Trump presidency

Seen something interesting in the news or on the intertubes? Discuss it here.

Moderators: Zamfir, Hawknc, Moderators General, Prelates

iamspen
Posts: 474
Joined: Tue May 01, 2012 2:23 pm UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby iamspen » Thu Aug 17, 2017 5:44 pm UTC

slinches wrote:In a free market of ideas, the stronger ones will win...


FTFY

User avatar
Belial
A terrible sound heard from a distance
Posts: 30450
Joined: Sat Apr 15, 2006 4:04 am UTC
Contact:

Re: Trump presidency

Postby Belial » Thu Aug 17, 2017 5:50 pm UTC

Why does anyone, ever, think I'm making a legal argument? Of course our government isn't interested in legally allowing effective resistance to white supremacy, it only got *kindof* good at *pretending* to be covert in its own white supremacy a few decades ago. So of course most ways of effectively shutting down white supremacists before they get all pogrom-y are illegal.

They're still good. Come on.

Also fuck off with the market of ideas. The market of *actual money* only stops short of mass murder because there are controls and limitations on it (and arguably it still doesn't). You expect a *metaphor* for a market to work correctly and not end up with a 9 digit body count?
addams wrote:A drunk neighbor is better than a sober Belial.


They/them

KnightExemplar
Posts: 5494
Joined: Sun Dec 26, 2010 1:58 pm UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby KnightExemplar » Thu Aug 17, 2017 5:55 pm UTC

slinches wrote:Anger leads to shit getting done, true. The problem is that what gets done in anger usually isn't worth shit.

Belial wrote:The purpose of antifa is and always has been self defense. Disrupting fascists wherever they gather and wherever they seek a platform is part of that

That isn't self-defense, it's unlawfully restricting the right of free movement and assembly. If fascists were blocking access to a peace rally, would you characterize that as a defensive act? I am a strong supporter of self-defense and you should be free to stand your ground in public if attacked, but that doesn't mean you have the right to impede others (even Nazis).

That said, Nazi ideology is terrible and I agree that it should be fought and pushed to the fringes. I just don't think physically attacking them or denying them basic human rights is an effective strategy. Instead of denying them any access to public grounds we should be denying them access to any ideological grounds. Fight the ideology of Nazism, not the Nazis themselves. Starve them of new recruits by providing better alternatives. In a free market of ideas, the better ones will win and the abhorrent ones will die off with the individuals that hold them.


Slinches, with all due respect. The "free market of ideas" has only demonstrated that the Nazism and White Supremacy will continue to grow today.

Trump has won the election, and now there is CURRENTLY a growing tide of White Supremacy. This rally is not an isolated incident. There are nooses being found on college campuses all across the country. The Swastika and other Nazi symbols have also continued to grow.

Part of it is a huge culture of the alt-right to be "wink wink / nudge-nudge its all just a joke". I'm not kidding here: Pepe the Frog is a joke, and for the Alt-Right using swastikas and such is also a joke (except when it isn't...). Just like electing Donald Trump to the White House was a joke for many people.

The current political sphere has become more welcoming to white supremacy. A number of forum posters here are frustrated by this. I still personally disavow violence, but I understand the frustration that they are going through.
First Strike +1/+1 and Indestructible.

User avatar
SDK
Posts: 675
Joined: Thu May 22, 2014 7:40 pm UTC
Location: Canada

Re: Trump presidency

Postby SDK » Thu Aug 17, 2017 5:58 pm UTC

Belial wrote:Why does anyone, ever, think I'm making a legal argument? Of course our government isn't interested in legally allowing effective resistance to white supremacy, it only got *kindof* good at *pretending* to be covert in its own white supremacy a few decades ago. So of course most ways of effectively shutting down white supremacists before they get all pogrom-y are illegal.

