Rising fascism in the US

@Lash,

Lash wrote:

Silly man. That was YOU.

Sure Lash. You're innocent of everything.

@Lash,

Lash wrote:

Try this: Judge each statement someone makes on its own merit, and stop worrying about herding a mob together to attack people you deem to fit in an undesirable category.

I'll save this quote and I bet I'll get on regurgitate it upon you several times a week.

0 Replies

@maporsche,

Certainly innocent of that. I hate PC and groupthink. Accuse me of something more plausible.

0 Replies

@Lash,

Lash wrote:

but I can stop short of broad-brush-smearing a huge group of people with an evil term.

You don't seem very reluctant to call the AP McCarthyist.

Yet here's a group where a significant number of self-proclaimed members are nationalists, racists, white supremacists etc. - and suddenly you have a moral problem with labeling them?

1 Reply

@old europe,

old europe wrote:

All I'm hearing from you are complaints about how the alt-right is wrongfully labeled nationalist, racist, white supremacist,

You still don't get it, do ya, Yurp? I'll repeat what I said earlier, but which you probably didn't hear:

If everyone wants to get together and agree that alt.right means white supremacists, fine, who cares? But don't then try to retroactively apply that new definition and insist that it dictates the way in which Bannon (and others) were using it at the time they used it. That's just a cheap-ass smear job.

A racist is a racist, whether you call him that or not. But "calling" him a racist is not what determines if he is a racist, as the lefties seem to think.

1 Reply

@layman,

layman wrote:

If everyone wants to get together and agree that alt.right means white supremacists, fine, who cares?

I'm pretty sure Lash finds that offensive.

layman wrote:

But don't then try to retroactively apply that new definition the way Bannon (and others) were using it at the time they used it.

Milo wrote his alt-right Breitbart article in March.

Do you think Richard Spencer, described as an intellectual of the alt-right and leader of a center of alt-right thought in that article, wasn't a white supremacist on March 29th, but rapidly transformed into one until he proclaimed “Hail Trump, hail our people, hail victory!” on November 21st and was cheered on by Nazi salutes?

2 Replies

@old europe,

I think the point here is that Spencer doesn't represent Bannon and the others.

There was a substantial Nazi Movement in Britain in until 1938. Do you believe PM Camberlain was responsible for that? After all he did cave in to Hitler. (We both know there was a lot more to it than that, but that's what your carping here sounds like to me.)

I'm uncomfortable making such remarks about the internal affairds of other countries, but somehow old europe has inspired it. (Is the name a relic of the Rumsfeld comment from the 1980s?)

0 Replies

@old europe,

old europe wrote:

Do you think Richard Spencer, described as an intellectual of the alt-right and leader of a center of alt-right thought in that article, wasn't a white supremacist on March 29th, but rapidly transformed into one until he proclaimed “Hail Trump, hail our people, hail victory!” on November 21st and was cheered on by Nazi salutes?

Let's assume that Spencer was a NAZI for the last 50 years, what the HELL do you think that has to do with Bannon? We've been through this, sophist, and I'm not going to do it again. Look back at the previous 3-4 pages of posts.

Your sophistry is self-evident. Will you EVER give up the ghost on your feeble horseshit?

0 Replies

Let me see if I can understand.

We are supposed to treat each and every member of the alt-right as a unique snowflake but it's OK (even fun!!) to condemn liberals, the NAACP, the Democratic Party, the Black Lives Matter movement, millennials, feminists, and welfare recipients as entire groups whose worst members represent them?

Is that right?

3 Replies

@maporsche,

Sounds about right.

0 Replies

@maporsche,

Condemn each person based on what they say and do; not what group they belong to.

1 Reply

Normal people think that if I call a cat a dog then I have made a mistake. A thing is what it what, regardless of how I label it. Cheese-eaters, being the subjectivists that they are, actually seem to think they have the power to turn a cat into a dog by calling it a dog.

0 Replies

@Lash,

Lash wrote:

Condemn each person based on what they say and do; not what group they belong to.

But only for the alt right movement right? I mean you've been condemning WHOLE GROUPS of people for months?

Or is this a do as I say not as I do moment?

0 Replies

@old europe,

Based on what they say they want to do, not what group they associate with or people's opinions of them.

1 Reply

@Lash,

Based on someone saying that what they want to do is "to ethnically cleanse White nations of non-Whites and establish an authoritarian government. Many people also believe that the Jews should be exterminated." - what would you label them?

1 Reply

@maporsche,

maporsche wrote:

Let me see if I can understand.

We are supposed to treat each and every member of the alt-right as a unique snowflake but it's OK (even fun!!) to condemn liberals, the NAACP, the Democratic Party, the Black Lives Matter movement, millennials, feminists, and welfare recipients as entire groups whose worst members represent them?

Is that right?

No it isn't right. There are many individual variations in all these groups. There are also central tendencies and general attributes in each of them. The fault here is in treating a small localized individual attribute as characteristic of the whole. I thinbk you are trying too hard to hide behind vague generalities.

1 Reply

@old europe,

How many people said that?

1 Reply

@georgeob1,

georgeob1 wrote:

maporsche wrote:

Let me see if I can understand.

We are supposed to treat each and every member of the alt-right as a unique snowflake but it's OK (even fun!!) to condemn liberals, the NAACP, the Democratic Party, the Black Lives Matter movement, millennials, feminists, and welfare recipients as entire groups whose worst members represent them?

Is that right?

No it isn't right. There are many individual variations in all these groups. There are also central tendencies and general attributes in each of them. The fault here is in treating a small localized individual attribute as characteristic of the whole. I thinbk you are trying too hard to hide behind vague generalities.

Im honestly curious George able to provide examples how each of the groups I mentioned have been mischaracteried by actions of the few

2 Replies

@maporsche,

I can't tell you how many times I've had to defend Black Lives Matter because of a segment of that group who chanted about "killing pigs."

The entire group doesn't advocate the murder of police officers in retaliation for violence against innocent or unarmed blacks, yet a lot of people like to broad brush the entire group.

And I have to use the term Establishment Democrats for precisely this reason.

0 Replies

@Lash,

You said you label people based on what they say they want to do, not what group they associate with or people's opinions of them.

Here's an example of someone saying what they want to do. That seems to be specifically what you were asking for. Now it appears as if you're adding more qualifiers before you can give any kind of description at all about a statement like the one above.

Why this reluctance?

1 Reply

Rising fascism in the US

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know