Political Discussion Thread (With Rules)

[Burrito Boy]

Clowns are scary freaks. Racists are scary freaks. I can see the correlation.

[DShomshak]

There is no bright side to the Charlottesville attack or what it is revealing. But if there's a not-quite-as-dark side, it's how many people in positions of influence are denouncing the alt-right and calling BS on Trump for his responses.

 

Dean Shomshak

[Lord Liaden]

At least there's no more ambiguity over where Donald Trump really stands. That's useful to know.

[st barbara]

Descendants of Robert E. Lee denounce white supremacists, advocate moving statue to museum

Fair enough. That is probably a workable solution.

[Lord Liaden]

Like I said, there are reasonable people on all sides of issues like this, capable of proposing reasonable compromises. Sadly, the reasonable people don't seem to be driving the conflict, and those who are likely have no interest in compromise.

[sinanju]

Except that many of the people attacked by the hateful bigots were peaceful counterprotestors if not innocent bystanders.  And antifa wouldn't have been present, in fact would not even exist, if the hateful bigots weren't there to begin with. 

 

And many of the people attacked by the hateful bigots of Antifa were peacefully protesting. Everywhere Antifa goes, violence and rioting follows. That's not an accident.

[Tech priest support]

My problems to antifa evaporated when I heard a trump voter say he "couldn't wait for the great liberal genocide to begin!"

 

Yeah, if someone's goal is to murder me I have little problem with them being...neutralized.

[Pattern Ghost]

My problems to antifa evaporated when I heard a trump voter say he "couldn't wait for the great liberal genocide to begin!"

 

Yeah, if someone's goal is to murder me I have little problem with them being...neutralized.

 

While violent solutions are sometimes necessary, applying them haphazardly tends to get innocents caught up in the crossfire. I'm not sure that the words of some random guy who's fired up at a rally really calls for any broad application of violent solutions. Certainly not the clownish vigilantism of Antifa.

 

IMO, the authorities should shut down -- and should have been prepared to shut down in this last case -- any and all rallies and protests where people show up armed. That just stopped being a "peaceful assembly" and needs to be not just contained but dispersed.

 

I also think people who show up looking like they're ready for a medieval melee should be forced into an arena and made to fight to the death, but while it'd be amusing (to me), I don't really think we need to do that just yet.

[Lord Liaden]

IMO TPS does raise a pertinent point about where provocation plays into the placement of blame in confrontations. Recently Canada's Maclean's Magazine published an op-ed article on the Charlottesville debacle, titled, The false equivalency of the criticism of the "alt-left". I want to leave aside the specifics in the article about Charlottesville for the moment (you can read them if interested), to concentrate on the first couple of paragraphs, which I believe are generally pertinent:

 

 

"Three years ago, my best friend—a nightclub promoter named Ken—stood on a busy intersection in downtown Toronto, trying to hail a taxi. A female friend accompanied him on the way to a fundraiser for breast cancer research. Every cab going by had a fare in the back seat. As they scouted the road for a lit roof sign, a white man in his twenties approached them. “Don’t trust that n—-r,” the stranger said to the woman, speaking right past Ken as if he were beneath addressing. The woman, it bears mentioning, is white, and Ken is Black. While my friend registered the shock of being called the most degrading slur ever invented to address him, the man spat in his eye and shouted “white power.” A brief fight ensued, and ended when Ken floored the man with two kicks to the thigh.

 

To sensible human beings, it would come as no surprise that Ken fought back against a man who called him by a racial slur and spat in his face. If there were some bystander who watched that man spit on my friend and invade his personal space, but in a later recounting of the story called Ken a “troublemaker” for retaliating, that bystander’s credibility would rightly be called into question. If that bystander were to offer testimony that Ken was “violently attacking” the man who called him a n—-r, spat in his eye, and shouted “white power,” one might question whether that bystander had some personal beliefs about white supremacy clouding his judgment. Whatever one believes about the proper way to respond to immediate physical harm from strangers, when people shout racial slurs, assault others, and shout Nazi slogans, claiming that both sides were in the wrong would be the least responsible assessment possible."

