Right Wing Grifters

suicide_circus

Wibbs wrote: »

Again I say meh. About the only times I might take an insult to heart is if it comes from a friend, or if it strikes home in some way. Being called a racist by some right on type is akin to being called a martian. It's an inaccurate statement. There's eff all weight behind it.

If someone were to label me being very much anti the currently in vogue multiculturalist/"diversity"/"cultural enrichment" nonsense then game ball, it's an accurate statement and one I have zero problems with being labelled. If anything I'd take it as a compliment of sorts and an acknowledgement of my position.

you will be told that there is not one iota of difference between having doubts about multiculturalism as a policy and racism. some people genuinely cannot differentiate between the two.

Boggles

The likes of those who subscribe and donate to the type of people the OP is referring to would indeed be of a racist persuasion, it wouldn't be there only vice either mind.

You just have to take a look at the first dozen comments on the content to get a flavor of the ne'er-do-well's who do subscribe.

I imagine some degree of mental illness and social isolation plays it part combined with other inadequacies, they also struggle with been called out rightly for what they are.

Boggles

Boggles wrote: »

The likes of those who subscribe and donate to the type of people the OP is referring to would indeed be of a racist persuasion, it wouldn't be there only vice either mind.

You just have to take a look first dozen comments on the content to get a flavor of the ne'er-do-well's who do subscribe.

I imagine some degree of mental illness and social isolation plays it part, they also struggle with been called out rightly for what they are.

We can all play that game:


The type of people who support Antifa are all violent, racist (against white people) dangerous misandrists. It wouldn't be their only vice either.

You only have to look at their facebook page to get a flavour of the idiots that subscribe.

I imagine they are all mentally ill to some degree and social status climbing through virtue signalling plays its part. They also struggle with being called out rightly for what they are.

Slowyourrole

Lefty Bicek wrote: »

No. Not 'claiming' anything.

I am stating factually, that the scurillous tactic of shouting 'racist' at people who say things you don't want to hear, has factually had toxic consequences.

Factually, it facilitated the exploitation in vast numbers of factually underage white girls by young men who factually, were already married to a cousin from Pakistan.

Those are facts, not claims.

I don't think you know what the word "claim" means. Or "factual" for that matter. You seem to be referring to the claim that some officials in Rotherham avoided dealing with the issue due to fears of being racist. That would be a factual claim. Your opinion is that this was a result of "the scurillous tactic of shouting 'racist' at people who say things you don't want to hear". This is not a claim supported by fact but by your own opinion on the matter.

Wibbs wrote: »

Again I say meh. About the only times I might take an insult to heart is if it comes from a friend, or if it strikes home in some way. Being called a racist by some right on type is akin to being called a martian. It's an inaccurate statement. There's eff all weight behind it.

If someone were to label me being very much anti the currently in vogue multiculturalist/"diversity"/"cultural enrichment" nonsense then game ball, it's an accurate statement and one I have zero problems with being labelled. If anything I'd take it as a compliment of sorts and an acknowledgement of my position.

On the topic of right wing grifters, a common tactic used across the likes of Trump forums and Breitbart-like publications is to attempt to delegitimise the word "racist" as being just another lefty attack. The idea being if they can take the weight away from the word it is easier to dismiss legitimate claims and even play the victim a little. Unfortunately, it only really works against people who already think like they do. Just strengthens the echo chamber.

Slowyourrole

Slowyourrole wrote: »

On the topic of right wing grifters, a common tactic used across the likes of Trump forums and Breitbart-like publications is to attempt to delegitimise the word "racist" as being just another lefty attack. The idea being if they can take the weight away from the word it is easier to dismiss legitimate claims and even play the victim a little. Unfortunately, it only really works against people who already think like they do. Just strengthens the echo chamber.

Your lack of self awareness is staggering.

Boggles

Deleted User wrote: »

We can all play that game:


The type of people who support Antifa are all violent, racist (against white people) dangerous misandrists. It wouldn't be their only vice either.

You only have to look at their facebook page to get a flavour of the idiots that subscribe.

I imagine they are all mentally ill to some degree and social status climbing through virtue signalling plays its part. They also struggle with being called out rightly for what they are.

I have no idea really who there are. I'm not a member of facebook so can't subscribe.

But it sounds like you are trying to defend one breed of cretin by highlighting another.

That's pretty weird TBF.

