Extremist rhetoric on Trump threads

pq0n1ct4ve8zf5

demfad wrote: »

If you are debating with someone who's arguments substantiate that they are being racist or fascist then I would say it's strategically wise to call them out.
Fascists are unlikely to change their minds, but when others see why these people's viewpoints are fascist and what fascism is may learn from it.

I agree with you, although I think the term fascist is being thrown around more than is merited, and is being used because of its negative connotations as much as it's used because it's factually accurate. But there's never any reason to call someone a nutjob.

Like if I were having a back and forth with someone on here and they called me a socialist, depending on what I was saying that might well be fair enough. My point is it's a very different thing to say "The views you're expressing are socialist, socialism will destroy this country" and "You're a socialist nutjob". (It's not that I have some particular problem with the word nutjob, it's just the one that was used in the post I quoted.)

I post and lurk in a lot of the Trump threads and I'd bet the farm that nobody reading is learning anything from any of them at the moment.

Il Fascista

demfad wrote: »

If you are debating with someone who's arguments substantiate that they are being racist or fascist then I would say it's strategically wise to call them out.
Fascists are unlikely to change their minds, but when others see why these people's viewpoints are fascist and what fascism is they may learn from it.

Can you give me an example of a fascist post on here? On just the previous page you called someone a white supremacist, which I know you've little evidence to back up. It's hysteria like that which ruins Trump related discourse on here.

Lovely Bloke

The problem is that the vast majority of people on Boards are NOT racists nor fascists.

But they are being labelled as such by people who are vehemently opposed to any anti-immigration sentiment, simply for questioning immigration - for example.

This is what's pissing people off.

Mark Hamill

Ian Disgusting Superscript wrote: »

Nutjob is probably never a helpful term to use in fairness. Whatever about fascist or racist, sometimes, maybe, possibly those might just be the best words and the most accurate description. There's never any need to call somebody a nutjob or a libtard or a cuck. They're purely inflammatory.

It's not a case of fear of offending someone, it's a case of what's the point? What's to be achieved? Because it won't be a debate that's productive to take part in or enjoyable to read.

I've never really used the ignore function on here before but I have been since the election.

OK, nutjob is inflammatory and isn't going to help a discussion but racist? Facist? I know you are saying they might be applicable, but I'm not getting from other posters here. Other posters seem to be of the position that getting called out on racism/facism/etc (be it in their posts or the actions of people in the news) is the problematic extremism, not the racism/facism/etc itself.

Lovely Bloke

I love how my last post was thanked by a user with the name "Il Fascista"

demfad

Il Fascista wrote: »

Can you give me an example of a fascist post on here? On just the previous page you called someone a white supremacist, which I know you've little evidence to back up. It's hysteria like that which ruins Trump related discourse on here.

I have plenty of evidence to back up the fact that Steve Bannon is a white supremacist not least the News site 'Breitbart news' that he was CEO of and he declared himself a platform for the 'alt-right'.
I'm not alone: the most prominent democrat in the house Nanci Pelosi called him this twice yesterday in light of his elevation to the NSC ahead of the head of the joint chief of staff (highest military person in USA) and the Director of National Intelligence (highest intelligence person in USA).
http://edition.cnn.com/2017/02/02/politics/pelosi-steve-bannon-white-supremacist/
That is enough to make it OK for me to make that claim i would think.

There is a lot to be extremely worried about here and on sites like this it must be remembered that this is not a normal situation. Just a while ago the former PM of Norway, was stopped and detained under Bannon's EO.

In the last 2 days:
Revealed recording devices deliberately turned off for Trumps phonecall with Putin,
Sanctions against the FSB (former KGB) were lifted yesterday,
Sanctions forcing oil companies to disclose deals with foreign governments were lifted a day after Tillerson made SOS (if you dont know significance of that you should).
Russia has upped its offensive in Ukraine directly after that phonecall.
And this is just Trump/Russia stuff.
This is not normal. Trump supporters should expect questions and lots of them.

Lovely Bloke

Mark Hamill wrote: »

Other posters seem to be of the position that getting called out on racism/facism/etc (be it in their posts or the actions of people in the news) is the problematic extremism, not the racism/facism/etc itself.

Nope, it's because most of the time the actions being labelled as one or extreme or another are not actually racist or fascist when examined without the hyperbole applied by the modern media.

demfad

Lovely Bloke wrote: »

The problem is that the vast majority of people on Boards are NOT racists nor fascists.

But they are being labelled as such by people who are vehemently opposed to any anti-immigration sentiment, simply for questioning immigration - for example.

This is what's pissing people off.