[Pattern Ghost]

Just to be clear, I'm not engaging in alt-left Trumpisms here. Antifa just happened to be the subject. The neo-Nazis should have been sent packing since they showed up armed as well, permit or not. (I have other opinions on that group, but shouldn't let them out of the dark corners of my mind, lest they be noticed by The Simon.)

[megaplayboy]

IMO TPS does raise a pertinent point about where provocation plays into the placement of blame in confrontations. Recently Canada's Maclean's Magazine published an op-ed article on the Charlottesville debacle, titled, The false equivalency of the criticism of the "alt-left". I want to leave aside the specifics in the article about Charlottesville for the moment (you can read them if interested), to concentrate on the first couple of paragraphs, which I believe are generally pertinent:

 

 

"Three years ago, my best friend—a nightclub promoter named Ken—stood on a busy intersection in downtown Toronto, trying to hail a taxi. A female friend accompanied him on the way to a fundraiser for breast cancer research. Every cab going by had a fare in the back seat. As they scouted the road for a lit roof sign, a white man in his twenties approached them. “Don’t trust that n—-r,” the stranger said to the woman, speaking right past Ken as if he were beneath addressing. The woman, it bears mentioning, is white, and Ken is Black. While my friend registered the shock of being called the most degrading slur ever invented to address him, the man spat in his eye and shouted “white power.” A brief fight ensued, and ended when Ken floored the man with two kicks to the thigh.

 

To sensible human beings, it would come as no surprise that Ken fought back against a man who called him by a racial slur and spat in his face. If there were some bystander who watched that man spit on my friend and invade his personal space, but in a later recounting of the story called Ken a “troublemaker” for retaliating, that bystander’s credibility would rightly be called into question. If that bystander were to offer testimony that Ken was “violently attacking” the man who called him a n—-r, spat in his eye, and shouted “white power,” one might question whether that bystander had some personal beliefs about white supremacy clouding his judgment. Whatever one believes about the proper way to respond to immediate physical harm from strangers, when people shout racial slurs, assault others, and shout Nazi slogans, claiming that both sides were in the wrong would be the least responsible assessment possible."

Incitement is an actual legal exception to freedom of speech and assembly. The ACLU just changed its policy, announcing they will not defend hate groups that march while openly carrying firearms.  

[Pattern Ghost]

Argh! Trump needs to stop making public statements. This time, his comments on an incident in Barcelona:

 

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/donald-trump-barcelona_us_5995bcd4e4b0d0d2cc851561

[Old Man]

And many of the people attacked by the hateful bigots of Antifa were peacefully protesting. Everywhere Antifa goes, violence and rioting follows. That's not an accident.

 

"Everywhere antifa goes" is by definition someplace with neo-Nazis loudly calling for the subjugation or murder of non-white people, which is where the correlation with violence comes from.  It's not as though neo-Nazi rallies don't get violent if antifa isn't there.

 

Part of the responsibility is definitely on the Charlottesville PD who allowed openly armed demonstrators to gather.  Many other municipalities would have shut down the event as soon as they saw guys showing up in riot gear with shields and pipes.  In some places you can't even carry a sign or flag on a stick.

[Tech priest support]

"Everywhere antifa goes" is by definition someplace with neo-Nazis loudly calling for the subjugation or murder of non-white people, which is where the correlation with violence comes from. It's not as though neo-Nazi rallies don't get violent if antifa isn't there.

 

Part of the responsibility is definitely on the Charlottesville PD who allowed openly armed demonstrators to gather. Many other municipalities would have shut down the event as soon as they saw guys showing up in riot gear with shields and pipes. In some places you can't even carry a sign or flag on a stick.

This reminds me of an ep of Batman where the penguin was running for mayor of gotham. (Yes Danny devito copped this later) and attacked batman, who was running against him, for always being seen near criminals, while whenever the penguin was in the news he was surrounded by police.

