|
NotJustANumber99 posted:This is a thread titled about acceptable discourse in hollywood and in the post above mine there is a graph of walt disney co's share price. Did you not read the posts above it? Someone was claiming Disney's stocks went down because of firing James Gunn.
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2018 23:40
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 22:43 |
|
|
I agree Walt Disney Co's share price is a valuable metric when discussing acceptable public discourse. Anywhere. Like look at what you're saying?
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2018 23:44
|
|
|
I was fired from Raytheon because I questioned whether it was wise that we should refocus our efforts on the higher profit margin bomb industry. Their share price went up. Lol I'm a total oval office.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2018 23:47
|
|
|
Are you broken?
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2018 23:48
|
|
|
lmao ok bro
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2018 23:48
|
|
|
I agree lmao and lol.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2018 23:51
|
|
|
Capitalism is the society we live in and influences everything we and others say and do, and a company seeing their profits or share price go up will encourage them to stay the course, in this case continuing to appease internet rapist Nazis. So I see no problem with citing it in these conversations.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2018 23:51
|
|
|
NotJustANumber99 posted:I agree Walt Disney Co's share price is a valuable metric when discussing acceptable public discourse. Anywhere. It was pulled up because an earlier post was a Fox Business report saying stocks took a dive, which they apparently didn't. Are you okay, dude?
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2018 00:09
|
|
|
I am not sure that I am OK. But I wonder why within a couple of posts of saying something that... I dunno might require... evaluation? I have been quizzed on my sanity by more than one poster. I'm not all up on this and am somewhat old fashioned but could you explain to be whether this could be a case of gas lighting or not?
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2018 00:19
|
|
|
Your reaction was over the top.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2018 00:28
|
|
|
NotJustANumber99 posted:I am not sure that I am OK. Your reading comprehension is poo poo, you ignored the context of a post in order to attack it and then doubled down when people pointed out what you were doing. You should probably take a break.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2018 00:32
|
|
|
Mechafunkzilla posted:Your reading comprehension is poo poo, you ignored the context of a post in order to attack it and then doubled down when people pointed out what you were doing. You should probably take a break. I've seen a bunch of your posts and they tend to be on the money so yeah, I'll have a look. But right now I disagree. Edit: Sorry. What was I doing?
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2018 00:36
|
|
|
HUNDU THE BEAST GOD posted:I'd love to know what the appreciable difference is between the two, to be perfectly honest with you. I see what you’re both saying. Republicans being shitheads has indeed always been a thing but their beliefs and values are degenerating generationally - it used to be they could credibly claim to have a coherent core strand of ideology, along with your racists and zealots and profiteers. Wrong but, as someone said, palatable. Now, the bigots are emboldened and the profiteers (and associated grifters) have complete control, and everyone involved is working with half remembered ideology corrupted towards their particular issues (like prosperity gospel style misreadings) - thus small g governmenters pass huge military budget increases but only mention the deficit when social programs are discussed, state’s rightists override state laws, they don’t even try to appeal to supple side economic theories when cutting taxes, and the ethnic cleansing types don’t say the quiet part quietly anymore. Their philosophy was never truly coherent and consistent and as it gets replicated through the generations it’s degrading like Keaton’s successive clones in Multiplicity. To answer your question, though, I’d say the difference is the older generation he was referring to is the adults who get taken in by a viral photoshop. Cernovich and co. are the generation that creates them - that grew up internet adjacent - the trolls and shitheads we’ve spent 20 years dealing with on this site. Meaner and more racist, I assume due to the anonymity and echo chambers the internet has allowed - fewer mediating forces, more egging on. And they know how to play people and work systems since, as we know, all trolls push limits. The older generation will call you a slur. The newer type he’s trying to define will do that, and call in a swat team to your address. Does the line get fuzzy as you move between the generations? Yeah. But the newer ones are creating the lies - the older ones tend to consume them. The newer type is cannier - but, as trolls, they are also cowardly when isolated and unmasked. Enderzero fucked around with this message at 00:42 on Jul 27, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2018 00:36
