IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » USA Politics
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Reply
Old 4th February 2017, 10:25 AM   #601
sir drinks-a-lot
Philosopher
 
sir drinks-a-lot's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Cole Valley, CA
Posts: 5,335
Originally Posted by acbytesla View Post
So why do you think that people you want to deport wouldn't want to put up a fight?
No one made a peep when Obama was deporting people like gangbusters.
__________________
So, if he's doing it by divine means, I can only tell him this: 'Mr. Geller, you're doing it the hard way.' --James Randi
sir drinks-a-lot is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th February 2017, 11:19 AM   #602
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: The Antimemetics Division
Posts: 69,914
Originally Posted by NoahFence View Post
It was also the perfect time and place for conservative agitators to wear their masks so they can't be identified as such, and cause as much trouble to be blamed on "liberals" as possible.

Equally plausible, despite pleas to the contrary.
Violent protester identified, works for UC Berkeley.
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th February 2017, 11:20 AM   #603
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: The Antimemetics Division
Posts: 69,914
Originally Posted by NoahFence View Post
Conspicuous by its absence from any reply from Sunmaster, theprestige, TBD or the user who made the observation initially, mgidm86 - is an answer to the question. Deflect, deflect, deflect.
Why is that?

So I ask.

Again.

Why do the infinitesimally small number of nitwits who choose violence represent the whole of liberals in your mind, but the massive number of peaceful protesters that we saw at the Women's march don't?
Conspicuously absent is anywhere I made either of these claims. Also conspicuously absent is any relevance the question has to anything I've said.

Last edited by theprestige; 4th February 2017 at 11:21 AM.
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th February 2017, 11:27 AM   #604
acbytesla
Penultimate Amazing
 
acbytesla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 33,710
Originally Posted by sir drinks-a-lot View Post
No one made a peep when Obama was deporting people like gangbusters.
That isn't true.There were definitely protests. You're drawing a false equivalency.
__________________
Just because I'm paranoid doesn't mean they're not out to get to me.
.
acbytesla is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th February 2017, 11:36 AM   #605
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: The Antimemetics Division
Posts: 69,914
Originally Posted by acbytesla View Post
That isn't true.There were definitely protests. You're drawing a false equivalency.
Yeah, but did people go on a violent rampage and trash downtown whenever someone showed up to speak in favor of Obama's policy?
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th February 2017, 11:49 AM   #606
Hercules56
Philosopher
 
Hercules56's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 8,862
Why should we tolerate Nazis?
Hercules56 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th February 2017, 11:57 AM   #607
Armitage72
Philosopher
 
Armitage72's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Rochester, NY
Posts: 8,185
Meanwhile, Dan Adamini, a County-level GOP official in Michigan, said that the best way to deal with campus protestors is to have another Kent State.

Quote:
The violent protests at our universities certainly indicate portage acacian at the lower level. I'm thinking another Kent State might be the only solution protest stopped after only one death. They do it because they know there are no consequences yet.

Quote:
Violent protesters who shut down free speech? Time for another Kent State perhaps. One bullet stops a lot of thuggery.

Of course, he walked it back later.
Quote:
Taking a lot of heat for a very poorly worded tweet yesterday. Sorry folks, the intent was to try to stop the violence, not encourage more

"Tin soldiers and GOP coming."

Last edited by Armitage72; 4th February 2017 at 11:58 AM.
Armitage72 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th February 2017, 11:58 AM   #608
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 56,425
Originally Posted by Hercules56 View Post
Why should we tolerate Nazis?
Because violence is not an appropriate response to thought crimes in a free and civil society, and we want to live in a free and civil society.

Perhaps you don't want to.
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th February 2017, 12:30 PM   #609
Slings and Arrows
Graduate Poster
 
Slings and Arrows's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: USA
Posts: 1,743
Originally Posted by Hercules56 View Post
Why should we tolerate Nazis?

There are two sides to this conflict. One side throws tantrums, breaks windows and burns the American flag, and the other side controls the purse strings, signs executive orders and nominates supreme court justices.