Boggles

Boggles wrote: »

I have no idea really who there are. I'm not a member of facebook so can't subscribe.

But it sounds like you are trying to defend one breed of cretin by highlighting another.

That's pretty weird TBF.

Sorry, I was just found it amusing that you are able to label everyone who subscribes to people mentioned in the OP as racist and having other bad vices so I made a sweeping generalisation and passed it off as fact too.

Boggles

Deleted User wrote: »

Sorry, I was just found it amusing that you are able to label everyone who subscribes to people mentioned in the OP as racist and having other bad vices so I made a sweeping generalisation and passed it off as fact too.

No need to be sorry.

I would wager I would be fairly accurate in my assertion though.

No offense meant.

Slowyourrole

Deleted User wrote: »

Your lack of self awareness is staggering.

If I wanted to be in an echo chamber, I wouldn't be on Boards or Trump forums.

Boggles wrote: »

I have no idea really who there are. I'm not a member of facebook so can't subscribe.

But it sounds like you are trying to defend one breed of cretin by highlighting another.

That's pretty weird TBF.

Deflection. Straight out of the Trump playbook. Also called the "Hilary's emails" tactic.

Blind Eagle

Slowyourrole wrote: »

If I wanted to be in an echo chamber, I wouldn't be on Boards or Trump forums.





Deflection. Straight out of the Trump playbook. Also called the "Hilary's emails" tactic.

Log off. Go out-side.

Lefty Bicek

Slowyourrole wrote: »

I don't think you know what the word "claim" means. Or "factual" for that matter. You seem to be referring to the claim that some officials in Rotherham avoided dealing with the issue due to fears of being racist. That would be a factual claim. Your opinion is that this was a result of "the scurillous tactic of shouting 'racist' at people who say things you don't want to hear". This is not a claim supported by fact but by your own opinion on the matter.

I'm indeed flattered that the House of Commons Home Affairs Committee had so much faith in my opinion.

Otherwise it's inquiry might never have led the independent report commissioned by Rotherham Council, amongst whose many findings were -

There was "denial" that such events could happen in Rotherham and issues of ethnicity were "played down" by senior managers.

"Almost all" the abusers were described by victims as being of Pakistani origin, but authorities "wanted to play down ethnic dimensions... for fear of being thought racist."

That is the testimony of people in a position to know.

https://news.sky.com/story/horrific-cases-of-child-abuse-in-rotherham-10391876

All perfectly chimes with the perspective of the Labour MP for Keighley, Ann Cryer, whom I have mentioned twice already.

...Cryer is adamant that she can't have been the only politician to have heard such stories. "There must have been councillors and MPs, I think, all over the country who knew what was going on but were terrified. It's a genuine fear, to be terrified of being labelled a racist. No one wants to be called a racist, least of all someone who isn't a racist."

Yet that's exactly what happened to Cryer...

...she was shunned by elements of her party, a panic button was installed in her house

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/aug/30/rotherham-girls-could-have-been-spared-ann-cryer

So in spite of your disingenuity, it really has nothing to do with my opinion, and everything to do with the lived experience of people who are in a position to speak with authority.

Slowyourrole

Blind Eagle wrote: »

Log off. Go out-side.

It's cold out there.

Blind Eagle

Slowyourrole wrote: »

It's cold out there.

Ye **** it... Log back on.

Wibbs

Slowyourrole wrote: »

On the topic of right wing grifters, a common tactic used across the likes of Trump forums and Breitbart-like publications is to attempt to delegitimise the word "racist" as being just another lefty attack. The idea being if they can take the weight away from the word it is easier to dismiss legitimate claims and even play the victim a little. Unfortunately, it only really works against people who already think like they do. Just strengthens the echo chamber.

Racist is a legitimate term and if it's present then fine. However it's wheeled out as soon as night follows day if anyone questions any part of the multicultural credo. Now it can be in play yes, but it doesn't mean it is automatically in play. That is not legitimate. For a start I've consistently stated that racism is a huge part of why multiculturalism doesn't work nearly as well as the naive ideal that's peddled and it's nearly always the immigrant non native population that bear the brunt of it. Oh and that's consistent throughout history and regardless of melanin content of the parties involved. The list of cultural flashpoints, unrest and racism is a very long one and in many if not most cases the antagonists were the same "colour".

