Right Wing Grifters

marieholmfan

By the way 'Rise and Fall of the Great Powers' Is available at:
https://www.cia.gov/library/abbottabad-compound/04/04A70DD54F5CB55BED6BE3B351E242EE_The_Rise_and_Fall_of_Great_Power_Paul_Kennedy.pdf

As the source is the CIA I think it's safe to assume that the licensing etc. has been dealt with by the US government.

20Cent

20Cent wrote: »

Just throw up a video or a name of someone on the left as bonkers and high profile as katie Hopkins. I'll wait.

Ana Kasparian.

Junkyard Tom

Junkyard Tom wrote: »

I don't know. What I do know is that any time I hear 'Western Civilisation' it is usually spoken of by cranks and frauds. It's a bit like 'Leader of the Free World' or 'Traditional values'. These terms are big on connotation but little on substance.

Well, I use the term because it's the one I hear the most, and the one most people would understand. I feel it relates to nations which were founded on western principles with regards to morality and social structure. For the most part, there are common links between west European countries, the US, Canada, Australia etc. Not being identical but sharing a sense of morality and common beliefs in what is right/wrong. Very general.

By the way, it's also what most people I meet outside of Europe call it. Western civilisation when referring to the influence of Europe and America.

Is there a better term to use? I'd genuinely like to know.

Junkyard Tom wrote:

Western civilisation is history because of leftist principles. What the hell does that even mean?

Deleted User wrote:

Although I suppose that's why you oppose them, since the left is so embarrassed that western civilisation was (past tense in thanks to leftist principles) so damn successful on the world stage

Isn't it great when you take a sentence out of context? Wow. Just really gives you plenty to go nuts on.

The problem here is that you have taken the whole sentence, and even were you to take the whole paragraph, you'd be doing so, out of the context of the discussion that was occurring.

Which might have been the point, although I hope not. It is interesting that you went all the way back to page 10, just to grab a small sentence in brackets out of an entire paragraph, from a discussion that you weren't involved in. And no, I don't feel any particular interest in explaining it now. Back then, when I said it, sure. But now? Nope.

20Cent

Deleted User wrote: »

Ana Kasparian.

Throw up a video then of her having like Katie Hopkins.

After a shooting at a Mosque Hopkins reported that guns were found afterwards. Implying they were stored there. They were the killers guns. Dispicable behaviour.

20Cent

20Cent wrote: »

Just throw up a video or a name of someone on the left as bonkers and high profile as katie Hopkins. I'll wait.

20Cent wrote: »

Throw up a video then of her having like Katie Hopkins.

you wanted a name. You have the name. You also have plenty of other names from the start of this thread.

The fact that you find these people more palatable than Katie Hopkins means that you won't agree that they are as bad.

You want a "left wing version of Katie Hopkins"? What exactly does that mean? I assumed you meant a left winger who spouts hatred towards the right and doesn't care about accuracy of reporting as long as it fits their agenda.

Ana Kasparian does that.

Look for your own videos. You seem to be the expert on "grifters".

Blind Eagle

20Cent wrote: »

Who is the left wing version of Katie Hopkins?

Sarah Jeong.

rossie1977

Can you post a video where Ana Kasparian is calling for or inciting violence against a certain group

marieholmfan

What does it mean?


Where are it's limits?
Is Russia in the West?
Is Japan in the West?

Italy and Germany are at the absolute centre of our civilisation (certainly far more so than America) yet I have heard the term used as though they somehow ceased to be of the west in the 1930s.

I prefer the term 'Christian Civilisation'.

Deleted User wrote: »

Well, I use the term because it's the one I hear the most, and the one most people would understand. I feel it relates to nations which were founded on western principles with regards to morality and social structure. For the most part, there are common links between west European countries, the US, Canada, Australia etc. Not being identical but sharing a sense of morality and common beliefs in what is right/wrong. Very general.

By the way, it's also what most people I meet outside of Europe call it. Western civilisation when referring to the influence of Europe and America.

Is there a better term to use? I'd genuinely like to know.