Gee, I wonder which side will ultimately prevail?

Last edited by Slings and Arrows; 4th February 2017 at 12:47 PM.
Slings and Arrows is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th February 2017, 12:37 PM   #610
Delphic Oracle
Philosopher
 
Delphic Oracle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2016
Posts: 6,415
Originally Posted by Argumemnon View Post
Oh, come on, Oracle. You know exactly what he meant.
As I said, I'm willing to accept that a person can honestly believe they meant no malice. That doesn't change the fact that the language subtly undermines the legitimacy of the person themselves rather than condemning a behavior.

Besides, overstaying a visa is how most end up being determined to be unlawfully present. That's a civil offense, not a criminal one. Deportation proceedings are a civil procedure and removal from the country is a civil penalty.

It's an issue of the proportionality of the response. A permanent restriction on ever becoming a citizen because of a procedural infraction seems quite out of balance to me. This is not to say 'free citizenship for all' but just make the punishment fit the offense. Many proposals exist that seem like a workable starting point. Get on papers, pay a fine, stay out of trouble for x period of time, etc. These are compensatory penalties, but what is proposed by permanently being barred from citizenship is punitive. It doesn't sound too dissimilar from a lot of structured legal deals where one pays a fine, performs community service, meets with a court corrections officer for check-ins, stays employed, etc. in order to avoid prison or other punishments.

Last edited by Delphic Oracle; 4th February 2017 at 12:39 PM.
Delphic Oracle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th February 2017, 12:43 PM   #611
banquetbear
Graduate Poster
 
banquetbear's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 1,765
Originally Posted by sunmaster14 View Post
That's ridiculous. There isn't a progressive pundit around who could hold a candle to Milo in a debate. He's a deeper thinker than any of them. Far more articulate. And funny as hell. He may be a troll part of the time (much of the time actually), but he's certainly not a paint-by-numbers troll.
...oh give me a break. Even Boy George made Milo look like a fool.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fm8QCUpFPrg
banquetbear is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th February 2017, 12:45 PM   #612
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In a post-fact world
Posts: 96,875
Originally Posted by Delphic Oracle View Post
As I said, I'm willing to accept that a person can honestly believe they meant no malice. That doesn't change the fact that the language subtly undermines the legitimacy of the person themselves rather than condemning a behavior.
No it doesn't. It's being sensitive to a ridiculous extent.
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

"My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward


Belz... is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th February 2017, 12:50 PM   #613
Delphic Oracle
Philosopher
 
Delphic Oracle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2016
Posts: 6,415
Originally Posted by Sherkeu View Post
Anyone else see the death threat in here? Insane.
Another constant paradox the anarchists never seem to see.

If one gathers sufficient violent potential to 'protect' the vulnerable, then they've merely traded one abusive force for another who prefers a different kind of victim.
Delphic Oracle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th February 2017, 12:54 PM   #614
Delphic Oracle
Philosopher
 
Delphic Oracle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2016
Posts: 6,415
Originally Posted by sir drinks-a-lot View Post
No one made a peep when Obama was deporting people like gangbusters.
Partisan blindness knows no party, for sure. But to say 'nobody' was making this point is utterly false. One might have had to go outside their own typical experience to find people articulating that message, however.
Delphic Oracle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th February 2017, 12:57 PM   #615
Delphic Oracle
Philosopher
 
Delphic Oracle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2016
Posts: 6,415
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
Yeah, but did people go on a violent rampage and trash downtown whenever someone showed up to speak in favor of Obama's policy?
Not sure. Has anyone showed up to speak in support of Obama deporting people?

If someone showed up to speak in support of Obama deporting people and a violent rampage ensued, would that mean it's ok?

I'm trying to understand how this argument doesn't end up eating itself.
Delphic Oracle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th February 2017, 01:02 PM   #616
Delphic Oracle
Philosopher
 
Delphic Oracle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2016
Posts: 6,415
Originally Posted by Argumemnon View Post
No it doesn't. It's being sensitive to a ridiculous extent.
I see an assertion of my motives.