An argument is either based on reason or prejudiced. If a poster cannot make a reasonably argument we can suggest bias, if the argument is about groups of people who are 'different' in some way, it is fair to suggest they are prejudiced against that group.
If you don't want arguments to be labelled as racist, or fascist then support them with reasoning and real news.

pq0n1ct4ve8zf5

Mark Hamill wrote: »

OK, nutjob is inflammatory and isn't going to help a discussion but racist? Facist? I know you are saying they might be applicable, but I'm not getting from other posters here. Other posters seem to be of the position that getting called out on racism/facism/etc (be it in their posts or the actions of people in the news) is the problematic extremism, not the racism/facism/etc itself.

Yeah I know. I hate that deflection thing and pretending the two things are the same.

Lovely Bloke wrote: »

The problem is that the vast majority of people on Boards are NOT racists nor fascists.

But they are being labelled as such by people who are vehemently opposed to any anti-immigration sentiment, simply for questioning immigration - for example.

This is what's pissing people off.

Really? Really? Are they being labelled that way because of the irreducible fact that they question immigration or because of the fact that they question immigration on the grounds that these are 'rape-ugees', that their culture is 'incompatible with Western society'?

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Lovely Bloke

demfad wrote: »

If you don't want arguments to be labelled as racist, or fascist then support them with reasoning and real news.

Fair enough, but the very same needs to be applied to the "other side" as it were. Stop taking shrieking leftist news outlets as your sources and going around calling anyone who disagrees with your viewpoint a racist.

Answer this.

Is it legitimate to question the resettling of 40 undocumented males from the Calais jungle, at a cost of €11m into a locality where there was no prior consultation? Is it legitimate to question where that money is coming from, when the minister responsible has an already stretched budget?

Is it legitimate to point out Ireland already spends north of 600m on aid already?

Is it legitimate to question the fact that there seems to be some kind of nefarious dealings surrounding the procurement of the hotel in Ballaghadreen?

Or is it racist to bring up those things?

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

demfad

Ian Disgusting Superscript wrote: »

I agree with you, although I think the term fascist is being thrown around more than is merited, and is being used because of its negative connotations as much as it's used because it's factually accurate. But there's never any reason to call someone a nutjob.

Like if I were having a back and forth with someone on here and they called me a socialist, depending on what I was saying that might well be fair enough. My point is it's a very different thing to say "The views you're expressing are socialist, socialism will destroy this country" and "You're a socialist nutjob". (It's not that I have some particular problem with the word nutjob, it's just the one that was used in the post I quoted.)

I post and lurk in a lot of the Trump threads and I'd bet the farm that nobody reading is learning anything from any of them at the moment.

I believe that Bannon is an anarcho capitalist and Trump a Kleptocrat.
Bannon is also an accelerationist. As Bannon himself admires Alexandr Dugin who roughly bases his makey-up/fool the youngsters ideology on Italian Fascism then people using the description of fascism is OK.
I haven't worked out why Bannon is trying to pull the Establishment down so fast: Either it is because he believes a complete destruction of State is necessary to achive his goals or he fears the upcoming investigations into Putin/Trump.

Your argument against fascism seems to be that people need only identify an argument as fascist in order to have it vilified. If this was a result of an unfair press that fascism had i would be inclined to agree.
But the demonising, othering and de-humanising of 'other' people, has in the last century caused the mass murder and 'experimentation' of 100s of millions of human beings by regimes based only on their appearance or religion or nationality or gender or age. Facism/Nazism is so toxic that the alt-right only salute when they think the cameras are off. How can this be normalised?

So sometimes you rightly win the argument by proving someone to be a devil worshipper, sometimes you rightly win it by proving they are fascist/nazis (alt-right, anarcho capitalisst etc.) It cannot be normalised.

If the fascists have an issue with this blame their forefathers who exterminated and killed men, women and children in their 100s of millions just for being different.

Supporters of these scum better grow thicker skin.

demfad

See above ^^^^^ Alles ist clar?

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Il Fascista

demfad wrote: »

I have plenty of evidence to back up the fact that Steve Bannon is a white supremacist not least the News site 'Breitbart news' that he was CEO of and he declared himself a platform for the 'alt-right'.
I'm not alone: the most prominent democrat in the house Nanci Pelosi cllaed him this twice yesterday in light of his elevation to the NSC ahead of the head of the joint chief of staff (highest military person in USA) and the Director of National Intelligence (highest intelligence person in USA).
That is enough to make it OK for me to make that claim i would think.

There is a lot to be extremely worried about here and on sites like this it must be remembered that this is not a normal situation. Just a while ago the former PM of Norway, was stopped and detained under Bannon's EO.

In the last 2 days:
Revealed recording devices deliberately turned off for Trumps phonecall with Putin,
Sanctions against the FSB (former KGB) were lifted yesterday,
Sanctions forcing oil companies to disclose deals with foreign governments were lifted a day after Tillerson made SOS (if you dont know significance of that you should).
Russia has upped its offensive in Ukraine directly after that phonecall.
And this is just Trump/Russia stuff.
This is not normal. Trump supporters should expect questions and lots of them.

