|
stone cold posted:I too think the person who DOESN'T hate minorities with a bloodlust like yours, Woozy, is the Stormfronter. Oh no! The lovely, dumber version of Effectronica has accused me of bloodlust. This is like kryptonite for me.
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2016 22:12
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 23, 2024 12:32 |
|
|
Woozy posted:Oh no! The lovely, dumber version of Effectronica has accused me of bloodlust. This is like kryptonite for me. So here's a question. Why should other people commit seppuku or whatever you want them to do when you copy-paste platitudinous farting at them, when you treat everyone else as a pathological liar? Do you believe yourself to be on a pedestal above the "Tumblrina" hoi polloi? Neurolimal posted:you get trolled in the game, you get trolled in real life! No, like, seriously, cut out the whole "you're trolling" poo poo or you'll end up damning yourself to hundreds of millions of years of torment before being reincarnated.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2016 22:14
|
|
|
Can I hit "5" for the earlier part of the thread, but a "1" for the later part of the thread? And not just this thread, I mean for like all of the other threads that devolve into petty arguing like this.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2016 22:14
|
|
|
Woozy posted:Oh no! The lovely, dumber version of Effectronica has accused me of bloodlust. This is like kryptonite for me. I am okay with being deemed a dumb eff for my 'posting crimes.' Did you know that 'racism' and 'bigotry' aren't posting crimes, but 'hurting white feelings' is?
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2016 22:15
|
|
|
Brainiac Five posted:No, like, seriously, cut out the whole "you're trolling" poo poo or you'll end up damning yourself to hundreds of millions of years of torment before being reincarnated. not sure what you expected when you ignored the part about how you're trying to pivot to an imagined argument ITT about poor voters fleeing to trump that you accidentally posted while quoting me
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2016 22:16
|
|
|
lothar_ posted:Can I hit "5" for the earlier part of the thread, but a "1" for the later part of the thread? And not just this thread, I mean for like all of the other threads that devolve into petty arguing like this. D&D needs to drain the swamp of established gimmick posters. Make Debating Great Again.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2016 22:17
|
|
|
Neurolimal posted:not sure what you expected when you ignored the part about how you're trying to pivot to an imagined argument ITT about poor voters fleeing to trump that you accidentally posted while quoting me Can you turn this world salad into something comprehensible by human brains?
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2016 22:17
|
|
|
Brainiac Five posted:Can you turn this world salad into something comprehensible by human brains? Ok Brainiac Five posted:No, I argued against the argument that people went from Obama to Trump, something nobody in the thread argued and was not argued by me quote:which should be obvious since it was polling voters and not people who didn't vote. but not obvious enough to make this clarification until after your secret poll is disassembled quote:Your attempts at being cute are giving me nausea though, so I guess I better take some Tums before I read any more of your posts. :3
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2016 22:20
|
|
|
Unfortunately, I can't reach into your tiny little brain, so I can't discern whether you meant "economically anxious people decided to do nothing" or "economically anxious people decided to vote for the con man Nazi" and while you may be dumb enough to have exploited that ambiguity unintentionally, I don't think it's fair to assume that level of stupidity.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2016 22:21
|
|
|
Neurolimal posted:D&D needs to drain the swamp of established gimmick posters. Make Debating Great Again. You first, trump-garbage. Glad your gambit has peeled away, you can go back to the Daily Stormer and talk about your sick owns on "minorities" now.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2016 22:22
|
|
|
Brainiac Five posted:Unfortunately, I can't reach into your tiny little brain, so I can't discern whether you meant "economically anxious people decided to do nothing" or "economically anxious people decided to vote for the con man Nazi" and while you may be dumb enough to have exploited that ambiguity unintentionally, I don't think it's fair to assume that level of stupidity. It might have helped to read the part where I was talking about fiscal leftists, talking about people who voted Obama last time (no evidence whatsoever of those votes moving towards trump), and the part where I discussed with the OP the fact that lost midwestern voters didn't go to Trump Too subtle on my part imo
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2016 22:26
|
|
|
Neurolimal posted:Too subtle on my part imo But not subtle enough where it counts, trumpador
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2016 22:28
|
|
|
Neurolimal posted:It might have helped to read the part where I was talking about fiscal leftists, talking about people who voted Obama last time (no evidence whatsoever of those votes moving towards trump), and the part where I discussed with the OP the fact that lost midwestern voters didn't go to Trump Yeah, I should have figured that when you made up a hideously ugly, nonsensical term like "fiscal leftists" to disguise your liberal beliefs, that you weren't gonna write anything worth reading. Thank you for the reminder! 