I've given a thorough explanation of why I feel 'illegal' is a dangerous adjective to apply to a person rather than a behavior. I have even declared that I accept it can merely be repeating a common phrasing without understanding the implications.

You can disagree with my conclusion and I would accept that. If all you have is a motive-impugning retort, then so be it.
Delphic Oracle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th February 2017, 01:14 PM   #617
caveman1917
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 8,143
Originally Posted by Delphic Oracle View Post
Another constant paradox the anarchists never seem to see.

If one gathers sufficient violent potential to 'protect' the vulnerable, then they've merely traded one abusive force for another who prefers a different kind of victim.
caveman1917 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th February 2017, 01:46 PM   #618
OMGturt1es
Graduate Poster
 
OMGturt1es's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Elk Grove, California.
Posts: 1,028
I haven't read this entire thread. I browsed a few pages. It seems to me that an important point is being overlooked: All evidence is that the violence, vandalism, and rioting were caused by anarchist antifa. Not the leftists at the protest.

Note the black clothing. The covered faces. The anti-government banners. Pay attention to coverage of most riots and you'll start to notice that most the folks vandalizing and instigating violence dress in black clothing, cover their faces, and carry anti-government signs. These are anarchists. They commonly appropriate legit protests for their own cause.

I'm not sure how we've been through so many protests that featured anarchist-caused vandalism, violence, and rioting without this being common knowledge. I'm not sure how the media hasn't caught on.

Anyway. Not leftists. Not right wingers trying to discredit protesters. Anarchists. Antifa anarchists specifically in this case. But anarchists.
__________________
“Science is an integral part of culture. It's not this foreign thing, done by an arcane priesthood. It's one of the glories of the human intellectual tradition.” - Stephen Jay Gould
OMGturt1es is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th February 2017, 01:54 PM   #619
caveman1917
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 8,143
Originally Posted by OMGturt1es View Post
All evidence is that the violence, vandalism, and rioting were caused by anarchist antifa. Not the leftists at the protest.
Can you provide this evidence?

I'm especially interested in evidence that antifa isn't leftist. After all, anyone bothering to do even the most basic reading on anti-fascism (such as its wikipedia article) will quickly find that it is distinctly leftist. One could even say that anti-fascism is a distinguishing feature of the broad left (anarchists, communists, socialists & social-democrats) as opposed to the broad right which does not feature it (liberals, conservatives, nationalists).

Last edited by caveman1917; 4th February 2017 at 02:04 PM.
caveman1917 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th February 2017, 02:35 PM   #620
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: The Antimemetics Division
Posts: 69,914
Originally Posted by Delphic Oracle View Post
Not sure. Has anyone showed up to speak in support of Obama deporting people?

If someone showed up to speak in support of Obama deporting people and a violent rampage ensued, would that mean it's ok?

I'm trying to understand how this argument doesn't end up eating itself.
The essence the argument is that there is a double standard when it comes to these kinds of protests. Here's a report of Nancy Pelosi defending Obama's deportation raids:

http://thehill.com/homenews/house/28...on-enforcement

Where was the destructive rampage?

Here's a report of Press Secretary Josh Earnest defending the raids:

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-us...-idUSKCN0Y429P

The article includes a photo of peaceful protesters. If there was a violent rampage, Reuters didn't report it.

Here's DHS Secretary Johnson, defending the raids:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/...b0b958f65c5935

There's a video of peaceful protesters, but no violent rampage.

If a violent rampage ensued, it would not be OK, but it would at least suggest that people are acting from a consistent, principled position. What would be OK is if the people who responded peacefully to Barack Obama's immigration policy, applied that same principle to Trump's immigration policy.
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th February 2017, 02:45 PM   #621
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: The Antimemetics Division
Posts: 69,914
Originally Posted by OMGturt1es View Post
I haven't read this entire thread. I browsed a few pages. It seems to me that an important point is being overlooked: All evidence is that the violence, vandalism, and rioting were caused by anarchist antifa. Not the leftists at the protest.