 

BTW the ep of batman where penguin ran for mayor of Gotham against batman looks so much less unbelievable than it used to...

[Michael Hopcroft]

And many of the people attacked by the hateful bigots of Antifa were peacefully protesting. Everywhere Antifa goes, violence and rioting follows. That's not an accident.

You cannot "peacefully protest" in favor of a racist agenda. Period. Your cause would be violent by definition. There is no such thing as a peaceful Nazi!

[Simon]

Easy comparison here as a way to show that there is no equivalence between the two sides (and why attempting to draw one is offensive in the extreme):

ISIS shares a large amount of similarity with Neo-Nazis.  Both claim to religious justification for hate and terrorist actions. Both seek the elimination or subjugation of entire races and/or religions. The main difference between the two is the color of the skin of their members.  Neo-Nazis are credited with more terrorist attacks on American soil than ISIS and are more of a concern for DHS and the FBI.

 

Now...picture an ISIS march in NC.  ISIS members and supporters marching armed and calling for jihad on all non-Muslims.  Feel free to add some ISIS sympathizers (but not active ISIS members) in with the group.  They're not armed and they're not really into the whole jihad thing, but they think that ISIS makes some good points and want to show their support by marching with them.  Continue the formation of this picture by having an active terror attack take place during this rally -- an ISIS member drives a car into a group of counter protesters.

 

If you think there is any "equivalence" to be drawn here (the counter protesters were armed/the counter protesters were angry/ the counter protesters were yelling at the ISIS marchers), you're no better than the ISIS sympathizers.  And we lock them up.

 

Why is it different for neo-Nazis? 

[Joe Walsh]

Bannon's out:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trump-decides-to-get-rid-of-white-house-chief-strategist-stephen-bannon/2017/08/18/98cd5c40-8430-11e7-902a-2a9f2d808496_story.html?deferJs=true&outputType=default-article&utm_term=.cb39f9c231d3

[Sociotard]

I remember how one of our last Presidents' nicknames was No-Drama Obama.  Good times.

[Tom]

Sometimes I wonder if the thing really getting Trump's goat is Obama's tweet in response to Charlottesville is more popular than anything he's ever sent.

 

(Just to take a step back from more serious concerns -- well, serious to us)

[DasBroot]

I would suspect if anything got his goat it would be that Obama himself is more popular than he'll ever be.

 

I wonder if there's ever been so many changes in high ranking White House positions before in so short a time?

It seems like forever but it's only been 8 months.

[Pariah]

Bannon's out:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trump-decides-to-get-rid-of-white-house-chief-strategist-stephen-bannon/2017/08/18/98cd5c40-8430-11e7-902a-2a9f2d808496_story.html?deferJs=true&outputType=default-article&utm_term=.cb39f9c231d3

 

 

Seriously, it's way past ridiculous at this point.

[Pariah]

I would suspect if anything got his goat it would be that Obama himself is more popular than he'll ever be.

 

I wonder if there's ever been so many changes in high ranking White House positions before in so short a time?

It seems like forever but it's only been 8 months.

 

How long would it take to install a revolving door at the White House, do you suppose?

[megaplayboy]

Bannon's out:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trump-decides-to-get-rid-of-white-house-chief-strategist-stephen-bannon/2017/08/18/98cd5c40-8430-11e7-902a-2a9f2d808496_story.html?deferJs=true&outputType=default-article&utm_term=.cb39f9c231d3

Oh frabjous day! Callooh callay!

[Pariah]

From the USA Today article:

 

 

 

Joel B. Pollak, an editor at Breitbart, tweeted out a single word in reaction to news Bannon was out: "#WAR."

 

That's a little ominous.

[csyphrett]

RPGnet members are saying parts of the internet controlled by WS/Nazis are going crazy. Thing is Bannon signed his resignation on the 7th, so he knew he was out.

CES