, there are things I don't like about current leftist movements in the US....   But I sure as hell won't support or pay the least lip service to a f*ing nazi rally.

The pleas of some people saying that they're "peaceful nazis" eeehh.... yeah, fucking sure. Are you channeling Chamberlain's spirit all of a sudden or something? Seriously, this idea of peace loving fascists carrying sticks in self defense is as asinine as you can get. I can only imagine that those spouting this kind of reasoning are either daft, or, (more likely) in their heart of hearts they are fellow travelers.

Of course they're not peaceful nazis, but the police could've easily corralled them and prevented any violence from happening at all. Instead, streetfights.

[RedKing]

"You shouldn't be white supremacists, mmkay? White supremacy is bad, mmkay?"

Trump's statement has about as much effectiveness as Mr. Mackey.

[SalmonGod]

That has to be a right. Unless you want to deprive certain people of the right to expression because what they want to express is their desire for others to lose rights, in which case we're back to it not being okay to take away rights. Understandably, you want to make an exception for actual Nazis, but that's missing the point of fundamental rights (that is, their fundamental nature).

I mean... I know it's sticky... but if a people want to proclaim that their ways are fundamentally rooted in the promotion of basic human rights, then that should mean by extension that the act of proclaiming an opposition to basic human rights would be met with strong discouragement.  If this is not the case, because people's ability to say what they want is one of those rights, then the conclusion is that our culture sees that specific right as more important than any other example of what we call a human right.  Which... ok... but that doesn't sit well with me.

It's the whole tolerance of intolerance dilemma.  Where I've long ago accepted that if tolerance is my goal, then there is no contradiction in actively opposing forces that work against tolerance.  If I didn't, then my pursuit of a tolerant world would be in a token abstract sense, not a pragmatic one.  A meaningless label to apply to my self-image, with no substance.

[Frumple]

"You shouldn't be white supremacists, mmkay? White supremacy is bad, mmkay?"

Trump's statement has about as much effectiveness as Mr. Mackey.

Has him or the WH press crew actually gotten around to getting off their craven asses and specifically mentioning white supremacy, yet? Hell, nazi shit, even. Right wing extremists, whatever. Last time I checked they were still avoiding those kind of specifics in a way that defies words, particularly ones suited to public discourse.

[Playergamer]

"You shouldn't be white supremacists, mmkay? White supremacy is bad, mmkay?"

Trump's statement has about as much effectiveness as Mr. Mackey.

Has him or the WH press crew actually gotten around to getting off their craven asses and specifically mentioning white supremacy, yet? Hell, nazi shit, even. Right wing extremists, whatever. Last time I checked they were still avoiding those kind of specifics in a way that defies words, particularly ones suited to public discourse.

Here you go. Kinda shitty tbh, just a statement half a day later saying "we mean nazis too,"