Note the black clothing. The covered faces. The anti-government banners. Pay attention to coverage of most riots and you'll start to notice that most the folks vandalizing and instigating violence dress in black clothing, cover their faces, and carry anti-government signs. These are anarchists. They commonly appropriate legit protests for their own cause.

I'm not sure how we've been through so many protests that featured anarchist-caused vandalism, violence, and rioting without this being common knowledge. I'm not sure how the media hasn't caught on.

Anyway. Not leftists. Not right wingers trying to discredit protesters. Anarchists. Antifa anarchists specifically in this case. But anarchists.
Originally Posted by caveman1917 View Post
Can you provide this evidence?

I'm especially interested in evidence that antifa isn't leftist. After all, anyone bothering to do even the most basic reading on anti-fascism (such as its wikipedia article) will quickly find that it is distinctly leftist. One could even say that anti-fascism is a distinguishing feature of the broad left (anarchists, communists, socialists & social-democrats) as opposed to the broad right which does not feature it (liberals, conservatives, nationalists).
OMGturt1es, I feel you. Conservatives have the same problem with the neo-nazis. They insist that they're on your your side. The other side holds them against you as if they're representative... It sucks. It'd be nice if the two extremes just fought it out amongst themselves and left the rest of us out of it.
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th February 2017, 02:53 PM   #622
Hercules56
Philosopher
 
Hercules56's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 8,862
I really don't think Trump is in any place to complain about a lack of tolerance.
Hercules56 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th February 2017, 03:04 PM   #623
caveman1917
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 8,143
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
OMGturt1es, I feel you. Conservatives have the same problem with the neo-nazis. They insist that they're on your your side.
If you mean liberals, I don't think you'll easily find leftists - especially of the antifa variety - who insist on being on their side. Quite the opposite.
caveman1917 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th February 2017, 03:45 PM   #624
Skeptic Ginger
Nasty Woman
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 96,386
Originally Posted by varwoche View Post
[Flak vs Flack]

Whaddya know, thanks.
Both spellings are correct:
Quote:
flack 2 (flăk)
n.
Variant of flak.
Though flack does have an additional meaning flak does not have.
Quote:
flack 1 (flăk) Informal
n.
A press agent; a publicist.
v. flacked, flack·ing, flacks
v.intr.
To act as a press agent: flacking for a movie studio.
v.tr.
To act as a press agent for; promote: authors who tour the country flacking their books.
Though I do agree flak is probably the preferred spelling.

[/sidetrack]
Skeptic Ginger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th February 2017, 05:21 PM   #625
Delphic Oracle
Philosopher
 
Delphic Oracle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2016
Posts: 6,415
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
The essence the argument is that there is a double standard when it comes to these kinds of protests. Here's a report of Nancy Pelosi defending Obama's deportation raids:

http://thehill.com/homenews/house/28...on-enforcement

Where was the destructive rampage?

Here's a report of Press Secretary Josh Earnest defending the raids:

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-us...-idUSKCN0Y429P

The article includes a photo of peaceful protesters. If there was a violent rampage, Reuters didn't report it.

Here's DHS Secretary Johnson, defending the raids:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/...b0b958f65c5935

There's a video of peaceful protesters, but no violent rampage.

If a violent rampage ensued, it would not be OK, but it would at least suggest that people are acting from a consistent, principled position. What would be OK is if the people who responded peacefully to Barack Obama's immigration policy, applied that same principle to Trump's immigration policy.
First demonstrate that peaceful demonstrators are also violent demonstrators.

I reject that they are the same people and are thus required to eat each others' words.

