Extremist rhetoric on Trump threads

Robineen · 02-02-2017 7:41pm

kneemos wrote: »

You don't need examples,he explained in detail what he thought the problem was.

Yes, but sans concrete examples. Links to full posts and the like.

kneemos · 02-02-2017 7:44pm

Robineen wrote: »

Yes, but sans concrete examples. Links to full posts and the like.

Pointless arguing specific examples when the supposed problem is apparently a multiple forum issue.

ancapailldorcha · 02-02-2017 7:45pm

Flint Fredstone wrote: »

In my experience here and in general I suppose, the further left a person is the more likely they are to be intolerant of other opinions. It comes across as a mission to take away the voice of the other side at times.

See, this is the issue in a nutshell. I'm not having a go at you personally but in my experience modding Politics you see two camps that are both more than happy to show a blind eye when one of their own has a go but when someone from the other side does it, they're up in arms.

Robineen · 02-02-2017 7:47pm

kneemos wrote: »

Pointless arguing specific examples when the supposed problem is apparently a multiple forum issue.

I don't think it's too much to ask for some evidence.

A lot of people have strong views on Trump but some people, me included, don't think that should be conflated with extremism. So some examples of extremism as opposed to strong views would be nice.

Flint Fredstone · 02-02-2017 8:00pm

26000 Elephants wrote: »

Could it not also be argued that "perceived racism" (your words) is simply racism that you dont have a problem with? So in fact its the same thing really.

In the example I gave above (I promise not to mention names) you see the defendants actions as mere "perceived racism" but the courts thought otherwise. They are not 2 different things.

Just because your value system allows you to see something wrong as being acceptable does not make it OK.

I take issue with your continued reference to me in that post. You don't know me or anything about me. It's pathetic.

Flint Fredstone · 02-02-2017 8:06pm

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

See, this is the issue in a nutshell. I'm not having a go at you personally but in my experience modding Politics you see two camps that are both more than happy to show a blind eye when one of their own has a go but when someone from the other side does it, they're up in arms.

I'm new to these discussions on boards. I rarely venture outside of the soccer forum to be honest.

I wouldn't align myself to either side but I find the left far louder, more oppressive and intolerant in their posting to be honest.

Case in point above where I'm being told I'm probably racist despite not saying or doing anything racist.

ancapailldorcha · 02-02-2017 8:08pm

Flint Fredstone wrote: »

I'm new to these discussions on boards. I rarely venture outside of the soccer forum to be honest.

I wouldn't align myself to either side but I find the left far louder, more oppressive and intolerant in their posting to be honest.

I just noticed your post. Nothing personal intended. I was just making the point that it's those at the far ends of the spectrum who tend to claim victimhood while shouting the other side down.

26000 Elephants · 02-02-2017 8:48pm

Flint Fredstone wrote: »

I take issue with your continued reference to me in that post. You don't know me or anything about me. It's pathetic.

Why dont you try and construct a compelling argument against it instead of just stomping around saying "Its pathetic". It doesn't advance your case.

You said that there are 2 kinds of racism. Real and perceived. Now, back that up by at least owning the notion of "perceived racism" and explain how it differs from what I described above.

Flint Fredstone · 02-02-2017 8:56pm

26000 Elephants wrote: »

Why dont you try and construct a compelling argument against it instead of just stomping around saying "Its pathetic". It doesn't advance your case.

You said that there are 2 kinds of racism. Real and perceived. Now, back that up by at least owning the notion of "perceived racism" and explain how it differs from what I described above.

You insinuating that I, a complete stranger, who hasn't said or done anything racist, might be racist is pathetic.

I could not be bothered engaging with that kind of attitude.
Apart from anything this is a feedback thread. Don't use me in your examples again.

jackofalltrades · 02-02-2017 9:03pm

Robineen wrote: »

I'd like some examples too.

Here's two from a thread that had nothing to do with Donald Trump.

The biggest extremeist is sitting in the White House signing executive orders banning innocent people from entering the US illegally.

When the AG points this out she is fired.

I'm much much more alarmed than bigot Trump than a bigot lone wolf shooter.

One had the capacity to kill six people.

One has the capacity to kill six billion people.

Astonishing to see so many people still falsely blaming Muslims, even after we know the attacker was a facist Trump and Le Pen supporter.
Utterly disgusting behaviour from the facist section of boards imho.

Here's a few from the Nickname for Donald Trump thread.
I know it's AH and it's a bit tongue in cheek, but I doubt a similar thread with the same level of vitriol would have been allowed if Hillary had been elected.

The Rapist

Hitler

Hopefully we'll soon be calling him "The late Donald Trump".

W***er?

Mango Mussolini

Trumple Sh*tskin.