I'll ask you the same question I asked Hippo: If the government can't help, what should the USA be doing about this? Form a militia of their own and break the Nazis up by force every time they try to stage a rally?
The biggest number (63 quintillion googols in debt)

KnightExemplar
Posts: 5494
Joined: Sun Dec 26, 2010 1:58 pm UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby KnightExemplar » Thu Aug 17, 2017 6:02 pm UTC

SDK wrote:
Belial wrote:Why does anyone, ever, think I'm making a legal argument? Of course our government isn't interested in legally allowing effective resistance to white supremacy, it only got *kindof* good at *pretending* to be covert in its own white supremacy a few decades ago. So of course most ways of effectively shutting down white supremacists before they get all pogrom-y are illegal.

I'll ask you the same question I asked Hippo: If the government can't help, what should the USA be doing about this? Form a militia of their own and break the Nazis up by force every time they try to stage a rally?


Belial actually has been pretty clear on what he thinks the best methodology is. He wrote this a few pages ago:

viewtopic.php?f=9&t=121289&start=2640#p4232861

Belial wrote:
KnightExemplar wrote:But that's not what a lot of people were talking about in this topic. People seem to be talking about offensively taking on the next Neo-Nazi rally. And I don't think that's quite the same thing.


If you're willing to stop them when they're on the move toward targets, at some point you have to be willing to stop them from organizing and recruiting too. That's the purpose of their rallies: they're step one. What happened in Charlottesville was step 2. If you only react to step 2, eventually people are going to get lynched and neighborhoods are going to get burnt.

That doesn't mean indiscriminately punching nazis. It *does* mean suppressing their ability to march, speak to reporters, or otherwise reach a platform. Ideally just through physically blocking them but if someone needs to get punched or tackled so be it. It both denies them the ability to recruit and, when it happens on camera, sends a message to horrified onlookers who may be threatened by these nazis that they aren't unopposed.


I'm not sure if I agree with it 100%, but I think its overall a reasonable point of view. Basically, the goal of counter-protesting is to drown out the primary protest. Of course, counter-protesting only works if your group is bigger than the other side.

With that said, I should note that it is Trump in power right now. If 1st Amendment rights go away, it will be Trump who benefits the most. I think its a bit dangerous to be reducing the 1st Amendment rights of people, because then it would open up the ability for Trump to shut-down your side with police powers. As long as counter-protesting remains reasonable however, I think it'd be a valid strategy.

The main concern is that Trump has basically attacked the counter-protesters on a national stage, painting them as violent as the other group.
Last edited by KnightExemplar on Thu Aug 17, 2017 6:06 pm UTC, edited 2 times in total.
First Strike +1/+1 and Indestructible.

User avatar
SDK
Posts: 675
Joined: Thu May 22, 2014 7:40 pm UTC
Location: Canada

Re: Trump presidency

Postby SDK » Thu Aug 17, 2017 6:04 pm UTC

Forgot about that, thanks.

KnightExemplar wrote:I think its overall a reasonable point of view.

I agree.
The biggest number (63 quintillion googols in debt)

User avatar
Weeks
Hey Baby, wanna make a fortnight?
Posts: 2018
Joined: Sat Aug 23, 2008 12:41 am UTC
Location: Ciudad de Panamá, Panamá

Re: Trump presidency

Postby Weeks » Thu Aug 17, 2017 6:09 pm UTC

SDK wrote:Forgot about that, thanks.

KnightExemplar wrote:I think its overall a reasonable point of view.

I agree.
yay!
TaintedDeity wrote:Tainted Deity
suffer-cait wrote:One day I'm gun a go visit weeks and discover they're just a computer in a trashcan at an ice cream shop.

User avatar
slinches
Slinches get Stinches
Posts: 1009
Joined: Tue Mar 26, 2013 4:23 am UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby slinches » Thu Aug 17, 2017 6:40 pm UTC

The problem is that if "effective" resistance to white supremacy that Belial is calling for is legally allowed, it means also allowing "effective" resistance to the gays or the communists or whatever other group is demonized at the time. And "effective" is in quotes because these same tactics have recently been tried with terrorism and that hasn't worked out that well.