|
|
|
HUNDU THE BEAST GOD posted:I'd love to know what the appreciable difference is between the two, to be perfectly honest with you. Late-2000s republicans are unrepentant big-business capitalists. Tea Partiers are a portion of the voting base of the Republican party who were weaned on FoxNews-style propaganda for most of their adult lives. They were subsequently hijacked by Internet propaganda that was more effective because it could be substantially less restrained than broadcast television. This propaganda was mostly sponsored by traditional Republican funding sources, much of it was orchestrated through PACs, and the initial appeal of it was anti-socialist rhetoric concentrated against Obama campaign promises. Yes, it adopted racist tones quickly, but confounding "Obummer is a kenyan and therefore an illegal president" and "Non-white people are subhuman" does nothing to help anyone understand how we got to where we are today, which is probably a very important part of understanding how to get out. The new wave, the Alt-Right, are comprised at the core of disenfranchised people who were mostly radicalized on dark corners of the internet. This is the one comfortably interwoven with "nonwhites are subhuman" racism. They are a progression on the Tea Party concept, but not directly related to the Tea Party as the Tea Party has been co-opted into a recognized branch of the Republican party. The Alt-Right is still mostly only dogwhistled at by career politicians, but as they pick up speed and support with Tea Partiers who feel disenfranchised by the movement's formal adoption into the party and powerful hate groups like the KKK and non-internet Nazis that line gets blurrier and blurrier. These are three distinct groups and lumping them into one or pretending they're actually the same makes the problem substantially harder to understand and deal with. YOLOsubmarine posted:They’re the same people. The Republicans in power are like 99% the same people that were in power then. Some of them tut tut about decorum and some go full open white supremacist like Steve King, but they all support the policies the Nazis want even if they sometimes distance themselves from the rhetoric. The Republican Party hasn’t changed, it’s simply become more honest about it’s ideals. YOLOsubmarine posted:Who do you think is giving Trump his 80+% approval ratings among republicans? The Tea Party movement may have been ideological for some of the leaders but it was undeniably cultural for most of the voters. Trump's an ideological weathervane but he aligns with the Tea Partiers in one very important way, which is white outrage at the world changing and diversifying around them. Those old white folks at the Tea Party rallies who were saying things like keep government out of my medicare and chanting for lower taxes but maintaining social security weren't ideologues that suddenly discovered their ideology right about the time a black president became a possibility, they were angry whites who latched onto whatever party promised to help them stay on top of the social hierarchy. Why do you think the House Freedom Caucus, the Tea Partiest dudes ever, are trying to do Trump a solid and kill the Russia investigation? Career politicians taking a stance or making a vote on an issue doesn't indicate their personal feelings so much as what they think it will take to get re-elected. Tea Party Movement voters were moved by rhetoric, and felt that they had found a movement (that happened to be manufactured mostly by Americans for Prosperity but they didn't know that) that really understood their suffering. The Tea Party was founded around the idea that bailing out homeowners and building a rail system and investing in communities is *socialism* moreso than that Barack Obama is Black. The House Freedom Caucus was formed to oppose the standing Congressional leadership, and in downing Boehner they accomplished what they were formed to do. The House Freedom Caucus and Trump did not get along for the first year of Trump's presidency, and their current cooperation probably has more to do with it being an election year than anything else. You post about politics like a Redditor, and that's not a good thing. Your posts read a lot like someone read the headlines over the last 8 years, maybe a couple of articles, and then filled in their gaps in knowledge with a lot of conjecture and a heaping helping of personal bias. Manufacturing timelines or narratives, especially ones that see Nazis taking over the American Government as a logical extension of Republicans, isn't going to help anyone stop any Nazis, not today, not ever. Please do some research about this stuff before you rush to p-p-p-p-post about things you fundamentally do not understand. YOLOsubmarine posted:As for gatekeeping allies...who say’s they’re allies? “Thinks James Gunn shouldn’t have been fired because Mike Cernovich is a Nazi” doesn’t really tell me much about their politics. The enemy of my enemy is my friend and all that. Those are real people, many of whom are or could be voters, and either way their unique voices and energy can add to the movement and help convince others. If you want to turn them away on the basis of how they came into the fold then know I'd trade two of you for each of them any day of the week, and so would anyone else who actually cares about stopping Nazis from taking more power in the US.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2018 11:58