Or just "cúnt".

And from the Should Ireland ban Donald trump from a year ago.

Well if he's been banned from the Presidential race for the backward comments and ideas he has...
And his Hilter type solution to Muslims...Do we need this guy visiting and investing in Ireland?

He's a pr*ck of the highest order and there are wealthier, nicer billionaires out there who aren't as racist and vile as he is.

Christy42 · 02-02-2017 9:08pm

jackofalltrades wrote: »

Here's two from a thread that had nothing to do with Donald Trump.

Here's a few from the Nickname for Donald Trump thread.
I know it's AH and it's a bit tongue in cheek, but I doubt a similar thread with the same level of vitriol would have been allowed if Hillary had been elected.

And from the Should Ireland ban Donald trump from a year ago.

Aside from the one wishing death on him and maybe the one comparing him to Hitler what is your issue with the above. You took two quotes from the thread on the Quebec shooting which was perpetrated by a far right terrorist. The statement that he was a Trump and Le Pen supporter seems quite relevant in that context to me.

FA Hayek · 02-02-2017 9:37pm

Skylinehead wrote: »

Honestly that's one of the things that irks me the most. Screaming "Islam isn't a race" doesn't change a thing for me. Saying "kill all Muslims" is going to get the same response in AH from me as saying "kill all blacks".

You would have a point if indeed people were saying Kill all Muslims/Blacks. Can you link us to a post that specially stated this?

People conflate criticism of Islam with racism, as if Islam itself is beyond criticism, when we all know it has a problem with extremism. One should be able to critique Islam with out being accused of racism, which happens all too often.

FA Hayek · 02-02-2017 9:40pm

Memnoch wrote: »

I am curious. Why and in what instance do you make an exception for Judaism?

Being Jewish is more about ethnicity rather than religion per say. It is entirely possible to be an Atheist Jew, indeed many of them died in the Holocaust.

26000 Elephants · 02-02-2017 9:40pm

Flint Fredstone wrote: »

You insinuating that I, a complete stranger, who hasn't said or done anything racist, might be racist is pathetic.

Let me just stop your fallacy right there and remind you what you said:

Flint Fredstone wrote: »

I'm [...] simply making the point that perceived racism and racism can be two different things.

You are struggling because there is no moral way to legitimize that statement.

Flint Fredstone · 02-02-2017 9:49pm

26000 Elephants wrote: »

Let me just stop your fallacy right there and remind you what you said:

You are struggling because there is no moral way to legitimize that statement.

I'm not struggling at all. Just let me ask you before I cut my interaction with you completely... Is there such a thing as perceived racism?

ancapailldorcha · 02-02-2017 9:50pm

FA Hayek wrote: »

People conflate criticism of Islam with racism, as if Islam itself is beyond criticism, when we all know it has a problem with extremism. One should be able to critique Islam with out being accused of racism, which happens all too often.

No they don't. They rightly treat the demonisation of Muslims as racism.

Zaph · 02-02-2017 10:03pm

Flint Fredstone and 26000 Elephants, if you want to carry on a discussion between yourselves then please take it to PM.

Flint Fredstone · 02-02-2017 10:04pm

Zaph wrote: »

Flint Fredstone and 26000 Elephants, if you want to carry on a discussion between yourselves then please take it to PM.

I'm good thanks. I don't want any PMs off that poster.

JRant · 02-02-2017 10:06pm

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

No they don't. They rightly treat the demonisation of Muslims as racism.

Of course they do Anc and it is a perfect example of how words are being redefined almost off the cuff the shut down debate. For example it is a perfectly reasonable position to state that Islam is incompatible with Western society. It is not okay to say that muslims are incompatible with Western society. Yet these two statements will usually garner the same response ie. "that's racist".

The problem as I see is not really the extremist views from both sides. These should be easily dealt with. It's more the low level trolling that pops up in nearly all these type of threads and honestly is ruining what little conversation is taking place. Everyone knows who they are and once they arrive that's pretty much it for the next 10/20 pages. Pointless back and forth making the same points over and over and over and over again.

FA Hayek · 02-02-2017 10:19pm

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

No they don't. They rightly treat the demonisation of Muslims as racism.

Did you misread my post. I said criticism of Islam, the religion and doctrine itself. Not muslims or people.

People should be able to critique the former, just like any ideology.

ancapailldorcha · 02-02-2017 10:22pm

FA Hayek wrote: »

Did you misread my post. I said criticism of Islam, the religion and doctrine itself. Not muslims or people.

People should be able to critique the former, just like any ideology.

Nobody is saying otherwise and both the religion and its followers get regular bashings on this site. Take a look at any of the immigration threads and you'll see what I mean. That's why this absurd victim fantasy needs to stop.

