MizPiz posted:

Great news, we don't actually have to feel sorry about Grandpa CHUD getting maced.

https://twitter.com/TheZOMB/status/838249820557033472

Lindsey O. Graham posted:

i know it's chaos and hard to see, as well as an intense fight or flight, us vs them scenario, much like war

however, i would prefer antifa, to try to avoid the elderly, women, and children if possible, in observance of what are just some basic combat engagement rules

like, it may be advisable to attempt avoidance of, what in other circumstances might be seen as war crimes, in order to reduce fodder for negative propaganda

MizPiz posted:

Great news, we don't actually have to feel sorry about Grandpa CHUD getting maced.

https://twitter.com/TheZOMB/status/838249820557033472

lancemantis posted:

this is pretty much what I suspected happened

Pener Kropoopkin posted:

Why did you feel sorry before?

MizPiz posted:

Basically the reasons Lindsey O Graham laid out.

Big Fat Iguana posted:

lol he got maced by another red hat actually

Big Fat Iguana posted:

lol he got maced by another red hat actually

Montasque posted:

Montasque posted:

Montasque posted:

Grondoth posted:

HOW IS HE STILL GETTING BOOKED ANYWHERE

THERE ISN'T A SINGLE SCIENTIST IN ANY FIELD RELATED TO THE THINGS HE WROTE ABOUT THAT DOESN'T HATE HIS STUPID BOOK

Montasque posted:

In the video both sides were firing mace at each other.

It was one of the most pitiful expressions of violence I have ever seen. Both sides should be ashamed.

It looked like a LARP battle. Just... Sad.

Pener Kropoopkin posted:

people are carrying shields lmfao, I dunno guys street fighting doesn't seem very cool anymore

Race Realists posted:

https://mobile.twitter.com/Anawnnemus/status/838406953856565249

this article reminds me of how much this is a anti-intellectual movement as well

Alt-Right are STEM nerds who deem Art as an unrealistic career choice

quote:

Imagine a red army and a blue army fighting for control of a city. (You might populate this hypothetical city with gray civilians, or you might not. I don’t think it tortures the thought experiment much one way or another.) The fighting in this city is mixed up. There are no battle lines to speak of, just sporadic flare ups of combat as both sides attempt to stake out various territories within the metropolis. Now imagine that the two armies operate with vastly different rules of engagement. The blue rules of engagement are pretty streamlined: “Shoot reds on sight. Shoot to kill.” But the red rules are a little more… we’ll say “involved.” The reds try to observe the Universal Rules of Fair Play in Warfare. This means they generally avoid initiating battles. They don’t fire from ambush. They don’t aggressively push advantages or pursue retreating forces. And they’ll even punish their own troops for violating their notions of above-the-board combat. A red soldier executing a surprise raid on sleeping blues is as culpable as a blue doing so to reds. Reds aren’t savages, after all.

In this thought experiment, which side would you say is likely to win the city? If you had to bet.

The cleverer readers at home have no doubt already surmised that what I’m actually asking you to contemplate, in the most general terms, are the differences between conservative and liberal strategies in the Great American Culture War, a conflict that is now some fifty or sixty years ongoing. Liberals conceive of the culture war as a war, a conflict in which they have an enemy who must be beaten. And so wherever this enemy rears his white, cishetero, Christian head, they take their pot shots at it. Conservatives, on the other hand, tend to think of the culture war as a debate of sorts rather than a dominance struggle for social preeminence. And so they couch their propositions in the language of principle (even when those principles are in fact ex post facto rationalizations) and occasionally pull out a devastating gotcha about the other side’s “hypocrisy.”

(I do have to admit, in the interest of thoroughness, that the situation isn’t quite so dire as it is in the imagined scenario above. In that scenario, team red operates on universal rules. In reality, however, a great number of the rules with which team red attempts to police public discourse aren’t universal at all but actually blue in origin. So the situation for real-life conservatives is a bit more dire, in fact.)

