Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Post
  • Reply
mobby_6kl
Aug 9, 2009

by Fluffdaddy
Only Donald the Dove can bring peace to the Middle East

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Mid-Life Crisis
Jun 13, 2023

by Fluffdaddy
Trump literally signed a withdrawal order

Edgar Allen Ho
Apr 3, 2017

by sebmojo

Mid-Life Crisis posted:

Neolibs want NWO and Obama/Biden definitely lean this direction, but are miles apart from the European overton on the concept.


bein' a USA and EU citizen, this poo poo is really funny.

In la belle France, a US-alike country with a much more open presidential system and a populace much more willing to start smashing poo poo when they feel wronged...

every election ends with the left wheeling out some dork to get owned into 3rd to 6th place, and the actual contest is Boring vs Boring if you're lucky or Boring vs Mussolini Had Some Good Ideas if you aren't. The mystical foreign land of Europe doesn't have better politics that the dumb yank can't comprehend.

Agents are GO!
Dec 29, 2004

Misunderstood posted:

And, like, you're also being really cagey about "inflation" - the Democratic establishment has a "position" that's different from the public's on it? So, like, what... they're pro-inflation?

Actually, Biden is pro-inflation, he signed an Executive Order creating a special rule that encourages it. Google "Biden Inflation Rule 34" for more information.

Mid-Life Crisis posted:

Are you saying Obama and Biden aren’t neocons? Trump is the least neocon of the three believe it or not, though it’s easy to get confused I can understand.

This seems suspiciously close to "everyone I don't like is a neocon." Bush 2 was a neocon, Obamna and Biden are various flavors of Neoliberal.

Bodyholes
Jun 30, 2005

Mid-Life Crisis posted:

Neolibs want NWO and Obama/Biden definitely lean this direction, but are miles apart from the European overton on the concept.

Giving Biden credit for Afghanistan is hilarious. It was Trump who set it up.

Obama had Hillary for Pete’s sake. Look at what they did to Libya.

Neither of these things have anything to do with domestic policy

Biden said back in 2008 Afghanistan was a mistake and we should get out. This was always his view.

Trump isn't a "neoconservative" because he is a fascist. He supports declaring martial law, overstepping his executive authority to fire and replace 50,000 federal bureaucrats with far right sycophants, and he plans to use the surveillance state to round up and deport millions of people. He refuses to concede he lost the 2020 election and if America rewards him with a 2nd term, this will embolden fascists in this country to bitch and try to overthrow election results every time. A Trump 2nd term is the end of democracy in America.

When you have Noam Chomsky, Ralph Nader, AOC, and Bernie Sanders all saying in no uncertain terms this cannot be allowed, I've gone ahead and written off all "leftists" that think everyone they supported up until now is a sellout. You guys aren't left anymore you're just in denial about it.

Blue Footed Booby
Oct 4, 2006

got those happy feet

Agents are GO! posted:

Actually, Biden is pro-inflation, he signed an Executive Order creating a special rule that encourages it. Google "Biden Inflation Rule 34" for more information.


..

I did this and my eyes are opened. :eek:

Kalit
Nov 6, 2006

The great thing about the thousands of slaughtered Palestinian children is that they can't pull away when you fondle them or sniff their hair.

That's a Biden success story.

Mid-Life Crisis posted:

Giving Biden credit for Afghanistan is hilarious. It was Trump who set it up.

I'm so sick of people repeating this point. So, once again, to show that Trump wouldn't have either followed through or would have immediately re-deployed troops: https://thehill.com/policy/defense/570034-trump-us-should-take-military-action-if-taliban-doesnt-return-billions-in/

quote:

“If it is not handed back, we should either go in with unequivocal Military force and get it, or at least bomb the hell out of it. Nobody ever thought such stupidity, as this feeble-brained withdrawal, was possible!” he added.

It seemed like Trump only rushed this withdrawal to try to sabotage Biden after he got mad that he lost the election

Kalit fucked around with this message at 16:47 on Nov 24, 2023

Mid-Life Crisis
Jun 13, 2023

by Fluffdaddy

Kalit posted:

I'm so sick of people repeating this point. So, once again, to show that Trump wouldn't have either followed through or would have immediately re-deployed troops: https://thehill.com/policy/defense/570034-trump-us-should-take-military-action-if-taliban-doesnt-return-billions-in/

This is just a lot of reactionary nonsense that proves nothing

Bodyholes posted:

Biden said back in 2008 Afghanistan was a mistake and we should get out. This was always his view.