As I expected you're basing this mainly on his comment about the Alt Right. He was clearly speaking about the Alt Right that Milo appeals to, not the hardcore white nationalist element.

The kind of Alt Right people you're assuming it's about, hate Milo because he's a Jew, and hate Bannon because he's pro Israel. There's little to no articles on Breitbart about racial realism or antisemitism, which are the subjects that separate the moderates from the hardcore members. If he was appealing to that element I'd at least expect some articles in favor of these things.

I don't care about what Nanci Pelosi thinks, she's working on just as little information as you are.

drunkmonkey

New dating app for iOS for any singletons posting Hater by Hater Inc. https://appsto.re/ie/yrkJgb.i

Guess it's going to be the year of hate may as well get with the program. Glad someone has found a way to make money from it besides selling weapons.

demfad

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

Cherry picking wont cut it. Are you suggesting that Hitler, Mussolini, Franco and other fascists of the 20th century are not scum?

I'm an anarcho-capitalist in that I believe ultimately in a society without government, regulated only by the invisible hand of the market. Does that mean that you win the argument just because you can point that out?

If you are also a white supremacist athen I would be labelling you with the fascists and nazis. Nazis are socialists within the master race. Poor white people wont be saved under Bannons world view.

kunst nugget

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

What happens to the poor, disabled or just those unfortunate enough to lose their jobs in a society like that?

demfad

Il Fascista wrote: »

As I expected you're basing this mainly on his comment about the Alt Right. He was clearly speaking about the Alt Right that Milo appeals to, not the hardcore white nationalist element.

The kind of Alt Right people you're assuming it's about, hate Milo because he's a Jew, and hate Bannon because he's pro Israel. There's little to no articles on Breitbart about racial realism or antisemitism, which are the subjects that separate the moderates from the hardcore members. If he was appealing to that element I'd at least expect some articles in favor of these things.

I don't care about what Nanci Pelosi thinks, she's working on just as little information as you are.

Bannon refused to send his children to the local schoold because there were too many Jewish kids in it. His mysoginy is clear anyway, the fact that he used to beat the tar out of his wife and kids is not unexpected news.
He is a member of the ultra right Council for National Policy which advocates
religeous statism. He also took the mention of jews out of the presidents speech on holocaust day deliberately as provocation to jews.
Breitbart is hosted with the idea of making ultra right views more mainstream. As such the articles work on part content, but leave plenty of gaps and suggestion for the reader to fill in.
As you know if you read it the comment section is the home of the Breitbart Nazi. These are dominated by the most extreme views and this is the platform that Bannon really means.
For you to suggest that the leading democrat in the house Nanci Pelosi knows less than people like you are I is naive or foolish in the extreme.
She also called for the acceleration and completion of the FBI FISA investigation into Trump/Putin ties. I have researched the evidence that the FBI may have available and unless Bannon was extremely careful he will be going down also.

Il Fascista

demfad wrote: »

Bannon refused to send his children to the local schoold because there were too many Jewish kids in it. His mysoginy is clear anyway, the fact that he used to beat the tar out of his wife and kids is not unexpected news.
He is a member of the ultra right Council for National Policy which advocates
religeous statism. He also took the mention of jews out of the presidents speech on holocaust day deliberately as provocation to jews.
Breitbart is hosted with the idea of making ultra right views more mainstream. As such the articles work on part content, but leave plenty of gaps and suggestion for the reader to fill in.
As you know if you read it the comment section is the home of the Breitbart Nazi. These are dominated by the most extreme views and this is the platform that Bannon really means.
For you to suggest that the leading democrat in the house Nanci Pelosi knows less than people like you are I is naive or foolish in the extreme.
She also called for the acceleration and completion of the FBI FISA investigation into Trump/Putin ties. I have researched the evidence that the FBI may have available and unless Bannon was extremely careful he will be going down also.

So he's a white supremacist who beats his family? That's what you believe, based on little. Can you not see how dangerous that is?

The only claims of his antisemitism come from his ex wife, who's can't be considered a unbiased source. Breitbart was even considered too pro Israel not so long ago by some. A Jew used to be their editor too, so your narrative doesn't work for me.

demfad

Il Fascista wrote: »

So he's a white supremacist who beats his family? That's what you believe, based on little. Can you not see how dangerous that is?

The only claims of his antisemitism come from his ex wife, who's can't be considered a unbiased source. Breitbart was even considered too pro Israel not so long ago by some. A Jew used to be their editor too, so your narrative doesn't work for me.

Nothing dangerous about it.
I have no doubt that you wont be convinced which was a point I made earlier. I don't care about convincing you.