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2016 22:28
|
|
|
Brainiac Five posted:Yeah, I should have figured that when you made up a hideously ugly, nonsensical term like "fiscal leftists" to disguise your liberal beliefs, that you weren't gonna write anything worth reading. Thank you for the reminder! I could see the confusion about the term fiscal leftists, when you have difficulty identifying the topic ITT people are debating, and the topic nobody ITT is debating
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2016 22:31
|
|
|
lol the same 4 people have been bouncing back and forth for 3 pages
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2016 22:39
|
|
|
Business Gorillas posted:lol the same 4 people have been bouncing back and forth for 3 pages Don't you have more women to harass on dating sites, bernout?
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2016 22:40
|
|
|
-Blackadder- posted:It's interesting to see Identity Politics being taken up on the Left because in the old days it was heavily reviled and used almost universally by the Right. The implication, and I do think this needs to be spelled out word for word given the quality of posting in this thread, being that currently the social left is setting itself up for snatching defeat from the jaws of victory.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2016 22:43
|
|
I CANNOT EJACULATE WITHOUT SEEING NATIVE AMERICANS BRUTALISED!
|
stone cold answers thread title *advocates for black trans homeless* "quurrgjghgj look at this cishetwhiteboiii who hates disabled hispanic immigrants"
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2016 22:45
|
|
|
vintagepurple posted:stone cold answers thread title Nobody has advocated for black trans homeless people. They have used them as a rhetorical bludgeon, but the actual arguments are all about colorblind policies. Nobody, for example, has advocated anything about housing discrimination against trans people, or employment discrimination, or shifting cultural attitudes. People have, at most, argued that LGBT people need to be better-off economically because bigotry against them is immutable.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2016 22:47
|
|
|
vintagepurple posted:stone cold answers thread title I very much doubt that you care about housing discrimination, getting the homeless off the streets, support for trans youths, particularly POC trans youths, and genuine advocacy. Please continue to use ACTUAL REAL SUFFERING PEOPLE as rhetoric, you fuckstick.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2016 22:50
|
|
|
this whole thread is a word salad & my question is: is thishow Americans talk irl?? do your country have brain disease
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2016 22:53
|
|
|
eightpole posted:this whole thread is a word salad & my question is: is thishow Americans talk irl?? do your country have brain disease Yes, we are genetically subhuman.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2016 22:53
|
|
|
Brainiac Five posted:Yes, we are genetically subhuman. strange
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2016 22:54
|
|
|
eightpole posted:this whole thread is a word salad & my question is: is thishow Americans talk irl?? do your country have brain disease I mean, take a look at what happened. Am I supposed to say no?
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2016 22:56
|
|
|
eightpole posted:strange Anyhoo, are you the Geriatric Pirate/Ligur kind of Scandipol poster?