Trump isn't a "neoconservative" because he is a fascist. He supports declaring martial law, overstepping his executive authority to fire and replace 50,000 federal bureaucrats with far right sycophants, and he plans to use the surveillance state to round up and deport millions of people. He refuses to concede he lost the 2020 election and if America rewards him with a 2nd term, this will embolden fascists in this country to bitch and try to overthrow election results every time. A Trump 2nd term is the end of democracy in America.

When you have Noam Chomsky, Ralph Nader, AOC, and Bernie Sanders all saying in no uncertain terms this cannot be allowed, I've gone ahead and written off all "leftists" that think everyone they supported up until now is a sellout. You guys aren't left anymore you're just in denial about it.

The terms aren’t mutually exclusive

TheDeadlyShoe
Feb 14, 2014

In complete honesty: if Biden is a Neo-con, why did he withdraw from Afghanistan? And if neocons would withdraw from Afghanistan how is Trump not a neo-con? Seriously, I don't know how you're squaring these circles.

TheDeadlyShoe fucked around with this message at 17:24 on Nov 24, 2023

bird food bathtub
Aug 9, 2003

College Slice

Mid-Life Crisis posted:

Trump literally signed a withdrawal order

If you're going to take the position that Trump signing or saying something means he would then have felt obligated and committed to take a specific act at a later point after changing what charitably passes for his mind then, uhh, :lol: I guess? Have fun trying to make that argument. Would be good for further laughs.

Mid-Life Crisis
Jun 13, 2023

by Fluffdaddy
Trump heavily campaigned on isolationism and did many isolationist acts that pissed off neocons. The whole NAFTA arguments, etc. His blurts of shows of strength were just his strongman tendencies not a policy. I’m not going to say Trump wasn’t a neocon in practice, he maintained the status quo like the others, he was just the least of the bunch.

If neocon is foreign conflict to sustain petrodollar, Obama let Hillary do her damage in Libya. Afghanistan had nothing to really do with petrodollar anymore. Israel is his bloodthirsty moment. Also, barely anything has been done to reduce the strangle. That’s the bar.

Xiahou Dun
Jul 16, 2009

We shall dive down through black abysses... and in that lair of the Deep Ones we shall dwell amidst wonder and glory forever.



Mid-Life Crisis posted:

Trump heavily campaigned on isolationism and did many isolationist acts that pissed off neocons. The whole NAFTA arguments, etc. His blurts of shows of strength were just his strongman tendencies not a policy.

If neocon is foreign conflict to sustain petrodollar, Obama let Hillary do her damage in Libya. Afghanistan had nothing to really do with petrodollar anymore. Israel is his bloodthirsty moment.

O I got it now.

You have no idea what words mean.

That’s not what “isolationism” or “neocon” mean to anyone else. Even if your definitions were internally consistent, that’s not how anyone uses them.

Mooseontheloose
May 13, 2003

Mid-Life Crisis posted:

Trump heavily campaigned on isolationism and did many isolationist acts that pissed off neocons. The whole NAFTA arguments, etc. His blurts of shows of strength were just his strongman tendencies not a policy. I’m not going to say Trump wasn’t a neocon in practice, he maintained the status quo like the others, he was just the least of the bunch.

If neocon is foreign conflict to sustain petrodollar, Obama let Hillary do her damage in Libya. Afghanistan had nothing to really do with petrodollar anymore. Israel is his bloodthirsty moment. Also, barely anything has been done to reduce the strangle. That’s the bar.

I think you are just trying to make this an ACTUALLY the Democrats. So first, quoting myself:

quote:


As a reminder for Trump was an isolationist ACTCHALLY people:
*He bombed Iran and only by the grace of Iranian leaders did that not go fully hot.
*Trump at the very least expanded drone warfare into Somalia and oh yah, restricted reporting on drone strikes.
*"Alleged civilian deaths in Iraq and Syria skyrocketed under Trump's four years in office to more than 13,000
*Trump had an on the ground NAVY Seals raid Yemen.
*Let's not forget the raid in Niger that got swept under the rug in 2017 that we all collectively decided was not worth investigating.