26000 Elephants · 02-02-2017 10:33pm

Zaph wrote: »

Flint Fredstone and 26000 Elephants, if you want to carry on a discussion between yourselves then please take it to PM.

Yeah, I'm done. Rhetoric doesn't stand much scrutiny.

jackofalltrades · 02-02-2017 11:21pm

Christy42 wrote: »

Aside from the one wishing death on him and maybe the one comparing him to Hitler what is your issue with the above. You took two quotes from the thread on the Quebec shooting which was perpetrated by a far right terrorist. The statement that he was a Trump and Le Pen supporter seems quite relevant in that context to me.

The overall level of rhetoric in the posts is what I have a problem with.
Engaging with posters at this level is very difficult and makes a rational discussion next to impossible.
One of the posters mad the absurd claim that there is a fascist section on boards.
It seems to be coming the case though that posters are increasingly using the site to rant about matters that they don't like, rather than engaging in discussion.

mansize · 02-02-2017 11:25pm

This site has attracted a more "alt-right" poster of late. Shame.

26000 Elephants · 02-02-2017 11:35pm

jackofalltrades wrote: »

The overall level of rhetoric in the posts is what I have a problem with.
.

If you think something is just 'rhetoric' then challenge it. Question it.

I think what is actually happening is that some people are confusing a robust challenge to their views as 'rhetoric'.

JRant · 02-02-2017 11:53pm

jackofalltrades wrote: »

The overall level of rhetoric in the posts is what I have a problem with.
Engaging with posters at this level is very difficult and makes a rational discussion next to impossible.
One of the posters mad the absurd claim that there is a fascist section on boards.
It seems to be coming the case though that posters are increasingly using the site to rant about matters that they don't like, rather than engaging in discussion.

You're spot on. It is impossible to have any sort of conversation when comments are framed in such a way that any dissent from their central theme automatically labels you some sort of 'ist'.

It's incredibly frustrating to see. Instead of trying to tease out an issue the default setting seems to be straight to the nuclear option for far too many posters in these threads.

I said earlier that low level trolling is stifling debate and I believe that until it is clamped down on by the entire community then it will just get worse.

ancapailldorcha · 02-02-2017 11:58pm

JRant wrote: »

You're spot on. It is impossible to have any sort of conversation when comments are framed in such a way that any dissent from their central theme automatically labels you some sort of 'ist'.

Except that this isn't the case nearly as often as is being made out if it ever happens at all. I'm not sure how you're supposed to respond to someone who's automatically written off any news source they disagree with as elitist.

Robineen · 03-02-2017 12:02am

jackofalltrades wrote: »

The overall level of rhetoric in the posts is what I have a problem with.
Engaging with posters at this level is very difficult and makes a rational discussion next to impossible.

The 'Nicknaming Trump' shouldn't have been quoted then. The whole point of the thread is in the title; it's not a political discussion. It's an AH thread on a very specific topic. Of course some discussion might happen in that thread but that wasn't its main purpose.

jackofalltrades · 03-02-2017 12:18am

26000 Elephants wrote: »

If you think something is just 'rhetoric' then challenge it. Question it.

I think what is actually happening is that some people are confusing a robust challenge to their views as 'rhetoric'.

I think you're missing the point.
I've no problem with people challenging my views.
When posters arguments boil down to anger and name calling it's very hard to have a discussion with them.
The thread then escalates, with the extremes who are never going to change their minds drowning out the moderates, who would like to hear other opinions.

Robineen wrote: »

The 'Nicknaming Trump' shouldn't have been quoted then. The whole point of the thread is in the title; it's not a political discussion. It's an AH thread on a very specific topic.
Of course some discussion might happen in that thread but that wasn't its main purpose.

Oh I know it's not a political discussion and I qualified that before I quoted those posts.
The point was to show the levels of vitriol out there.
And to also point out that I don't believe a similar thread, with similar comments about another politician would have been allowed.

Robineen · 03-02-2017 1:46am

jackofalltrades wrote: »

Oh I know it's not a political discussion and I qualified that before I quoted those posts.
The point was to show the levels of vitriol out there.
And to also point out that I don't believe a similar thread, with similar comments about another politician would have been allowed.

If the politician was conducting themselves as Trump is, I'd say it would be. Can't muster up much sympathy for the guy. And again, I would really hope people would be able to not conflate justifiably strong reactions to Trump with extremism. You really think all the people you quoted in the nickname thread are extremists? Seriously? There is a reason people are reacting to Trump the way they are. It comes across a bit faux naif and disingenuous to claim to not know why that might be.

Extremist rhetoric on Trump threads

Comments