Isn't it great when you take a sentence out of context? Wow. Just really gives you plenty to go nuts on.

The problem here is that you have taken the whole sentence, and even were you to take the whole paragraph, you'd be doing so, out of the context of the discussion that was occurring.

Which might have been the point, although I hope not. It is interesting that you went all the way back to page 10, just to grab a small sentence in brackets out of an entire paragraph, from a discussion that you weren't involved in. And no, I don't feel any particular interest in explaining it now. Back then, when I said it, sure. But now? Nope.

Slowyourrole

The Nal wrote: »

Interesting you believe environmental activism is hard left nonsense. I think it's amazing how this child has triggered so many people. There's very little factual rebuttal of her position, it's nearly all personal.

20Cent

Blind Eagle wrote: »

Sarah Jeong.

What has she done that is comparable to the horrible Katie Hopkins?

20Cent

20Cent wrote: »

What has she done that is comparable to the horrible Katie Hopkins?

As I said earlier:

"You want a "left wing version of Katie Hopkins"? What exactly does that mean? I assumed you meant a left winger who spouts hatred towards the right and doesn't care about accuracy of reporting as long as it fits their agenda."

There are plenty of those on both sides.

You won't get many (any) people sticking up for Katie Hopkins here. I don't see what your point is. She gets vilified by people on both the right and the left.

20Cent

Deleted User wrote: »

As I said earlier:

"You want a "left wing version of Katie Hopkins"? What exactly does that mean? I assumed you meant a left winger who spouts hatred towards the right and doesn't care about accuracy of reporting as long as it fits their agenda."

There are plenty of those on both sides.

You won't get many (any) people sticking up for Katie Hopkins here. I don't see what your point is. She gets vilified by people on both the right and the left.

Yeah who is this?

"I assumed you meant a left winger who spouts hatred towards the right and doesn't care about accuracy of reporting as long as it fits their agenda."


Hopkins makes a good living spreading hatred she has a lot of support on the right. She has a very high profile, is regularly on TV/Radio, had her own radio show, newspaper columns etc

Blind Eagle

20Cent wrote: »

What has she done that is comparable to the horrible Katie Hopkins?

https://www.google.com/search?q=sarah+jeong+tweets&client=ms-android-huawei&prmd=inv&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwig_JCI6J7mAhXSbsAKHRIBCScQ_AUoAXoECA0QAQ&biw=360&bih=560#imgrc=y9zt8DOfRSBRkM

On phone so can't link proper. But that is comparable to Hopkins. Its vile and racist, like Hopkins.

20Cent

Blind Eagle wrote: »

Sarah Jeong.

So had to look her up.
She wrote some satirical racist tweets to highlight the type of abuse people of colour get online. When confronted about it she explained why they were made and apologised.


Katie Hopkins: Would use machine guns against boat fulls of immigrants in the Mediterranean and called them cockroaches.


Not comparable by any stretch of the imagination.

Blind Eagle

20Cent wrote: »

So had to look her up.
She wrote some satirical racist tweets to highlight the type of abuse people of colour get online. When confronted about it she explained why they were made and apologised.


Katie Hopkins: Would use machine guns against boat fulls of immigrants in the Mediterranean and called them cockroaches.


Not comparable by any stretch of the imagination.

Jaysus, you looked her up quite quick. You sure you didn't know who she wss in the first place? Katie Hopkins was just engaging in some ethnic banter to show the type of abuse White people face online by the likes of Sarah Jeong... Or something.

You are quite evidently an idealogue, and you want to believe that your side is better. You'll engage in all kinds of mental gymnastics to prove this to yourself. They are bad people on both sides. Get over it.

20Cent

Blind Eagle wrote: »

Jaysus, you looked her up quite quick. You sure you didn't know who she wss in the first place? Katie Hopkins was just engaging in some ethnic banter to show the type of abuse White people face online by the likes of Sarah Jeong... Or something.

You are quite evidently an idealogue, and you want to believe that your side is better. You'll engage in all kinds of mental gymnastics to prove this to yourself. They are bad people on both sides. Get over it.