I might eat a probe for this but there are a lot of people rooting for their take, to use a sports talk radio term. You can be disgusted with Biden and his handing of Gaza but you don't need to ignore the reality of a Trump presidency because it's inconvenient for your argument.

Also this :

quote:

Afghanistan had nothing to really do with petrodollar anymore.

Is complete nonsense. Afghanistan never had extractable resources that people insisted there were. Iraq sure but Afghanistan never made sense as an extraction of resources imperial adventure.

I AM GRANDO
Aug 20, 2006

Seeking to maintain access to oil in C21 is a core activity of the United States and not really reducible to one school or approach. What did the neocons say they wanted and what did they say they were going to do? That’s where I’d start in figuring them out. They had like 20 years before the term became an insult.

Kchama
Jul 25, 2007

Mid-Life Crisis posted:

Trump heavily campaigned on isolationism and did many isolationist acts that pissed off neocons. The whole NAFTA arguments, etc. His blurts of shows of strength were just his strongman tendencies not a policy. I’m not going to say Trump wasn’t a neocon in practice, he maintained the status quo like the others, he was just the least of the bunch.

If neocon is foreign conflict to sustain petrodollar, Obama let Hillary do her damage in Libya. Afghanistan had nothing to really do with petrodollar anymore. Israel is his bloodthirsty moment. Also, barely anything has been done to reduce the strangle. That’s the bar.

Trump heavily campaigned on a lot of stuff that he never followed through on. And he sure as hell didn't follow through on isolationism, unless stepping up bombing and wars is isolationism.

Bwee
Jul 1, 2005
It's cool that people like to use cargo cult definitions of things like "reactionary" and "neocon", makes for a very enlightening debate and/or discussion

Morrow
Oct 31, 2010
There's a lot of people who, after four years of governance showing that he loves exploding brown people, till project their isolationist fantasies onto trump it seems.

Mid-Life Crisis
Jun 13, 2023

by Fluffdaddy

Xiahou Dun posted:

O I got it now.

You have no idea what words mean.

That’s not what “isolationism” or “neocon” mean to anyone else. Even if your definitions were internally consistent, that’s not how anyone uses them.

It’s literally what every liberal raged against Bushes about for decades. It was about promoting democracy overseas by force on paper, enshrining petrodollar in practice.

I AM GRANDO
Aug 20, 2006

I don’t know how well it stands up, but Robert Altemeyer’s definition of authoritarianism involves policy positions that are incoherent because the authoritarian disposition is psychological in origin or best understood as a personality type rather than a strategy to accomplish specific policy goals. Neoconservatives may have been delusional, but you could work backward from their goals to understand why they wanted to invade Iraq and what they wanted to do to the people there. Trump people start with strong feelings that outsiders don’t belong and must be punished (hatred of contamination) and equally strong feelings that not being totally dominant in all ways at all times means they’re in danger of being killed/beaten by their angry fathers (hatred of weakness), so you get people who are rabid isolationists who also want to invade China.

FLIPADELPHIA
Apr 27, 2007

Heavy Shit
Grimey Drawer

TheDeadlyShoe posted:

In complete honesty: if Biden is a Neo-con, why did he withdraw from Afghanistan? And if neocons would withdraw from Afghanistan how is Trump not a neo-con? Seriously, I don't know how you're squaring these circles.

Because it was the US's longest running war ever, and it was an embarrassing failure that was draining huge amounts of resources and not accomplishing anything. It's not like Biden opposed the idea of the war in Afghanistan or military intervention in principle. He was the loudest dem supporter of the heinous war in Iraq that killed a million people. Biden absolutely has and continues to exhibit neocon like tendencies. His overt support for Israel's ongoing genocide being just the latest example.

Retro42
Jun 27, 2011


Kchama posted:

Trump heavily campaigned on a lot of stuff that he never followed through on. And he sure as hell didn't follow through on isolationism, unless stepping up bombing and wars is isolationism.

Feels like you are memory-holing the entirety for Trumps immigration policy.