As for Trump, I consider him a bully, a snakeoil salesman and a blustering buffoon, who comes from a line of nasty bastards. His father was a racist, slumlord scumbag who hung around with Klan members and was arrested with them got up in the same bedsheets. That so many saw Donald Trump as some sort of alternative to the usual snakeoil salesmen they have on thier ballot papers doesn't bode well for Americans, or for the parlous state of their politics. I wouldn't read Breitbart or any of that American either/or/Right/Left hysterical echo chamber guff so prevalent in that culture at the moment. 1) I'm not American* and 2) it almost never applies to Europe or Ireland on most levels. Though too damned many consume that guff here and on both "sides" and parrot their third hand opinions as if it did make cultural sense here.

I'm also against the importation of this multicultural credo wherever it's coming from. As if a non multicultural nation must be somehow "improved". Though again it's pretty much always those nations that are pale of face and European that seem to be in need of this improvement. Many of those pushing this politic would have several shades of apoplexy if it were suggested that an Asian or African nation could be similarly "improved" by dropping a million white people into them. Funny that.

It's cold out there.

This bit we can agree on at least.






*I've nothing against Americans. Indeed I can't recall ever actively disliking any I've met and I've met a fair number, inside and outside that country. However it's not a country I'd want to live in, or import the dafter parts of their culture.

Slowyourrole

Slowyourrole wrote: »

On the topic of right wing grifters, a common tactic used across the likes of Trump forums and Breitbart-like publications is to attempt to delegitimise the word "racist" as being just another lefty attack. The idea being if they can take the weight away from the word it is easier to dismiss legitimate claims and even play the victim a little. Unfortunately, it only really works against people who already think like they do. Just strengthens the echo chamber.

There's little need to "delegitimise" the word because people on the left use it so often that they've made the word itself shallow and almost meaningless. To be honest, I suspect it's only those in the middle or the right who actually appreciate the gravity that the word should convey.

People like yourself throw it around too easily way beyond it's original meaning. You seek to expand the scope, without realising that the more specific a word is, the more power it has when used. Just as when a word is used less often, it carries more weight on those who receive the attack.

If you disagree with someone, disagree with them. Don't throw a tantrum and start name calling. If the left truly wants to be heard and appreciated for the message it promotes, then it's got to begin arguing like mature adults. Throwing around slurs isn't impressing anyone.

Lastly, making references to US Left/Right commentary means very little these days. The US has gone nuts with their identity politics and watered down vocabulary. They've embraced a black/white good/bad view of the world, and, I hope to God, that Irish people never embrace that kind of narrowness.

20Cent

One side wants to separate kids from their parents and lock them in cages. The other wants people to be recognised for who they are.

Always trust a centrist to come along and say they are both the same thing.

Slowyourrole

Deleted User wrote: »

There's little need to "delegitimise" the word because people on the left use it so often that they've made the word itself shallow and almost meaningless.

Yes, exactly like that.

Deleted User wrote: »

To be honest, I suspect it's only those in the middle or the right who actually appreciate the gravity that the word should convey.

People like yourself throw it around too easily way beyond it's original meaning. You seek to expand the scope, without realising that the more specific a word is, the more power it has when used. Just as when a word is used less often, it carries more weight on those who receive the attack.

If you disagree with someone, disagree with them. Don't throw a tantrum and start name calling. If the left truly wants to be heard and appreciated for the message it promotes, then it's got to begin arguing like mature adults. Throwing around slurs isn't impressing anyone.

Lastly, making references to US Left/Right commentary means very little these days. The US has gone nuts with their identity politics and watered down vocabulary. They've embraced a black/white good/bad view of the world, and, I hope to God, that Irish people never embrace that kind of narrowness.

You can't logically argue with someone whose position is not based on fact. I've tried it. I don't see it as my responsibility to try and educate people or argue them out of a position of bigotry just because they've chosen to get their "facts" from Facebook. We're all adults. We're all capable of making judgements of facts.



Simply put, if someone doesn't want to be called a racist, they shouldn't say racist things. And to clarify, by racist things I mean comments which denigrate or stereotype people based on race, nationality or ethnicity.

20Cent

20Cent wrote: »

One side wants to separate kids from their parents and lock them in cages. The other wants people to be recognised for who they are.

Always trust a centrist to come along and say they are both the same thing.

What a (unsuprisingly) ridiculous way of arguing. We could all do that:

One side wants control over their borders and expect immigrants to go through correct procedures to gain access to their country.