|
|
|
Plastik posted:These are three distinct groups and lumping them into one or pretending they're actually the same makes the problem substantially harder to understand and deal with. These taxonomic pseudodistinctions are interesting to muse about, but ultimately, it's too flattering. These are all slight variations on a type, the affluent "middle class" reactionary. People who live paycheck to paycheck think they are middle class, anyone who owns a home thinks they are middle class, and also, literal millionaires think they're middle class. What unites them is a common politic, therefore there is no appreciable difference between the Blue Lives Matter shithead, the small business tyrant who thinks its their god given right to make people work for free, a neonazi, a Fox News boomer, amoral finance guy. Collectively, they're all worthless for the exact same reason.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2018 14:40
|
|
|
HUNDU THE BEAST GOD posted:What unites them is a common politic, therefore there is no appreciable difference between the Blue Lives Matter shithead, the small business tyrant who thinks its their god given right to make people work for free, a neonazi, a Fox News boomer, amoral finance guy. Collectively, they're all worthless for the exact same reason. Which is?
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2018 16:24
|
|
|
ricdesi posted:Which is? gently caress you got mine
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2018 16:25
|
|
|
Concentration of power in whatever self-justifying heirarchy they are merely coincidentally at the top of and totally invested in. They will latch onto whatever is convenient to maintain even the perception of this power, which includes gratuitously punishing "lessers" when they are anxious about losing their position in this heirarchy and when they're feeling comfortable, inventing philosophies that suggest that the status quo is the natural order.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2018 16:32
|
|
|
HUNDU THE BEAST GOD posted:What unites them is a common politic, therefore there is no appreciable difference between the Blue Lives Matter shithead, the small business tyrant who thinks its their god given right to make people work for free, a neonazi, a Fox News boomer, amoral finance guy. Collectively, they're all worthless for the exact same reason. If you pause and put yourself on the other side of this sort of Neopolitik categorical rejection for a minute you might come close to understanding how exactly this attitude has allowed all of those groups to start sliding toward Nazi radicalization. At some point we have to address that, the fact that people on both sides like to throw around a lot of blanket damnations but offer no solutions (because pointing out that you're Definitely Not The Problem feels good but making any attempt to fix it Is Hard) or we're going to end up knee-deep in extreme radicals on both sides of the aisle that don't give two shits about reality. Oh wait.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2018 16:59
|
|
|
ricdesi posted:Which is? They're all Trump supporters. The "these traditional republicans aren't Nazis, they just vote for and provide political support FOR Nazis" take is certainly special. Plastik posted:Late-2000s republicans are unrepentant big-business capitalists. Both parties were and are still full of unrepentant big-business capitalists. The republican party has been the party of racists since 1968 and that's where their political power comes from. Without the mostly reliable southern voting block that was founded on coded racism they would have ceased to exist as a party long ago because "support big business" isn't a political winner. Nobody outside of actual rich people and their editorial writing sycophants actually likes big business, the Dixiecrats were mostly working class and union, but by god they hated black folks. And that hasn't changed, except you can expand it from black folks to brown folks. You've created all of these pointless taxonomies to try and put republicans into little boxes but to what end? Even if this information was correct (which it isn't, you're taking republicans at their word to determine what they care about, instead of looking at what they do) what do you propose to do with it? Are you advocating that we can convince some of these blocs to be allies? That you can cause a party split? That we need to convince them to return to the good ole days of Republicans not being as outwardly racist, merely passing incredibly racist policies while also starting never-ending wars and slashing social services and punishing the poor for