Bodyholes
Jun 30, 2005

Biden is the best president since Richard Nixon, and the folks that can't accept this have Biden Derangement Syndrome. Every accusation is a confession from these people. The Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act and Inflation Reduction Act have started domestic re-industrialization on an unprecedented scale. Largest green industry investment, largest mass transit investment since 1971. Biden is the most pro-union president we've had in modern history, and we haven't started any new wars.

(USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)

Kalit
Nov 6, 2006

The great thing about the thousands of slaughtered Palestinian children is that they can't pull away when you fondle them or sniff their hair.

That's a Biden success story.

FLIPADELPHIA posted:

Because it was the US's longest running war ever, and it was an embarrassing failure that was draining huge amounts of resources and not accomplishing anything. It's not like Biden opposed the idea of the war in Afghanistan or military intervention in principle. He was the loudest dem supporter of the heinous war in Iraq that killed a million people. Biden absolutely has and continues to exhibit neocon like tendencies. His overt support for Israel's ongoing genocide being just the latest example.

Just because you held a view at one point in your life doesn't mean you can't change that view. As already noted previously:

Bodyholes posted:

Biden said back in 2008 Afghanistan was a mistake and we should get out. This was always his view.

So, yes, by the time he was president it has been shown that he was long opposed to the war. Which is why he ended the war.

Mid-Life Crisis
Jun 13, 2023

by Fluffdaddy
The whole rub was why the hell did we invade Iraq when Afghanistan had the taliban? It was because petrodollar. Afghanistan was just revenge. Rare earths came later. Biden being against Afghanistan isn’t evidence he wasn’t a neocon, just that he wasn’t a Bush.

Mid-Life Crisis
Jun 13, 2023

by Fluffdaddy

Bodyholes posted:

Biden is the best president since Richard Nixon, and the folks that can't accept this have Biden Derangement Syndrome. Every accusation is a confession from these people. The Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act and Inflation Reduction Act have started domestic re-industrialization on an unprecedented scale. Largest green industry investment, largest mass transit investment since 1971. Biden is the most pro-union president we've had in modern history, and we haven't started any new wars.

What wars did Trump start?

Our involvement in Syria vs Ukraine and Israel is not paralleled. Stretch to call Biden peaceful in practice

Bodyholes
Jun 30, 2005

Remember when Trump used his veto for the 2nd time to continue bombing Yemen? Pepperidge Farm remembers.

Bellmaker
Oct 18, 2008

Chapter DOOF



Mid-Life Crisis posted:

What wars did Trump start?

Our involvement in Syria vs Ukraine and Israel is not paralleled. Stretch to call Biden peaceful in practice

He bombed an Iranian general so don’t tell me he wasn’t trying to start wars.

FLIPADELPHIA
Apr 27, 2007

Heavy Shit
Grimey Drawer
One can simultaneously believe that "Biden is the best President since _______ " and "Biden loving sucks". Rating Biden against other Presidents is just as much an assessment of how lovely our leaders have been as it is about Biden.

And yeah, people can change their minds etc but in the end, Biden loving voted for those wars. It's the biggest chickenshit move ever to actively support the invasion of a sovereign nation and the toppling of its government then turn around almost immediately (as soon as the public starts to sour on it) and talk about how against the war you have been from the beginning. Cowardice on a staggering scale.

Kchama
Jul 25, 2007

Retro42 posted:

Feels like you are memory-holing the entirety for Trumps immigration policy.

Dude is holding up his foreign policy as proof of his isolationism. Which uhh, was not good proof at all.

B B
Dec 1, 2005

Bodyholes posted:

Biden said back in 2008 Afghanistan was a mistake and we should get out. This was always his view.

Can you provide a source for this? This Vox article does a retrospective on Biden's views during the timeframe you're describing, and it seems that while he was an internal critic of many of the Obama administration's policy decisions, he fell short of calling for removal of troops. In fact, he supported a surge of troops--just a smaller one than others in the administration supported:

Vox posted:

But Biden didn’t argue for full withdrawal back then

Biden diagnosed the problems well, and he was likely the high-level official most skeptical of the Afghanistan war in the Obama administration. But though his logic arguably pointed toward a withdrawal of troops in the near future, he didn’t argue for that — it simply seemed too unpalatable. Officials were not ready to stomach the Taliban retaking the country.