I still think undermining the ideology is a better approach, even if you don't agree with the "market for ideas" metaphor. Attacking the people who hold hateful ideals only validates their hatred and if you paint with too broad a brush and lump those who question your tactics in with the Nazis, you are likely to help them radicalize more people.

Absolutely counter-protest and try to make sure that their ideas falls on deaf ears. Protests and rallies are more about the message the public and a smaller crowd doesn't necessarily mean a weaker message. In my opinion, what Belial is proposing undermines your own message by presupposing that it's the weaker one.

User avatar
gmalivuk
GNU Terry Pratchett
Posts: 26533
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:02 pm UTC
Location: Here and There
Contact:

Re: Trump presidency

Postby gmalivuk » Thu Aug 17, 2017 6:50 pm UTC

All kinds of homophobic and racist shit is already legally allowed.

Stop fellating the rule of law and join the moral conversation everyone else is having.
Unless stated otherwise, I do not care whether a statement, by itself, constitutes a persuasive political argument. I care whether it's true.
---
If this post has math that doesn't work for you, use TeX the World for Firefox or Chrome

(he/him/his)

User avatar
slinches
Slinches get Stinches
Posts: 1009
Joined: Tue Mar 26, 2013 4:23 am UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby slinches » Thu Aug 17, 2017 6:58 pm UTC

As far as I can tell, there are two arguments going on:

1. the morality and effectiveness of the tactics being used to fight evil ideologies.

2. discussion about what the law is, and should be, with regards to 1.



I addressed both, gmal.

User avatar
gmalivuk
GNU Terry Pratchett
Posts: 26533
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:02 pm UTC
Location: Here and There
Contact:

Re: Trump presidency

Postby gmalivuk » Thu Aug 17, 2017 7:06 pm UTC

Who else is discussing 2?
Unless stated otherwise, I do not care whether a statement, by itself, constitutes a persuasive political argument. I care whether it's true.
---
If this post has math that doesn't work for you, use TeX the World for Firefox or Chrome

(he/him/his)

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 10268
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby CorruptUser » Thu Aug 17, 2017 7:15 pm UTC

gmalivuk wrote:Who else is discussing 2?


I was, though I think you don't like me.

User avatar
gmalivuk
GNU Terry Pratchett
Posts: 26533
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:02 pm UTC
Location: Here and There
Contact:

Re: Trump presidency

Postby gmalivuk » Thu Aug 17, 2017 7:20 pm UTC

Yeah, you're one of the other people who keeps wanting to change the topic and argue against "punching Nazis should always be legal" strawmen.
Unless stated otherwise, I do not care whether a statement, by itself, constitutes a persuasive political argument. I care whether it's true.
---
If this post has math that doesn't work for you, use TeX the World for Firefox or Chrome

(he/him/his)

KnightExemplar
Posts: 5494
Joined: Sun Dec 26, 2010 1:58 pm UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby KnightExemplar » Thu Aug 17, 2017 7:24 pm UTC

slinches wrote:The problem is that if "effective" resistance to white supremacy that Belial is calling for is legally allowed, it means also allowing "effective" resistance to the gays or the communists or whatever other group is demonized at the time. And "effective" is in quotes because these same tactics have recently been tried with terrorism and that hasn't worked out that well.

I still think undermining the ideology is a better approach, even if you don't agree with the "market for ideas" metaphor. Attacking the people who hold hateful ideals only validates their hatred and if you paint with too broad a brush and lump those who question your tactics in with the Nazis, you are likely to help them radicalize more people.


Undermining the ideology doesn't work when the President is working against you. At very least, the "undermining" part works wayyyyy less. That's what is making the past weekend so frustrating.

With regards to gays: Mr. Trump is trying to ban transgender soldiers from our armies. Mr. Trump clearly doesn't give a damn about the LGBT community, and that point of view is now considered mainstream.