their poverty? Republicans now are republicans then. Trump voters were overwhelmingly old and white, not surprisingly the same people who have always formed the strongest Republican voting block. Those folks didn't change their ideology overnight when Trump became the nominee. Also the HFC has had their issues with Trump on the economic side but they are strong allies not merely because it's an election year but because they are actual allies with common cause on a whole host of issues including hating Muslims and brown folks. It's not mere election politics, it's because Trump is helping them further their agenda. Plastik posted:If you pause and put yourself on the other side of this sort of Neopolitik categorical rejection for a minute you might come close to understanding how exactly this attitude has allowed all of those groups to start sliding toward Nazi radicalization. At some point we have to address that, the fact that people on both sides like to throw around a lot of blanket damnations but offer no solutions (because pointing out that you're Definitely Not The Problem feels good but making any attempt to fix it Is Hard) or we're going to end up knee-deep in extreme radicals on both sides of the aisle that don't give two shits about reality. Ah, yes, the truth is in the middle, good point. What good ole days are we trying to get back to before this slide to Nazi radicalization? The 80s? The 90s? YOLOsubmarine fucked around with this message at 17:22 on Jul 27, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2018 17:20
|
|
|
Plastik posted:extreme radicals on both sides Sure, yeah, cool
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2018 17:23
|
|
|
Lol centrism nonsense
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2018 17:27
|
|
|
Plastik posted:If you pause and put yourself on the other side of this sort of Neopolitik categorical rejection for a minute you might come close to understanding how exactly this attitude has allowed all of those groups to start sliding toward Nazi radicalization. At some point we have to address that, the fact that people on both sides like to throw around a lot of blanket damnations but offer no solutions (because pointing out that you're Definitely Not The Problem feels good but making any attempt to fix it Is Hard) or we're going to end up knee-deep in extreme radicals on both sides of the aisle that don't give two shits about reality. These people can't be "fixed" and compromise with their values led to Bill Clinton. At a moment in time in history where it's rarely been more clear that liberalism does nothing but capitulate to "Nazi radicalization" (see: actually existing fascistic beliefs practices like leading the world in juvenile and women prisoners, unwavering worship of imperial foreign policy and military adventurism, obsession with micromanaging the personal habits of people who rely on public aid, the constant terror of "mob justice" wielded against powerful people, etc.), it's natural to reach for Deteriorating Discourse on Both Sides. There's three solutions in contention, the death cult of the American Dream, its boring close relation Managerial Technocracy and Full Communism.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2018 17:33
|
|
|
YOLOsubmarine posted:You've created all of these pointless taxonomies to try and put republicans into little boxes but to what end? Even if this information was correct (which it isn't, you're taking republicans at their word to determine what they care about, instead of looking at what they do) what do you propose to do with it? Are you advocating that we can convince some of these blocs to be allies? That you can cause a party split? That we need to convince them to return to the good ole days of Republicans not being as outwardly racist, merely passing incredibly racist policies while also starting never-ending wars and slashing social services and punishing the poor for their poverty? "It's weird, I put my Republicans in a box with Nazis then taped it and put it in a closet where I don't engage with it in any way, and now every election I've got more and more Nazis to deal with???" YOLOsubmarine posted:Trump voters were overwhelmingly old and white, not surprisingly the same people who have always formed the strongest Republican voting block. Those folks didn't change their ideology overnight when Trump became the nominee. The voters who elected Trump are the youngest group of voters who have elected a Republican in thirty years. Covering your ears and telling everyone the problem will solve itself is how, again, you end up with literal Nazis in power. YOLOsubmarine posted:Also the HFC has had their issues with Trump on the economic side but they are strong allies not merely because it's an election year but because they are actual allies with common cause on a whole host of issues including hating Muslims and brown folks. It's not mere election politics, it's because Trump is helping them further their agenda. Trump was positively vitriolic about the HFC until around March. You're demonstrating the opinion of a person who has never read more than headlines, sees political parties