Sara Jeong apologised and made a statement about why she did it.

" Jeong said in a statement that the tweets were intended to be an inversion of the racist and sexist trolling that had been a feature of her digital life—an attempt to fight racism by deploying its own language against it. She said, “While it was intended as satire, I deeply regret that I mimicked the language of my harassers. These comments were not aimed at a general audience, because general audiences do not engage in harassment campaigns.” She added that she understood how, out of context, tweeting such remarks was “hurtful,” and that she would not do it again.


Hopkins always doubles down and has never claimed her comments are meant as satirical.

20Cent

20Cent wrote: »

So had to look her up.
She wrote some satirical racist tweets to highlight the type of abuse people of colour get online. When confronted about it she explained why they were made and apologised.


Katie Hopkins: Would use machine guns against boat fulls of immigrants in the Mediterranean and called them cockroaches.


Not comparable by any stretch of the imagination.

Racism is bad no matter what way you spin it. I am not surprised you are willing to give her the benefit of the doubt though. I wouldn't say you would be as quick to believe someone who wasn't "of colour".

"Are white people genetically predisposed to burn faster in the sun, thus logically being only fit to live underground like groveling goblins"

"Oh man it's kind of sick how much joy I get out of being cruel to old white men"

"dumbass f***ing white people".

I am in no way defending or advocating what Katie Hopkins said, I am just pointing out (again) the hypocrisy of the "left".

Blind Eagle

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Racism is bad no matter what way you spin it. I am not surprised you are willing to give her the benefit of the doubt though. I wouldn't say you would be as quick to believe someone who wasn't "of colour".

"Are white people genetically predisposed to burn faster in the sun, thus logically being only fit to live underground like groveling goblins"

"Oh man it's kind of sick how much joy I get out of being cruel to old white men"

"dumbass f***ing white people".

I am in no way defending or advocating what Katie Hopkins said, I am just pointing out (again) the hypocrisy of the "left".

To be fair. Its the hypocrisy of the progressive left. There are many left of center and center left people who hate the double standard too.

20Cent

Deleted User wrote: »

Racism is bad no matter what way you spin it. I am not surprised you are willing to give her the benefit of the doubt though. I wouldn't say you would be as quick to believe someone who wasn't "of colour".

"Are white people genetically predisposed to burn faster in the sun, thus logically being only fit to live underground like groveling goblins"

"Oh man it's kind of sick how much joy I get out of being cruel to old white men"

"dumbass f***ing white people".

I am in no way defending or advocating what Katie Hopkins said, I am just pointing out (again) the hypocrisy of the "left".

She apologised and explained why she did it.
Has Hopkins?
Nope Hopkins is making a career out of spreading hate and her fans are lapping it up.

Blind Eagle

20Cent wrote: »

Sara Jeong apologised and made a statement about why she did it.

" Jeong said in a statement that the tweets were intended to be an inversion of the racist and sexist trolling that had been a feature of her digital life—an attempt to fight racism by deploying its own language against it. She said, “While it was intended as satire, I deeply regret that I mimicked the language of my harassers. These comments were not aimed at a general audience, because general audiences do not engage in harassment campaigns.” She added that she understood how, out of context, tweeting such remarks was “hurtful,” and that she would not do it again.


Hopkins always doubles down and has never claimed her comments are meant as satirical.

"I'm sorry for being a racist". The fact is they are both racists. They are comparable, which is what you originally asked for.

20Cent

Blind Eagle wrote: »

To be fair. Its the hypocrisy of the progressive left. There are many left of center and center left people who hate the double standard too.

It's a fake double standard.
Hilarious struggle to come up with a left wing exuivilent of Katie Hopkins or Alex Jones. Greta Thunberg, Sara Jeong, Ana Kasparian, David Pakman!!

None of them are remotely near the hatred, bile and lies.

20Cent

Blind Eagle wrote: »

"I'm sorry for being a racist". The fact is they are both racists. They are comparable, which is what you originally asked for.