There is a fear that this country is returning to its ugly roots: Jim Crow, Slavery, White Supremacy, KKK, NeoNazis... these beings that we thought were fringe are now coming out of the woodwork. And the Presidential response to them has been inadequate, while the President marches forward with anti-LGBT / anti-immigration ideas as best as it can.

How do you "undermine" an ideology that the President is espousing? Even with a historically weak 35ish% approval rating, that is roughly 1 in 3 Americans who will listen to Mr. Trump and take his side on the majority of issues. Mr. Trump is comparing Robert E. Lee to George Washington for fucks sake.

I'd like to make a solid case against Belial, but the reality of the current political situation means that I really can't. The best I can say is maybe "Buckle up: there's 3 and a half more years of this shit at a minimum".
First Strike +1/+1 and Indestructible.

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 10268
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby CorruptUser » Thu Aug 17, 2017 7:48 pm UTC

gmalivuk wrote:Yeah, you're one of the other people who keeps wanting to change the topic and argue against "punching Nazis should always be legal" strawmen.


No? I'm trying to get a proper legal framework for when and where "punching Nazis should be legal" that doesn't also create precedent for "punching people the majority agrees are bad should be legal."

Because while I'm on Team Nazi-puncher, I don't want to open the gates for Team Gaybasher. Yes I'm old enough to see the difference between Nazis and homosexuals, but there was a time when homosexuals were considered dangerous deviants by the vast, vast majority...

User avatar
Quercus
Posts: 1757
Joined: Thu Sep 19, 2013 12:22 pm UTC
Location: London, UK
Contact:

Re: Trump presidency

Postby Quercus » Thu Aug 17, 2017 8:01 pm UTC

CorruptUser wrote:
gmalivuk wrote:Yeah, you're one of the other people who keeps wanting to change the topic and argue against "punching Nazis should always be legal" strawmen.


No? I'm trying to get a proper legal framework for "punching Nazis should be legal" that doesn't also create precedent for "punching people the majority agrees are bad should be legal."


I spent ages trying to do that myself, and eventually settled for: "punching Nazis shouldn't be legal", and "sometimes it is morally acceptable and/or a moral duty to act illegally"

Edit: Part of this is because by the time non-state violence against Nazi's becomes necessary the rule of law has failed in its duty to protect citizens so spectacularly as to lose its moral force in that area entirely.
Last edited by Quercus on Thu Aug 17, 2017 8:16 pm UTC, edited 3 times in total.

User avatar
eran_rathan
Mostly Wrong
Posts: 1822
Joined: Fri Apr 09, 2010 2:36 pm UTC
Location: in your ceiling, judging you

Re: Trump presidency

Postby eran_rathan » Thu Aug 17, 2017 8:04 pm UTC

I think a good place to start is that one side wants to be left alone/allowed to have their civil rights, and the other is openly advocating genocide.

I also think that advocating genocide is reason enough someone ought to be punched.
"Does this smell like chloroform to you?"
"Google tells me you are not unique. You are, however, wrong."
nɒʜƚɒɿ_nɒɿɘ

KnightExemplar
Posts: 5494
Joined: Sun Dec 26, 2010 1:58 pm UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby KnightExemplar » Thu Aug 17, 2017 8:10 pm UTC

eran_rathan wrote:I think a good place to start is that one side wants to be left alone/allowed to have their civil rights, and the other is openly advocating genocide.

I also think that advocating genocide is reason enough someone ought to be punched.


I think this is misstating the facts quite a bit. Again, the gathering was nominally for the removal of a Confederate statue. One side wanted the statue to stay up.

Now of course, Neo-Nazis and White Supremacists want to keep the statue up because it matches their philosophy. But this is very much a far cry from "being left alone". One side does want to remove all the Confederate statues from public places at very least.