Your double standard is premised upon a hasty generalization.
Delphic Oracle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th February 2017, 05:50 PM   #626
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 56,425
Originally Posted by Hercules56 View Post
I really don't think Trump is in any place to complain about a lack of tolerance.
How about the people in Berkeley who had their windows smashed? Do they get to complain? Or what about the people who were physically assaulted? Should they just keep their mouths shut?
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th February 2017, 06:41 PM   #627
Metullus
Forum ľ-Wit Pro Tem
 
Metullus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 5,214
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
How about the people in Berkeley who had their windows smashed? Do they get to complain? Or what about the people who were physically assaulted? Should they just keep their mouths shut?
Evidently, if their attackers are on the correct side of the argument the victims will just have to suck it up. Which, I gather, will show Trump whats what.
__________________
I have met Tim at TAM. He is of sufficient height to piss on your leg. - Doubt 10/7/2005 - I'll miss Tim.

Aristotle taught that the brain exists merely to cool the blood and is not involved in the process of thinking. This is true only of certain persons. - Will Cuppy
Metullus is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th February 2017, 01:54 AM   #628
Eddie Dane
Philosopher
 
Eddie Dane's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 6,681
Originally Posted by Metullus View Post
Evidently, if their attackers are on the correct side of the argument the victims will just have to suck it up. Which, I gather, will show Trump whats what.
Whilst Trump will not be affected. Milo's book is now a bestseller (he hasn't even finished writing it, I think. Hell, he probably has a ghostwriter or two on the job).

And I bet the ad revenue from his Youtube channel experienced quite a spike.

Nice going, Antifa.
__________________
Death to Videodrome! Long live the new flesh!
Eddie Dane is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th February 2017, 09:55 AM   #629
Kestrel
Philosopher
 
Kestrel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Colorado
Posts: 6,248
Did the police manage to arrest any of the Berkeley protesters dressed in ninja outfits?
Kestrel is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th February 2017, 01:53 PM   #630
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: The Antimemetics Division
Posts: 69,914
Originally Posted by Delphic Oracle View Post
First demonstrate that peaceful demonstrators are also violent demonstrators.

I reject that they are the same people and are thus required to eat each others' words.

Your double standard is premised upon a hasty generalization.
I'm not talking about violent and peaceful demonstrators. I'm talking about people who responded peacefully to Obama's deportation raids a year ago, responded peacefully to several different supporters of Obama's policy who spoke in defense of that policy, and who responded violently to Milo.

I'm not making a hasty generalization. I'm observing a pattern of response over the past year.

Where were the violent rampages when Obama conducted deportation raids last year? Where were the violent rampages when people in his administration spoke in favor of those raids? Why did the violent rampagers save their rampage for this event?

I'll tell you why: Because they are partisan. They demonstrably believe it is not the policy, but the party, that merits an outpouring of destruction and intimidation.

Last edited by theprestige; 5th February 2017 at 01:54 PM.
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th February 2017, 02:06 PM   #631
varwoche
Penultimate Amazing
 
varwoche's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Puget Sound
Posts: 17,528
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
I'm not talking about violent and peaceful demonstrators. I'm talking about people who responded peacefully to Obama's deportation raids a year ago, responded peacefully to several different supporters of Obama's policy who spoke in defense of that policy, and who responded violently to Milo.

I'm not making a hasty generalization. I'm observing a pattern of response over the past year.
A pattern based on the behavoir of a handful of fringe extremists is not particularly meaningful.

Who specifically are these people you refer to?
__________________
To survive election season on a skeptics forum, one must understand Hymie-the-Robot.
varwoche is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th February 2017, 05:18 PM   #632
Thermal
Penultimate Amazing
 
Thermal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: Where the Arrantly Roam
Posts: 26,169
Originally Posted by caveman1917 View Post
Can you provide this evidence?