She explained why the tweets were sent and it wasn't I'm sorry for being racist.
There is a quote above.
No it's not comparable, show me where Katie Hopkins has said her comments are satire then.

20Cent

20Cent wrote: »

She apologised and explained why she did it.
Has Hopkins?
Nope Hopkins is making a career out of spreading hate and her fans are lapping it up.

And you are willing to believe her dubious excuse because she aligns to your way of thinking.

I don't believe you would accept such an excuse from anyone who tweeted about "people of colour" in such a manner.

Samantha Bee, Ana Kasparian and even Steven Colbert to an extent are also making a career of spreading hatred and ridicule of Trump, his supporters and anyone who doesn't align with their thinking.

This is ok to you though.

ohnonotgmail

Deleted User wrote: »

And you are willing to believe her dubious excuse because she aligns to your way of thinking.

I don't believe you would accept such an excuse from anyone who tweeted about "people of colour" in such a manner.

Samantha Bee, Ana Kasparian and even Steven Colbert to an extent are also making a career of spreading hatred and ridicule of Trump, his supporters and anyone who doesn't align with their thinking.

This is ok to you though.

Well i certainly wouldn't if they tweeted about it repeatedly. that is not what happened with sara jeong. There are no left wing equivalents of Hopkins, a vile racist who spreads hate to make money.

ohnonotgmail

Blind Eagle wrote: »

Jaysus, you looked her up quite quick. You sure you didn't know who she wss in the first place? Katie Hopkins was just engaging in some ethnic banter to show the type of abuse White people face online by the likes of Sarah Jeong... Or something.

You are quite evidently an idealogue, and you want to believe that your side is better. You'll engage in all kinds of mental gymnastics to prove this to yourself. They are bad people on both sides. Get over it.

our side isn't the one filled with racists and holocaust deniers so i'm quite comfortable with thinking that our side is better.

Blind Eagle

20Cent wrote: »

She explained why the tweets were sent and it wasn't I'm sorry for being racist.
There is a quote above.
No it's not comparable, show me where Katie Hopkins has said her comments are satire then.

She only apologised because she was in danger of losing her job with the New York Times. The fact that you believe her says it all. If Hopkins comes out and apologises and says it was all just satire will you take that at face value too? No, ofcourse you won't.

20Cent

Deleted User wrote: »

And you are willing to believe her dubious excuse because she aligns to your way of thinking.

I don't believe you would accept such an excuse from anyone who tweeted about "people of colour" in such a manner.

Samantha Bee, Ana Kasparian and even Steven Colbert to an extent are also making a career of spreading hatred and ridicule of Trump, his supporters and anyone who doesn't align with their thinking.

This is ok to you though.

She apologised and hasn't done it since so I believe her.
Maybe she is secretly racist but she isn't spreading hatred to make a living.

Making fun of trump is spreading hatred now.
And they call the left snowflakes.

Blind Eagle

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

our side isn't the one filled with racists and holocaust deniers so i'm quite comfortable with thinking that our side is better.

I'm not right wing. I don't have a "side". I'd never be so silly to pigeonhole myself in such a way. You aware of the current problems in the labour party aren't you? Have you read the report released today? Might make you rethink your position that your "side" is so much better.

ohnonotgmail

Blind Eagle wrote: »

I'm not right wing. I don't have a "side". I'd never be so silly to pigeonhole myself in such a way. You aware of the current problems in the labour party aren't you? Have you read the report released today? Might make you rethink your position that your "side" is so much better.

you seem to spend a lot of time defending them. strange that. and i'm not a member of the labour party. i couldn't a monkeys what they do.

Blind Eagle

20Cent wrote: »

She apologised and hasn't done it since so I believe her.
Maybe she is secretly racist but she isn't spreading hatred to make a living.

Making fun of trump is spreading hatred now.
And they call the left snowflakes.

Right, so you accept she is racist, like Hopkins. Thus they are comparable. You didn't ask for an exact carbon copy, you asked for somebody who is comparable. That has been provided to you.

Your argument essential is our racists aren't as bad as your racists. The point is they are racists though.