Instead, Biden proposed a smaller surge of 20,000 troops rather than 40,000, with a mission of “counterterrorism” as opposed to counterinsurgency. (Think targeting terrorists rather than nation-building.) The military fired back that that would be insufficient. Obama ended up agreeing to send 30,000 troops and satisfy most of the military’s demands, in part because he did not want to “break with” then-Defense Secretary Robert Gates, Woodward writes.

After a few years with the heavily expanded troop presence that, as Biden predicted, did not result in Afghanistan becoming a functioning government or in security forces capable of defeating the Taliban, Obama began a troop drawdown in his second term. Since then, US policy has essentially been to kick the can down the road.

In 2015, then-Vox staffer Max Fisher wrote, “The war is already lost, and has been for years,” adding that the only remaining mission was “to temporarily stave off Afghanistan’s inevitable collapse, a few months at a time.”

Former President Donald Trump continued that can-kicking until 2020, when he reached a deal with the Taliban to end the war. It then fell on Biden to decide whether to stick with that arrangement. He did so — rejecting advice from his generals — and a Taliban takeover has now occurred. But his decision was no doubt grounded in the fact that he’s had these debates before.

https://www.vox.com/2021/8/18/22629135/biden-afghanistan-withdrawal-reasons

Here's an article from 2009 that also characterizes his views as wanting to stay in Afghanistan but with a more limited scope than sought by others in the Obama admin:

NYTimes posted:

Mr. Biden does not favor abandoning Afghanistan, but his approach would reject the additional troops sought by Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal and leave the American force in Afghanistan roughly the same, 68,000 troops. Rather than emphasize protecting the Afghan population, he would accelerate training of Afghans to take over the fight while hunting Al Qaeda in Pakistan using drones and special forces. His view has caught on with many liberals in his party.

https://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/14/world/14biden.html

Rodenthar Drothman
May 14, 2013

I think I will continue
watching this twilight world
as long as time flows.
Y’all need to read the thread title. You are arguing with someone who is just typing out things Alex Jones has said and acting like they’re posting in good faith.

And much like with Jones himself, the words only mean what he wants them to mean when he wants them to mean it and he’ll insist you’re naïve because you know what the words mean and insist upon it. Sartre’s antisemite personified.

(USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)

RBA Starblade
Apr 28, 2008

Going Home.

Games Idiot Court Jester

It's interesting because Trump signed an order to withdraw and then didn't, and Biden probably didn't want to but did.

Kanos
Sep 6, 2006

was there a time when speedwagon didn't get trolled
It fundamentally doesn't matter who originally signed the order, because Biden was the one who actually saw it through and didn't kick the can down the road and find some bullshit excuse to delay/postpone withdrawal indefinitely despite absolutely everyone knowing and understanding that the situation was awful and the post-withdrawal collapse would look loving terrible for anyone who happened to be in office at the time. It was an act of actual political courage to do so when the option to continue indefinitely extending the occupation in a cowardly attempt to avoid political blowback was absolutely still on the table.

Bodyholes
Jun 30, 2005

FLIPADELPHIA posted:

One can simultaneously believe that "Biden is the best President since _______ " and "Biden loving sucks". Rating Biden against other Presidents is just as much an assessment of how lovely our leaders have been as it is about Biden.

And yeah, people can change their minds etc but in the end, Biden loving voted for those wars. It's the biggest chickenshit move ever to actively support the invasion of a sovereign nation and the toppling of its government then turn around almost immediately (as soon as the public starts to sour on it) and talk about how against the war you have been from the beginning. Cowardice on a staggering scale.

I appreciate this nuance. All of this is fair. The fact that we're holding up someone whose policies are similar to a Republican in the 70s as the best in a long time says a lot about how far this country has fallen. The US is in a deep hole. And we should absolutely keep Biden honest about his long neoliberal career of doing all the worst things democrats were doing.

That said, Biden, and clearly a decent number of democrats, have clearly evolved on some issues. The man who wrote the 1994 crime bill ended up being the one who mass pardoned all federal marijuana offenses. The universe is weird like that.