The other side want to hit people with bicycle locks and call people fascists for having a different opinion while attempting to silence them.

Slowyourrole

Slowyourrole wrote: »

Simply put, if someone doesn't want to be called a racist, they shouldn't say racist things. And to clarify, by racist things I mean comments which denigrate or stereotype people based on race, nationality or ethnicity.

Can you point out where I did that in order to back up your inference that I am a racist?

20Cent

Seems Andy Ngo was kicked off twitter temporarily for lying again.
Anyone who still considers him a reliable source needs their head examined.

Lefty Bicek

Deleted User wrote: »

Can you point out where I did that in order to back up your inference that I am a racist?

No, he can't.

And neither can the 'loser and toady' who initially made the charge against you, here -

https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=111916349&postcount=375

and who then immediately scuttled off, and hasn't been seen since.

Funny how that works.

Wibbs

20Cent wrote: »

One side wants to separate kids from their parents and lock them in cages. The other wants people to be recognised for who they are.

My how simple your world seems to be. Must be nice. Sadly reality doesn't work like that. And maybe I've missed the memo but I can't recall anyone calling for "kids to be locked in cages". Nice bit of hysterical arm waving though.

The only "kids in cages" story I can recall, was again in the United States and Mexican migrants(IIRC?) and again it has nada to do with Ireland.

Always trust a centrist to come along and say they are both the same thing.

Again you're coming up with nonsensical equivalences that don't actually exist.

Slowyourrole wrote: »

You can't logically argue with someone whose position is not based on fact. I've tried it. I don't see it as my responsibility to try and educate people or argue them out of a position of bigotry just because they've chosen to get their "facts" from Facebook. We're all adults. We're all capable of making judgements of facts.

I for one can't recall any example where you've argued from a position of facts and links to same. Unlike me by the by. Your entire debating position appears to be "well you're just wrong and even questioning this is RACIST!!" in a vain attempt to shut down any debate. Surely if your position is so obviously correct, tenable and provable it should be a doddle to show the opposing position is not obviously correct, untenable and nonsense.

Simply put, if someone doesn't want to be called a racist, they shouldn't say racist things. And to clarify, by racist things I mean comments which denigrate or stereotype people based on race, nationality or ethnicity.

Well then, you better get onto the leader of this country and the relevant immigration departments and accuse them of being "racist" because they have quite clearly stated that immigrants that have applied from Albania and Georgia and Nigeria are likely to be out to scam the system and have straight out rejected legal entry to this country of nearly 100% of them.

Then again you seem to get confused, or wilfully ignore the simple fact that this does not mean Albanians and Georgians and Nigerians are all scammers. Though you'd only love if someone thought this. It does mean that it strongly suggests those from those countries trying to claim asylum here are. That's the difference. And that's the joke too. While having a fit if you think people are stereotyping entire groups of people, you yourself are apparently and happily painting the same groups as homogeneous and all of one mind and morality just because they're of a different race, nationality or ethnicity.

Though this is not a complete shock as too often I have found that those with hair triggers about anything around the question of "race" are just as focused and swayed to their position on colour, culture and ethnicity as the actual racists out there are to theres.

Robert ninja

20Cent wrote: »

One side wants to separate kids from their parentscriminals

Illegally entering a country makes that person a criminal. It's a bad idea to let children hang around criminals especially ones with nothing to lose. People from economically unstable parts of the world have been found prostituting their children even if that wasn't their plan. No money, nowhere to go, criminal record... not a good idea to keep them within arms reach of society's most vulnerable.

The whole cage story was fake news anyway.

Junkyard Tom

Deleted User wrote: »

the left is so embarrassed that western civilisation was (past tense in thanks to leftist principles) so damn successful on the world stage.

What 'Western Civilisation' are you speaking of? The intergenerational torture of slaves? The industrialised slaughter on the battlefields of Europe? The mass death and misery caused by colonisation? Causing wars over a drug trade? Laissez faire Famines?

past tense in thanks to leftist principles

Also, what's this utter shite that 'the left has ruined western civilisation'? Where are you getting that from? Sounds like you're informing yourself by listening to idiot YouTube grifters.