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2016 22:55
|
|
|
Brainiac Five posted:Anyhoo, are you the Geriatric Pirate/Ligur kind of Scandipol poster? ? who are they
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2016 22:59
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:Fixing wage and class disparities won't make racism stop being a problem, it'll just make it easier to ignore. Genuinely fixing wage and class disparities absolutely would, within a generation, make racism stop being a problem. For example, middle class black people would no longer get mistaken for poor people and shot. Because, by definition, there would be no association between the concepts 'poor' and 'black'. For every white business owner biased to hiring other whites because they wanted a certain cultural fit, there would, by definition, be an equally wealthy black person doing the opposite. You probably want to keep the current anti-discrimination laws just because that's a conservative move to keep the social peace. But it is not an area where any particularly strong positive action would be necessary. So radicalism on that point is kinda pointless. The other way round is not true,. The median black household has a net wealth of a mediocre TV, the median white household could be swapped for a high end Italian sports car. Somehow wipe out all ability to even see race from everyone, and that inherited wealth and privilege would take hundreds, or thousands, of years to work their way out of the system. Which is plenty of time for ideologies based on justifying them to reemerge. Economic justice is racial justice. Any proposal for justice on some other foundation Is unlikely to deliver either.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2016 22:59
|
|
|
radmonger posted:Genuinely fixing wage and class disparities absolutely would, within a generation, make racism stop being a problem. For example, middle class black people would no longer get mistaken for poor people and shot. Because, by definition, there would be no association between the concepts 'poor' and 'black'. No socialist party or program has ever actually attempted to level all wages and/or access to goods. So eliminating wage and class disparities in the real-world sense would not inherently eliminate racism, because that doesn't prevent overconcentration of racial and ethnic minorities in lower brackets, as was the case in the USSR, due to a variety of factors. What you are proposing is reparations, efforts directly targeted on a racial basis.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2016 23:03
|
|
|
Ignoring the screaming match above, where is the idea that democrats abandoned economic leftism coming from? Have you been in some hoxhaist bunker for the past 50 years? This was probably the first election in our lives where the democratic party could be even vaguely considered a leftist party, instead of the party leftists vote for. Ya'll seem to be doing the whole "longing for a golden age that never was" bullshit and laying the blame for economic leftism at the feet of the political factions that launched leftist economics back into viability. Frankly I long for the days when socialism was just for Jews, queers, and coloreds cuz holy poo poo do the johnny-come-latelys suck at it. e: Also I think it's profoundly absurd to say that black/queer issues dominated the party. What would the equivalent legislative plank on the "identity politics" side be of say, student loan reform be? All of the "identity politics" wins have been either done on the Judicial or local level. Outside of criticizing Trump for saying lovely things, at what point were we the focus of this election? Schizotek fucked around with this message at 23:11 on Dec 4, 2016 |
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2016 23:06
|
|
|
Schizotek posted:Ignoring the screaming match above, where is the idea that democrats abandoned economic leftism coming from? Have you been in some hoxhaist bunker for the past 50 years? This was probably the first election in our lives where the democratic party could be even vaguely considered a leftist party, instead of the party leftists vote for. Could you be referring to the revolutionary politics of Eisenhower Democrat Bernie Sanders??
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2016 23:38
|
|
|
Schizotek posted:Ignoring the screaming match above, where is the idea that democrats abandoned economic leftism coming from? Have you been in some hoxhaist bunker for the past 50 years? This was probably the first election in our lives where the democratic party could be even vaguely considered a leftist party, instead of the party leftists vote for.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2016 23:41
|
|
|
the trump tutelage posted:What an absolutely absurd claim. That's like saying Goldman Sachs can be considered leftist because it's for social justice movements (that don't directly challenge its interests). At what point were the Democrats farther to the left economically? The nineties? the early oughts? Maybe you're old enough to remember the glorious socialist heyday of the 80's? The democrats didn't betray the economic left because they were never economic leftists to begin with, and they were the closest they've been to being socialists this election. e: I do like how even in a comparison of Democratic party economic platforms you can't stop loving whining about SOCIAL JUSTICE!!!!! Schizotek fucked around with this message at 23:56 on Dec 4, 2016 |
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2016 23:54
|
|
|
obama was farther to the left because he at least carried the lie of change all the way to election day, whereas clinton stopped talking about it as soon as she felt like she had the election in the bag
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2016 00:05
|
|
|
radmonger posted:Genuinely fixing wage and class disparities absolutely would, within a generation, make racism stop being a problem. For example, middle class black people would no longer get mistaken for poor people and shot. Because, by definition, there would be no association between the concepts 'poor' and 'black'. The reason the police murder black people isn't because they think black people are poor, it's because they think black people are violent criminals. Eliminating existing economic disparities won't stop the police fron being on a hair trigger around black people. Similarly, the reason non-whites find a harder time getting a job isn't because all the existing white business owners just want a "cultural fit", it's because minorities are racially stereotyped as lazy, stupid, and underqualified. Eliminating economic disparities won't change the fact that many people believe black workers - and black business owners - are inherently worse at basic tasks. No, eliminating racism alone won't get rid of the economic disadvantages accrued as a result of racism that's already happened. But eliminating those economic disadvantages will be a short-term fix at best without also tackling the reason that those disadvantages were imposed on them in the first place: because American culture regards them as fundamentally inferior!