as monoliths, and genuinely believes that there's no value in looking at the world in more than black and white. There are cracks in that block and you can use them, or you can ignore them and we can have more Nazis. YOLOsubmarine posted:Ah, yes, the truth is in the middle, good point. What good ole days are we trying to get back to before this slide to Nazi radicalization? The 80s? The 90s? Nobody said the truth is in the middle, I said stop categorically rejecting people and start proposing workable solutions or you're worthless to anyone who actually doesn't want to be knee-deep in Nazis. Which you're proving yourself to be. There are a gently caress of a lot of lovely racists in this country and if we don't start either convincing them to stay at home or giving them non-Nazis to vote for we're gonna end up with a lot of Nazis before we end up with any less Nazis. I don't want to go through that. Please stop putting us through that. HUNDU THE BEAST GOD posted:These people can't be "fixed" and compromise with their values led to Bill Clinton. If you really think that More Bill Clinton is a fate similar in any way to Nazis then you really, really don't understand Nazis. HUNDU THE BEAST GOD posted:At a moment in time in history where it's rarely been more clear that liberalism does nothing but capitulate to "Nazi radicalization" Yes let's double the gently caress down on the type of toxic masturbatory behavior the American Left has been engaging in for the last decade, because even though we now have Nazis in power on the right there's no way it'll end with More Nazis In More Power On The Right. Shit Fuckasaurus fucked around with this message at 17:45 on Jul 27, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2018 17:39
|
|
|
If you think we're getting out of this situation without bashing some Nazi heads in, you're fooling yourself. "Convincing them to stay home" ain't gonna do it.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2018 17:44
|
|
|
Basebf555 posted:If you think we're getting out of this situation without bashing some Nazi heads in, you're fooling yourself. "Convincing them to stay home" ain't gonna do it. I agree, now that there are Nazis in play we're going to have to get messy to get them out. It's not a bad idea, however, to recognize how we got here and maybe stop doing the things that got us All These Nazis because there's a drat good chance it'll just lead to Even More Nazis even if we punch some of them in the face in our sweet Youtube videos. To be clear, the Nazis are a self-solving problem in the long run and I think we all agree on that. But pretending that we can't do things to minimize Nazis in the meantime while attacking them frontally is just ignorant and goes through More Nazis before we get to Fewer Nazis.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2018 17:48
|
|
|
Plastik posted:If you really think that More Bill Clinton is a fate similar in any way to Nazis then you really, really don't understand Nazis. Aight.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2018 17:49
|
|
|
Bill Clinton realized Reagan's dream of totally destroying print journalism by allowing corporations to totally gut the profession and singlehandedly mainstreamed the far right by handing sane "pro-business" Republicans like Roger Ailes and Rupert Murdoch defacto control of the media through the Telecommunications Act.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2018 18:00
|
|
|
Plastik posted:"It's weird, I put my Republicans in a box with Nazis then taped it and put it in a closet where I don't engage with it in any way, and now every election I've got more and more Nazis to deal with???" Can you point to any actual policy differences between the current crop of Republican's in government and the past ones? The Nazi's have always been there. America didn't suddenly develop a Nazi problem two years ago. They're just more vocal now, in large part due to technological advancements and also because the President is one of them. quote:The voters who elected Trump are the youngest group of voters who have elected a Republican in thirty years. Covering your ears and telling everyone the problem will solve itself is how, again, you end up with literal Nazis in power. Romney carried a higher percentage of those 45 and under than Trump did. Nationally Trump did slightly worse than Romney as a percentage of the electorate. The actual demographic breakdowns from 2012 to 2016 were remarkably stable, Trump won because he picked up just the right number of people in just the right states, helped in part by people voting for third parties at a higher rate than 2012. quote:Trump was positively vitriolic about the HFC until around March. You're demonstrating the opinion of a person who has never read more than headlines, sees political parties as monoliths, and genuinely believes that there's no value in looking at the world in more than black and white. There are cracks in that block and you can use them, or you can ignore them and we can have more Nazis. Trump has been positively vitriolic about basically anyone in his orbit at some point or another. A "traditional" conservatives