I'm especially interested in evidence that antifa isn't leftist. After all, anyone bothering to do even the most basic reading on anti-fascism (such as its wikipedia article) will quickly find that it is distinctly leftist. One could even say that anti-fascism is a distinguishing feature of the broad left (anarchists, communists, socialists & social-democrats) as opposed to the broad right which does not feature it (liberals, conservatives, nationalists).
Post-left anarchy is what a lot of us are recognizing here. Fascism is a natural target, but that doesn't equate to being on the left.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post-left_anarchy
__________________
"Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect" -Mark Twain
"Half of what he said meant something else, and the other half didn't mean anything at all" -Rosencrantz, on Hamlet
Thermal is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th February 2017, 06:31 PM   #633
caveman1917
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 8,143
Originally Posted by MostlyDead View Post
Post-left anarchy is what a lot of us are recognizing here. Fascism is a natural target, but that doesn't equate to being on the left.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post-left_anarchy
Antifa is only partially anarchist. Anarchism is only partially post-left. And post-left anarchism isn't so much post-left for not being leftist in a general sense (ie anti-capitalist etc) but for being opposed to common organizational strategies and ideologies in the traditional left.

To say "it was antifa rather than leftists" is confused, and shows quite some ignorance regarding what antifa is or does.
caveman1917 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th February 2017, 06:47 PM   #634
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: The Antimemetics Division
Posts: 69,914
Originally Posted by varwoche View Post
A pattern based on the behavoir of a handful of fringe extremists is not particularly meaningful.

Who specifically are these people you refer to?
I feel like if you haven't been following the conversation so far, it's either because you can't or do you don't want to. Either way, I don't see how making the effort would be at all rewarding to me.
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th February 2017, 07:07 PM   #635
Thermal
Penultimate Amazing
 
Thermal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: Where the Arrantly Roam
Posts: 26,169
Originally Posted by caveman1917 View Post
Antifa is only partially anarchist. Anarchism is only partially post-left. And post-left anarchism isn't so much post-left for not being leftist in a general sense (ie anti-capitalist etc) but for being opposed to common organizational strategies and ideologies in the traditional left.

To say "it was antifa rather than leftists" is confused, and shows quite some ignorance regarding what antifa is or does.
The problem is that 'antifa' isn't well defined. Antifa, definition #1, from Urban Dictionary:

Quote:
Middle-class champagne socialist/communist/anarchist white boys who don't like nationalists or fascists. They consider themselves to be rebelling against the establishment, whilst upholding all of its ultra-politically correct views.

Antifa only dislike racism when its carried out by whites, and do not have the bottle to stand up against anti-white racism; leading to many people on the right to refer to them as 'traitors'. I'd rather just call them morons.

Most are teenagers and university students who grow out of the fad when they start paying taxes.
And definition#5:

Quote:
Short for antifascist

An antifascist is somebody who is usually young, upper to middle class(wo)man who sits in their parents house standing against racism on their computers while sipping expensive wine. Most of them are anarchists or far-leftists such as communists or Marxists (or any socialists for that matter.)

When they get off their computers and go into the real world, they usually flood the streets in packs waving red and black flags symbolizing anarcho-communism, or maybe they just fly black flags or red flags. Since they are too dumb to realize that anarchism and socialism were ideas written from behind a desk and not able to be used in reality.
The full term antifascist generally defines as 'opposed to fascism' which doesn't clear much up, but for sure doesn't guarantee being on the left, except on the assumption that they are against far right.

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=antifa

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/antifascist
__________________
"Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect" -Mark Twain
"Half of what he said meant something else, and the other half didn't mean anything at all" -Rosencrantz, on Hamlet
Thermal is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th February 2017, 07:14 PM   #636
The Big Dog
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 29,742
See that one of the anarchists was in fact an employee of the school, and therefore a state employee.

So anarchy, much anarchy.

Loser.
The Big Dog is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th February 2017, 07:51 PM   #637
caveman1917
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 8,143
Originally Posted by MostlyDead View Post
The problem is that 'antifa' isn't well defined. Antifa, definition #1, from Urban Dictionary:



And definition#5:



The full term antifascist generally defines as 'opposed to fascism' which doesn't clear much up, but for sure doesn't guarantee being on the left, except on the assumption that they are against far right.

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=antifa

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/antifascist
Urban Dictionary...