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2016 00:06
|
|
|
Brainiac Five posted:No socialist party or program has ever actually attempted to level all wages and/or access to goods. So eliminating wage and class disparities in the real-world sense would not inherently eliminate racism, because that doesn't prevent overconcentration of racial and ethnic minorities in lower brackets, as was the case in the USSR, due to a variety of factors. Yes, a classless working-class society turns out to be difficult, because people have different abilities, and 'to each according to his needs' is a slogan not a plan. A classless middle-class society is much more immediately plausible, because only easily-teachable skills are needed to keep money once you have it. All you really need to do is redistribute the wealth in the first place; and Trump's personal wealth alone would be enough to make a measurable difference. Just tax the richest ten thousand (or fine them for whatever crimes they have committed) and you'd be most of the way there. And it's not something that is all-or-nothing, 50% of the required money is half way there, even 10% is something. quote:What you are proposing is reparations, efforts directly targeted on a racial basis. Economically, there is a lot of overlap with such a plan. But it would, for example, include taking money from black billionaires, and giving money to poor whites. Even if the latter's ancestors owned the former. So symbolically, i.e. in terms of identity politics, it is very different. Which, if you back such a plan, is the argument against giving that perspective a lot of weight.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2016 00:09
|
|
|
radmonger posted:Yes, a classless working-class society turns out to be difficult, because people have different abilities, and 'to each according to his needs' is a slogan not a plan. This is gibberish. Middle-class people aren't rentiers in any meaningful sense of the term. A society of all rentiers can't loving exist you loving moron. I suggest reading about, oh, a hundred more books before you post again. Anyways, do you believe that black people face a systemic disenfranchisement, impoverishment, and disintegration? Or do you believe it to be coincidental?
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2016 00:13
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:The reason the police murder black people isn't because they think black people are poor, it's because they think black people are violent criminals. Eliminating existing economic disparities won't stop the police fron being on a hair trigger around black people. The trouble is that unless you actually have a plan to eliminate disparities in police brutality that goes beyond consciousness-raising, this does not amount to politics. I would offer that perhaps step one involves some scrutiny of the phrase "eliminate disparities in police violence" because after typing that out I realize how absurd it sounds.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2016 00:12
|
|
|
Woozy posted:The trouible is that unless you actually have a plan to eliminate disparities in police brutality that goes beyond consciousness-raising, this does not amount to politics. I would offer that perhaps step one involves some scrutiny of the phrase "eliminate disparities in police violence" because after typing that out I realize how absurd it sounds. Interesting how you assume someone who says that racial discrimination isn't just class discrimination is necessarily pro-police.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2016 00:14
|
|
|
Schizotek posted:e: I do like how even in a comparison of Democratic party economic platforms you can't stop loving whining about SOCIAL JUSTICE!!!!! Oh dear! It's always a little embarrassing when it pops out.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2016 00:14
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 23, 2024 12:32 |
|
|
Business Gorillas posted:obama was farther to the left because he at least carried the lie of change all the way to election day, whereas clinton stopped talking about it as soon as she felt like she had the election in the bag Hammering at what is perceived to be an opponents week point isn't the same as abandoning policy, and Clinton was, in terms of policies actually advocated for, to the left of even election Obama. Neither are socialists, and I think if Obama had been running he'd probably have been farther to the left than she was. But that doesn't change the fact that economic leftism has only very very recently become anything but a death sentence on the national stage.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2016 00:16
|
|