You have to admire the Left for it’s clarity of vision. It has identified its enemies, and it does what it can to drive them from the field. The recent fireworks in Indiana are a perfect illustration. Team blue knows that Christians are hateful homophobes, and so it goes to bat for the right of homosexuals to sue them over wedding cakes. The Right, with its characteristic acumen, mistakes this bushwhack for a principled stand. “Ah!” they say, “But if you support the right of a gay man to force a Christian to make a cake then you must support the right of the KKK to force a black baker to make a cake!” The average liberal couldn’t imagine a more irrelevant rejoinder. They aren’t making any such proposition at all. In their calculus, Christians (of the Not-fans-of-Pope-Francis type at least) are the bad guys and thus their interests are hateful and invalid and must be opposed. The KKK are bad guys and thus their actions are hateful and invalid and must be opposed. You attack bad guys. You don’t attack good guys. Whence the confusion?

The fact that they have such a clearly defined enemy is, incidentally, why the Left can mobilize effectively despite being a creaky, Frankenstein mass of mostly incompatible interest groups. Mexicans will ethnically cleanse blacks when their territories run afoul of one another, but they both vote for the same party. Homosexuals don’t always enjoy the gentlest of treatment from their Muslim friends, but they nevertheless routinely support Democratic politicians who promise more immigrants and “refugee resettlements” from all the vibrant corners of Africa and the Middle East. The Democrat coalition is organized not around a coherent vision of the future but a shared opponent.

It would serve the American Right well to catch up to their counterparts in this respect. The fact that the Left’s vision of the future is less than coherent doesn’t mean it will be any less Hell and misery for almost everyone involved. In this future, the children we don’t abort will be referred to by gender neutral pronouns as they’re taught lessons on anal sex in elementary. In this future, pedophilia will be “de-stigmatized.” In this future, America will be a rich, multicultural mosaic of ethnic and religious conflict. In this future, the federal government and the financial powers behind the throne will continue their rapine of the wealth of the middle class. In this future, Detroits and Fergusons will proliferate. (So will sharia zones.) In this future, the nuclear family will continue to disappear. In this future, if the lights do go out forever, it will seem almost a mercy to any normal Americans left on that final evening.

There are, all around you, individuals and groups working to realize this future, this dystopia. These people are your enemies. Many of them consciously and deliberately mean you harm. Many of them mean you harm as a byproduct of their devotion to one or more of the inhuman ideals of social justice. All of them mean you harm, and they will harm you unless they’re stopped. They will extinguish you from this very earth. College professors penning op eds about America’s ongoing struggles with racism. Mark them. Protest marchers attempting to stamp out the last dying embers of the institution of marriage. Mark them, too. Donors purchasing politicians in DC. Journalists dutifully looking the other way. Immigrants recreating cities in the likeness of the Third World. Church groups and nonprofits importing them. Ideologues in the family courts. Activists in judge’s robes. Politically-saavy careerists in police departments and the military. Feral teens in the street. Tally them up. Keep a list. These are the enemies. Quit trying to figure out to refute the logical principles you think they’re acting on. Figure out instead how to resist, how to thwart, how to beat them.

quote:

Author: John Glanton
John Glanton is that backwaters, unreconstructed Southern bigot the Huffington Post always warns you about. He has been assured on multiple occasions that views such as his can only issue from the profoundest depths of hatred, ignorance, and inbreeding—but he reckons he’s just about as smart as the next guy. Glanton invites you to consider that polite society might just be pounding the table because they can’t pound the facts.

Baloogan posted:

i kinda enjoyed seeing the photographs

Bud K ninja sword posted:

... who the gently caress brings mace to a goddamn brawl. And helmets? I mean i understand a gas mask and all but what the gently caress is all this captain america costume poo poo. bring your fists and a write your lawyers number on your arm in sharpie buddy.

rudatron posted:

god drat what a joke

who won?

answer: nobody. nobody won. Everyone, both in the protest and even us, watching it, have been made lesser by this

Grondoth posted:

HOW IS HE STILL GETTING BOOKED ANYWHERE

THERE ISN'T A SINGLE SCIENTIST IN ANY FIELD RELATED TO THE THINGS HE WROTE ABOUT THAT DOESN'T HATE HIS STUPID BOOK

Pener Kropoopkin posted:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dXpffMXUcAg

lancemantis posted:

is this....is this serious?

I just can't tell anymore

lancemantis posted:

is this....is this serious?

I just can't tell anymore

Mordekai posted:

has the bell crve been refuted?

Bud K ninja sword posted:

I think its the indignity of possibly losing a fight and looking weak, they just cant handle a proper rear end kicking anymore in the age of power fantasy vidja games. Some times you need to get punched in the head properly in order to learn a valuable lesson about civility.


and.... i old person-ed again