20Cent

Robert ninja wrote: »

Illegally entering a country makes that person a criminal. It's a bad idea to let children hang around criminals especially ones with nothing to lose. People from economically unstable parts of the world have been found prostituting their children even if that wasn't their plan. No money, nowhere to go, criminal record... not a good idea to keep them within arms reach of society's most vulnerable.

The whole cage story was fake news anyway.

Did a search for "immigrant kid in a cage fake news" and posts it as proof.

Screamin

20Cent

20Cent wrote: »

Screamin

You certainly are

Wibbs

Junkyard Tom wrote: »

What 'Western Civilisation' are you speaking of? The intergenerational torture of slaves? The industrialised slaughter on the battlefields of Europe? The mass death and misery caused by colonisation? Causing wars over a drug trade? Laissez faire Famines?

The Classical world, the renaissance, the use of the printing press to change everything(including the news and social media we're discussing here), the enlightenment, separation of church and state, democracy as an ideal for a state, women's rights, workers rights, the rights of the child, human rights separated from religious philosophies, modern universities, railways, the steam engine, the industrial revolution, anti slave legislation(that's the bit you left out) and a vanishing into the distance long list of technical innovation. Hell the modern global culture is far more European in flavour and origin than any other culture and by a long distance. And that's before you look at ex European colonies. The best bits of the modern world are almost entirely based on European culture and innovation. Look around you indoors or out, the vast majority of everything you see and use and take for granted in your life and that makes your life better had its origins in European and western civilisation. Never mind that outside industrialised slaughter every one of the others was perpetrated by other non Western civilisation. But no, the west and the evil whitey is so so bad. G'way to feck.

I get a major pain in my arse with this European/White self flagellation ballsology.

Robert ninja

20Cent wrote: »

Did a search for "immigrant kid in a cage fake news" and posts it as proof.

Screamin

It's called efficient searching. I'm looking specifically for that famous instance that was exposed as fake news, not all the actual fake news and 24/7 left wing Trump bashing. Nor did I want to link any specific place. But you're welcome to it. Let's remove the efficiency so.
Enjoy that search history.
Bonus

Marcos

Wibbs wrote: »

The Classical world, the renaissance, the use of the printing press to change everything(including the news and social media we're discussing here), the enlightenment, separation of church and state, democracy as an ideal for a state, women's rights, workers rights, the rights of the child, human rights separated from religious philosophies, modern universities, railways, the steam engine, the industrial revolution, anti slave legislation(that's the bit you left out) and a vanishing into the distance long list of technical innovation. Hell the modern global culture is far more European in flavour and origin than any other culture and by a long distance. And that's before you look at ex European colonies. The best bits of the modern world are almost entirely based on European culture and innovation. Look around you indoors or out, the vast majority of everything you see and use and take for granted in your life and that makes your life better had its origins in European and western civilisation. Never mind that outside industrialised slaughter every one of the others was perpetrated by other non Western civilisation. But no, the west and the evil whitey is so so bad. G'way to feck.

I get a major pain in my arse with this European/White self flagellation ballsology.

But what have the Romans ever done for us?

Junkyard Tom

Wibbs wrote: »

The Classical world, the renaissance, the use of the printing press to change everything(including the news and social media we're discussing here), the enlightenment, separation of church and state, democracy as an ideal for a state, women's rights, workers rights, the rights of the child, human rights separated from religious philosophies, modern universities, railways, the steam engine, the industrial revolution, anti slave legislation(that's the bit you left out) and a vanishing into the distance long list of technical innovation. Hell the modern global culture is far more European in flavour and origin than any other culture and by a long distance. And that's before you look at ex European colonies. The best bits of the modern world are almost entirely based on European culture and innovation. Look around you indoors or out, the vast majority of everything you see and use and take for granted in your life and that makes your life better had its origins in European and western civilisation. Never mind that outside industrialised slaughter every one of the others was perpetrated by other non Western civilisation.

So all the good stuff. As you know for every person who benefitted from 'western civilisation' another, both at home and abroad, experienced misery. The Native Americans felt the full force of 'Western Civilisation' as did millions of African slaves, as did millions of 'civilised' Europeans on the battlefield.

But no, the west and the evil whitey is so so bad. G'way to feck. I get a major pain in my arse with this European/White self flagellation ballsology.

Who said it was evil? Who mentioned race? That's a strawman. I'm sure if the North Africans or Chinese had gotten so far ahead we'd have suffered the same fate as those 'we' colonised only the Chinese would be couching it in similar terms to you.