have broken with him a number of times, to no actual effect. You're buying into political theater. What has actually happened is that they have given him two supreme court nominees, passed a huge tax giveaway to corporations and the rich, and supported him on his rollback of environmental regulations and his racist immigration polices. But they're VERY offended by his language. quote:Nobody said the truth is in the middle, I said stop categorically rejecting people and start proposing workable solutions or you're worthless to anyone who actually doesn't want to be knee-deep in Nazis. Which you're proving yourself to be. There are a gently caress of a lot of lovely racists in this country and if we don't start either convincing them to stay at home or giving them non-Nazis to vote for we're gonna end up with a lot of Nazis before we end up with any less Nazis. I don't want to go through that. Please stop putting us through that. What you're describing here is exactly the way we got here in the first place. Running blue dogs and centrists who then got ousted by actual republicans because why get the diet version when you can have the real thing. We've had 50 years of respectability politics and trying to understand the other side and here we are. The racists have plenty of non-nazis to vote for. Turns out they like the Nazis.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2018 18:12
|
|
|
Plastik posted:"It's weird, I put my Republicans in a box with Nazis then taped it and put it in a closet where I don't engage with it in any way, and now every election I've got more and more Nazis to deal with???" There's a really cool book called The Reactionary Mind that will help you work through all these incomplete thoughts. For example, invoking the concept of "workable solutions" without filling it with any content. Or, pointing to the idea of breeding fascists through using the wrong political discourse, without explaining the mechanisms of fascist breeding, or what is ""wrong"" with the discourse in a substantive way.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2018 18:53
|
|
|
Terrorist Fistbump posted:There's a really cool book called The Reactionary Mind that will help you work through all these incomplete thoughts. For example, invoking the concept of "workable solutions" without filling it with any content. Or, pointing to the idea of breeding fascists through using the wrong political discourse, without explaining the mechanisms of fascist breeding, or what is ""wrong"" with the discourse in a substantive way. Pretty much.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2018 18:54
|
|
|
Terrorist Fistbump posted:There's a really cool book called The Reactionary Mind that will help you work through all these incomplete thoughts. For example, invoking the concept of "workable solutions" without filling it with any content. Or, pointing to the idea of breeding fascists through using the wrong political discourse, without explaining the mechanisms of fascist breeding, or what is ""wrong"" with the discourse in a substantive way. I’d also recommend Rick Perlstein’s trilogy starting with Nixonland to understand the historical development of the modern right.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2018 19:02
|
|
|
Really, the problem lies in viewing fascists (and by extension, socialists etc.) as people with a difference of opinion in the learned sense. Like, a guy who reads one too many op-eds in the failing New York Times advocating for school desegregation or whatever and says, "Well, that settles it, liberals want to spend too much time and money on this problem when they should really be eliminating sales tax. I am totally against them now. If only they had been more reasonable." That is a complete misunderstanding of the reactionary core of fascism as a sociopolitical movement.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2018 19:20
|
|
|
The (unspoken) gospel of the Republican Party since Nixon was the Southern Strategy, which was predicated on appealing to race hate while maintaining a veneer of plausible deniability (for a certain definition of "plausible") to avoid alienating moderates. Trump's real heresy from a GOP point of view was rejecting the Southern Strategy's nuance and replacing it with open race hate, and as it turned out any "moderates" that voted Republican all this time were actually fine with race hate all along. This confounded the Republican politicians who based their entire careers on the Southern Strategy, but there was no sea-change in the Republican base itself, we just got to see their true nature all along. He fired up the most garbage of the garbage people in the GOP (which is dangerous) and depressed the the willfully dense "reasonable" Republicans (which had no effect on anything), but both groups had been pulling the "R" lever the whole time since 1968.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2018 19:27
|
|
|
Plastik posted:If you really think that More Bill Clinton is a fate similar in any way to Nazis then you really, really don't understand Nazis. Ever heard of a guy by the name of Friedrich Ebert?