A link to the wikipedia article on anti-fascism has already been provided, one wonders why you would ignore it in favour of Urban Dictionary. Plenty more information is only a google search away, such as a short history on the forerunner of current Western antifa.

And yes, militant anti-fascism does not absolutely guarantee every individual being on the left, but it makes it overwhelmingly likely. There is, after all, no liberal antifa, no conservative antifa, or other moderate-right antifa.
caveman1917 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th February 2017, 08:34 PM   #638
Thermal
Penultimate Amazing
 
Thermal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: Where the Arrantly Roam
Posts: 26,169
Originally Posted by caveman1917 View Post
Urban Dictionary...

A link to the wikipedia article on anti-fascism has already been provided, one wonders why you would ignore it in favour of Urban Dictionary. Plenty more information is only a google search away, such as a short history on the forerunner of current Western antifa.
Uh...yeah. Urban Dictionary. Thought it was appallingly obvious that it was not meant entirely seriously. My bad.

Quote:
And yes, militant anti-fascism does not absolutely guarantee every individual being on the left, but it makes it overwhelmingly likely. There is, after all, no liberal antifa, no conservative antifa, or other moderate-right antifa.
That does not mean it is overwhelmingly anything. There can certainly be some wine-sipping leftists, but down-and-dirty apolitical types I would think are the majority.

ETA: your link is about Brits from 15 or so years ago. The OP here is about the current Oakland crew, who basically bust **** up at any given opportunity. 'Tis a little different.
__________________
"Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect" -Mark Twain
"Half of what he said meant something else, and the other half didn't mean anything at all" -Rosencrantz, on Hamlet

Last edited by Thermal; 5th February 2017 at 08:39 PM.
Thermal is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th February 2017, 09:05 PM   #639
caveman1917
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 8,143
Originally Posted by MostlyDead View Post
That does not mean it is overwhelmingly anything.
If you bothered to look into it you'll find it is indeed overwhelmingly left-wing.

Quote:
There can certainly be some wine-sipping leftists
I didn't say anything about wine-sipping. If anything I'll go with beer-drinking, not that it matters, who cares what someone likes to drink anyway. At least judging by the nearest left-wing & antifa team to me in Liege
YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the ISF. The ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.
I AGREE


as well as other left-wing & antifa teams in Europe
YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the ISF. The ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.
I AGREE


Though apparently soccer isn't such a thing in the US, so do you have like left-wing/antifa and right-wing/fascist baseball teams or something?

Quote:
but down-and-dirty apolitical types I would think are the majority.
And why exactly would you think that?

Last edited by caveman1917; 5th February 2017 at 09:10 PM.
caveman1917 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th February 2017, 09:34 PM   #640
Thermal
Penultimate Amazing
 
Thermal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: Where the Arrantly Roam
Posts: 26,169
Originally Posted by caveman1917 View Post
If you bothered to look into it you'll find it is indeed overwhelmingly left-wing.
According to your cite. There are others. None are specific to the West Coast U.S.A. hommies at question in the OP. The century-old European history does not really apply to the current American practice of anarchism and use of the Bloc.

Quote:
I didn't say anything about wine-sipping. If anything I'll go with beer-drinking, not that it matters, who cares what someone likes to drink anyway. At least judging by the nearest left-wing & antifa team to me in Liege
The Urban Dictionary definitions did. Did you read them? Funny.

Quote:
Though apparently soccer isn't such a thing in the US, so do you have like left-wing/antifa and right-wing/fascist baseball teams or something?
Nope. We have anti-establishment anarchists that just want to watch the world burn, though. No pretense to socio-political sport teams or lofty ideology (with or without sipping wine).

Quote:
And why exactly would you think that?
Observation. And experience from my youth, from back when circling the letter A was your kindergarten classwork (JK).
__________________
"Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect" -Mark Twain
"Half of what he said meant something else, and the other half didn't mean anything at all" -Rosencrantz, on Hamlet
Thermal is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » USA Politics

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 04:55 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.