Bannon leaving any reference to Jews out of the holocaust speech was a huge act of anti-semitism which you have conveniently ignored.
Here he blames the Jewish community for the rise of Jihadism in the US.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/bannon-film-outline-warned-us-could-turn-into-islamic-states-of-america/2017/02/03/f73832f4-e8be-11e6-b82f-687d6e6a3e7c_story.html?postshare=4011486136302856&tid=ss_tw&utm_term=.f96f1b844cc7

And the comment section on Breitbart exposing its regular readers as vile racists and anti-semites? Why are the people who frequent it nothing less than outright Nazis?

EDIT: Here is some documentation about this very disturbed mans relationship with his wife, including threats to school principles and others.

https://theopporeport.com/2016/12/02/the-bannon-files-divorce-records-reveal-marital-discord-and-questionable-parenting/

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Il Fascista

demfad wrote: »

Nothing dangerous about it.
I have no doubt that you wont be convinced which was a point I made earlier. I don't care about convincing you.

Bannon leaving any reference to Jews out of the holocaust speech was a huge act of anti-semitism which you have conveniently ignored.
Here he blames the Jewish community for the rise of Jihadism in the US.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/bannon-film-outline-warned-us-could-turn-into-islamic-states-of-america/2017/02/03/f73832f4-e8be-11e6-b82f-687d6e6a3e7c_story.html?postshare=4011486136302856&tid=ss_tw&utm_term=.f96f1b844cc7

And the comment section on Breitbart exposing its regular readers as vile racists and anti-semites? Why are the people who frequent it nothing less than outright Nazis?

EDIT: Here is some documentation about this very disturbed mans relationship with his wife.

https://theopporeport.com/2016/12/02/the-bannon-files-divorce-records-reveal-marital-discord-and-questionable-parenting/

I wouldn't disagree that there's some not so nice people who read Brietbart, but he can't control who reads his website. CNN is read by Communists and Anarchists but that doesn't make them Communists or Anarchists.

I fail to see anything about beating his kids or wife in those reports? Can't you see how you're jumping to conclusions?

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Havockk

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

You've openly admitted that you believe an 'invisible hand' would sort out everything if it was left to it's own devices. There is no persuading you of anything other than what you already believe.

As for Bannon and the conversation above, I am completely comfortable labeling him as a fascist. He is heavily influenced by Evola and Dugin, both fascist thinkers and infulencers of the Traditionalism movement, has said that he believes it is something we in the West 'should adopt'.

The real question is how you can convince everyone he is NOT a fascist. You have literally provided no proof other than your own opinions, which as I've stated before I;m deeply suspicious of, and remain so.

RDM_83 again

Ian Disgusting Superscript wrote: »

Yeah I know. I hate that deflection thing and pretending the two things are the same.



Really? Really? Are they being labelled that way because of the irreducible fact that they question immigration or because of the fact that they question immigration on the grounds that these are 'rape-ugees', that their culture is 'incompatible with Western society'?

The highlighted part is an example of the over reach used, why is it automatically racist or fascist to highlight cultural incompatibilities? Its not simply the evil Muslims durhhhhh its about the accepted cultural practices (and in some cases legal framework) of their homes not being compatible, its not even about religion as such its about the culture (e.g you don't hear this about Indonesian or most Indian Muslim immigrants)

I don't get why so many socially left wing people have this viewpoint like its weird to be concerned with stuff like facebook banning female nipples but think that a bunch of young men from a country where there is codified womens dress codes won't cause a problem

demfad wrote: »

Just a while ago the former PM of Norway, was stopped and detained under Bannon's EO.

This is a good example of the hyperbole thats a problem, every decent report on this states that he was questioned under Obama era legislation, the guy says it himself!

RDM_83 again

Also how can somebody be an Anarcho-Capitalist and a Fascist at the same time? Like surely they are mutually exclusive philosophies right, simply looking at the word Fascist and its roman roots should tell you that ( stronger together/unity/state authority),

KyussBeeshop

I think the rhetoric used against Trump though, kind of oversteps the mark by labelling him and his government as fascist - it's right to note the fascist links by people in the Trump administration, but you've got to judge based on actions, and there isn't really anything to back such accusations yet - so it doesn't add to the debate.

RDM_83 again wrote: »

Also how can somebody be an Anarcho-Capitalist and a Fascist at the same time? Like surely they are mutually exclusive philosophies right, simply looking at the word Fascist and its roman roots should tell you that ( stronger together/unity/state authority),

When the Anarcho-Capitalist knows that the policies they advocate, will not lead to a well-functioning/self-regulating political/economic/social system, but continue to advocate those policies anyway.

If the Anarcho-Capitalist policies work as advertised: Great, you've got a capitalist utopia.

If the Anarcho-Capitalist policies fail as predicted: You've got the perfect conditions for a takeover of the state, through whittling away the power of the state, and letting power concentrate in the hands of a small number of private groups - who can eventually takeover the state and, if they want, install a Fascist government.