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2018 04:42
|
|
|
HUNDU THE BEAST GOD posted:Bill Clinton realized Reagan's dream of totally destroying print journalism by allowing corporations to totally gut the profession and singlehandedly mainstreamed the far right by handing sane "pro-business" Republicans like Roger Ailes and Rupert Murdoch defacto control of the media through the Telecommunications Act. DeimosRising posted:Ever heard of a guy by the name of Friedrich Ebert? Yes, I knew about Ebert and the Telecommunications act. But holy poo poo if either of you is unironically comparing Bill Clinton to Nazis (or even Trump, who despite his best efforts isn't a very good Nazi) instead of just trying to score Internet Points then you really, really do not understand Nazis. I agree he wasn't very good for a lot of different reasons but holy poo poo, seriously, Nazis. YOLOsubmarine posted:Can you point to any actual policy differences between the current crop of Republican's in government and the past ones? Again I think you don't understand career politicians and it's crippling your ability to keep up. The only new Republican acting idealogue who cannot apparently perform as a career politican (by which I mean supressing his views in favor of getting elected or doing what gets him paid) on the federal level is Trump. No Nazis got elected to the Federal government in 2016. If we don't make substantial changes soon, though, the same may not be true in 2018. YOLOsubmarine posted:Romney carried a higher percentage of those 45 and under than Trump did. The actual demographic breakdowns from 2012 to 2016 were remarkably stable, First off, Romney lost. I very specifically said "elected" twice, you even quoted it. Romney didn't get elected, he lost. Second, Mitt "R Money" Romney secondary to his Tea Party supporters in that race. Palin is what mattered to them. Mitt's race was unique for a presidential run in how little it had to do with him. Finally, my statement is correct regarding demographics. Trump lost voters compared to Romney in the highest age bracket, and gained on him in the middle age 30-44 bracket. This lowered his average voter age. I suspect you knew this though, or at least your source did, as you cited "under 45" even though that's two of the groups polled for. Either way, these people aren't going to die (and thus stop voting) for another 30 years. YOLOsubmarine posted:Trump has been positively vitriolic about basically anyone in his orbit at some point or another. A "traditional" conservatives have broken with him a number of times, to no actual effect. You're buying into political theater. What has actually happened is that they have given him two supreme court nominees, passed a huge tax giveaway to corporations and the rich, and supported him on his rollback of environmental regulations and his racist immigration polices. But they're VERY offended by his language. Right, yes, absolutely, I'm buying into political theater. I forgot that they didn't *actually* reject the first-pass AHCA, or that if they had it accepted it it would have passed without revision. That's not a real thing they did, they did something else. YOLOsubmarine posted:What you're describing here is exactly the way we got here in the first place. Running blue dogs and centrists who then got ousted by actual republicans because why get the diet version when you can have the real thing. We've had 50 years of respectability politics and trying to understand the other side and here we are. The racists have plenty of non-nazis to vote for. Turns out they like the Nazis. I am by no means advising we change our politics, just the way we interact with people. Maybe stop being lovely and toxic, maybe stop driving people to places like 4chan and Reddit where they can be radicalized, maybe stop attaching the word "white" to a bunch of negative words so that White Supremacists can use it as "evidence" that they're not the only ones playing race politics when trying to recruit people. Or you know, keep doing those things, keep feeding ammunition to your political enemies, and ultimately be complicit in Nazis. Seeing as two of your points were self-resolving if you'd actually read my posts I really can't find it in myself to give a poo poo what you think. sean10mm posted:the Southern Strategy I'm well aware of The Southern Strategy, but until the 2010s that was very much the Republicans wagging the dog, using dog-whistle racism to get elected and doing as little as they could to appease those groups while using normal strategies like gerrymandering to secure their power so they could do less and less to appease the base and get votes and more for the interests that actually paid their bills. Then the Tea Party kind of ruined things. I agree that it didn't so much ruin things than trot out the fact that they were real hosed up for everyone to see (which you misattribute to Trump but eh) but they unseated 3 candidates who had overwhelming party support and spoiled several other primaries pretty effectively. The screeching brakes were audible as the Republican Party redirected a lot of their messaging toward the Tea Party, and that messaging ended up more successful than anyone anticipated. Characterizing this as "we just got to see their true nature all along" in the context of racism is ignorant of the nature of career politicians. They were doing what they felt they needed to do to get elected, and the harder they leaned into it, the more and more effectively it began working, so the further they kept leaning. 