Killer robot
Sep 6, 2010

I was having the most wonderful dream. I think you were in it!
Pillbug

Kanos posted:

It fundamentally doesn't matter who originally signed the order, because Biden was the one who actually saw it through and didn't kick the can down the road and find some bullshit excuse to delay/postpone withdrawal indefinitely despite absolutely everyone knowing and understanding that the situation was awful and the post-withdrawal collapse would look loving terrible for anyone who happened to be in office at the time. It was an act of actual political courage to do so when the option to continue indefinitely extending the occupation in a cowardly attempt to avoid political blowback was absolutely still on the table.

Yeah, Trump signed a bunch of documents but the only concrete action he took to my knowledge was freeing a lot of Taliban fighters. He then sat on his rear end regarding Afghanistan for a year, with a deadline approaching. When Biden came in and postponed the withdrawal people looking to dunk on the Dems said that it was because he was a huge fan of the forever war and would never leave but it was just because none of the necessary work was done: Trump had done a show to get a ceasefire and illusion of making big deals, then immediately kicked the can down the road.

Killer robot fucked around with this message at 18:34 on Nov 24, 2023

Dapper_Swindler
Feb 14, 2012

Im glad my instant dislike in you has been validated again and again.

Bodyholes posted:

I appreciate this nuance. All of this is fair. The fact that we're holding up someone whose policies are similar to a Republican in the 70s as the best in a long time says a lot about how far this country has fallen. The US is in a deep hole. And we should absolutely keep Biden honest about his long neoliberal career of doing all the worst things democrats were doing.

That said, Biden, and clearly a decent number of democrats, have clearly evolved on some issues. The man who wrote the 1994 crime bill ended up being the one who mass pardoned all federal marijuana offenses. The universe is weird like that.

I mean LBJ kept alot of anti segregation bills and such dead in the senate for years but when he became president he got alot of the new society done and passed the civil rights act. people change or when they get actual power, do what they always wanted to do. I like biden on a personal level, i dont agree with everything he does(israel being the biggest one but i can sorta see what he is trying to do on some level) but i think he is a mostly good man trying to do what LBJ did and on the domestic front doing pretty well. yeah he has some hawkish tendancies, but ill take arming ukraine(who are asking for the help) to fight chud athoriterian russia who is invading their homeland over W/obama era loving around and finding out. I sure as gently caress like biden more then obama because at least biden is honest about what your getting and has surprised me in alot of good ways.

Agents are GO!
Dec 29, 2004

Something I see a lot is that while the online left/"woke"/young people generally have their hearts in the right place, there's definitely this idea that people can't/don't improve.

Professor Beetus
Apr 12, 2007

They can fight us
But they'll never Beetus

Mid-Life Crisis posted:

Not to forget Podesta had a justice killed off that created this scenario in the first place.. but I’m sure this is a probe waiting to happen. Happy capitalism day

lmao, yeah please keep arguing with this idiot

(USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)

Main Paineframe
Oct 27, 2010
The fundamental dilemma with Afghanistan was that although staying in Afghanistan was unpopular and clearly a poor idea, pulling out and leaving the Taliban to retake Afghanistan was even more unpopular. That's why the US never pulled out: even if politicians didn't really want to continue the war, they at least wanted to get Afghanistan stable enough that it wouldn't collapse basically the instant they pulled out.

Regardless of who we actually credit the pullout to, it's Biden who took the political hit. His approval rating dropped six points the month the US pulled out of Afghanistan, and approval of his handling of Afghanistan dropped more than twenty points, with clear majorities disapproving of Biden's handling of the pullout and saying that the Biden administration did a poor job handling Afghanistan.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Discendo Vox
Mar 21, 2013

We don't need to have that dialogue because it's obvious, trivial, and has already been had a thousand times.

Rodenthar Drothman posted:

Y’all need to read the thread title. You are arguing with someone who is just typing out things Alex Jones has said and acting like they’re posting in good faith.

And much like with Jones himself, the words only mean what he wants them to mean when he wants them to mean it and he’ll insist you’re naïve because you know what the words mean and insist upon it. Sartre’s antisemite personified.

Current moderation policy is that we're obligated to entertain such users' arguments.

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Post
  • Reply