2012 was a bad year for Republicans, relatively speaking, but 2014 was bonkers. And then, well, Nazis happened. You've pretty correctly characterized what happened there, but I feel it's important to emphasize that while I don't think that the Tea Party (either the movement or the Caucus) involved politicians are necessarily actually closer to Nazis than R politicians were before, the people getting involved in politics now are real, actual Nazis and the problem with idealogues in politics is that when it becomes clear to them that their voters have diminished and they're not going to win again they start getting desperate and stop caring about appearances. The National Policy Institute has a lot of money and has donated to a lot of career politicians who know they still have a lot of money. Terrorist Fistbump posted:There's a really cool book called The Reactionary Mind that will help you work through all these incomplete thoughts. For example, invoking the concept of "workable solutions" without filling it with any content. Or, pointing to the idea of breeding fascists through using the wrong political discourse, without explaining the mechanisms of fascist breeding, or what is ""wrong"" with the discourse in a substantive way. I appreciate the book recommendation (is the "to Donald Trump" substantially better than "To Sarah Palin"? The latter is substantially cheaper) but you should probably know that I've read a significant amount about radicalization. My half-brother is a former Radical Southern Baptist (pre-WBC shenanigans, still a Southern Baptist) and disappeared several times in college (to do lovely stuff and attend rallies most certainly) and I went through a period where I tried to understand why he was so deeply moved by his religious views (and also hating minorities and non-cishets, which for him is a religious view I guess) when our mother isn't religious at all and his father is reasonably moderate. It's been about a dozen years and the material I've read mostly predates the modern Internet, but my understanding is that Nazis are using more or less the same playbook that White Supremacists always have, just with 4chan and Reddit serving as the Nazi-adjacent social spaces from which they pull candidates for membership. I'll openly admit that I'm not competent in these areas and only spent about a year researching them in my spare time. To be clear, I'm not advocating anyone here break up a fascist breeding ground, I'm simply trying to get people in general to be less lovely in their treatment of people they disagree with so we can play less of an active role in directing people to those feeder groups. I know there's a profile that basically self-radicalizes to any given group, but I've seen a lot of otherwise moderate individuals being turned on to the alt-right movement (mostly on Reddit and Facebook, which I stopped using at the start of the year) because they were lonely loners with not a lot going for them and "Hey, they have neat nicknames for each other and I feel like I belong" and "these people are nice, maybe they've got some good points about racial inferiority". There is no question in my mind that this situation is being amplified by the hivemind toxicity that places like Twitter and Reddit are conditioning people to performatively demonstrate, and that if we could turn that down from 11 to maybe like 6 that it would make the Good Work people are doing to try and pull others out of these groups easier.
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2018 12:14
|
|
|
I've only read the 2nd edition of The Reactionary Mind with the chapter about Trump. From what the author has said in interviews, it's a pretty substantial revision and closer to what he intended to accomplish with the 1st edition.
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2018 15:45
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2018 16:00
|
|
|
George "There are fine people on both sides" Lucas.
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2018 18:20
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 22:43 |
|
|
Plastik posted:Yes, I knew about Ebert and the Telecommunications act. But holy poo poo if either of you is unironically comparing Bill Clinton to Nazis (or even Trump, who despite his best efforts isn't a very good Nazi) instead of just trying to score Internet Points then you really, really do not understand Nazis. I agree he wasn't very good for a lot of different reasons but holy poo poo, seriously, Nazis. What's Ebert got to do with nazis? The point is you don't have to be a Nazi to be a murderous piece of poo poo an in fact Nazi is not a privileged class of murderous piece of poo poo
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2018 06:27
|
|