---------

Its a bit more complicated of an argument you need to make. Dylann Roof (as well as the general white-supremacy population) uses Confederates as hate symbols. Historically speaking, Mr. Lee himself probably wouldn't want to be portrayed in this manner. Therefore, instead of glorifying former Confederates in public places (which is encouraging these white-supremacists to come out and rally), we should move the Confederate statues to a museum.
First Strike +1/+1 and Indestructible.

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 10268
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby CorruptUser » Thu Aug 17, 2017 8:14 pm UTC

Fun aside, I'm actually the descendent of a literal Nazi-puncher. My great grandfather saw Father Caughlin preaching by the subway about how we should join WWII on Germany's side and how we needed to get rid of the Jews, etc, so my great gramps punched him in the face and got on the train as it left the station. I'm told I have his hands...

User avatar
eran_rathan
Mostly Wrong
Posts: 1822
Joined: Fri Apr 09, 2010 2:36 pm UTC
Location: in your ceiling, judging you

Re: Trump presidency

Postby eran_rathan » Thu Aug 17, 2017 8:20 pm UTC

KnightExemplar wrote:
eran_rathan wrote:I think a good place to start is that one side wants to be left alone/allowed to have their civil rights, and the other is openly advocating genocide.

I also think that advocating genocide is reason enough someone ought to be punched.


I think this is misstating the facts quite a bit. Again, the gathering was nominally for the removal of a Confederate statue. One side wanted the statue to stay up.

Now of course, Neo-Nazis and White Supremacists want to keep the statue up because it matches their philosophy. But this is very much a far cry from "being left alone". One side does want to remove all the Confederate statues from public places at very least.


You misunderstand. The first group I was referring to was, as CU put it,
people the majority agrees are bad
and the second are the Nazis. When they go down the street chanting "Blood and Soil!" and "Jews will not replace us!" they are advocating genocide.


KnightExemplar wrote:Its a bit more complicated of an argument you need to make. Dylann Roof (as well as the general white-supremacy population) uses Confederates as hate symbols. Historically speaking, Mr. Lee himself probably wouldn't want to be portrayed in this manner. Therefore, instead of glorifying former Confederates in public places (which is encouraging these white-supremacists to come out and rally), we should move the Confederate statues to a museum.


Are there many statues to Oliver Cromwell in England? How about statues to Benedict Arnold in New York? I'm sure we can find a few statues of that famous patriot, Quisling, in Norway, right?


(edit to clean up quote)
"Does this smell like chloroform to you?"
"Google tells me you are not unique. You are, however, wrong."
nɒʜƚɒɿ_nɒɿɘ

User avatar
gmalivuk
GNU Terry Pratchett
Posts: 26533
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:02 pm UTC
Location: Here and There
Contact:

Re: Trump presidency

Postby gmalivuk » Thu Aug 17, 2017 8:26 pm UTC

CorruptUser wrote:I'm trying to get a proper legal framework for when and where "punching Nazis should be legal"
Why? Was anyone else here arguing that it should be legal?
Unless stated otherwise, I do not care whether a statement, by itself, constitutes a persuasive political argument. I care whether it's true.
---
If this post has math that doesn't work for you, use TeX the World for Firefox or Chrome

(he/him/his)

KnightExemplar
Posts: 5494
Joined: Sun Dec 26, 2010 1:58 pm UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby KnightExemplar » Thu Aug 17, 2017 8:31 pm UTC

You misunderstand.


I think I see it now. Thanks for the clarification.

eran_rathan wrote:
KnightExemplar wrote:Its a bit more complicated of an argument you need to make. Dylann Roof (as well as the general white-supremacy population) uses Confederates as hate symbols. Historically speaking, Mr. Lee himself probably wouldn't want to be portrayed in this manner. Therefore, instead of glorifying former Confederates in public places (which is encouraging these white-supremacists to come out and rally), we should move the Confederate statues to a museum.


Are there many statues to Oliver Cromwell in England? How about statues to Benedict Arnold in New York? I'm sure we can find a few statues of that famous patriot, Quisling, in Norway, right?


It'd be a lot easier to remove those Confederate Statues if the NeoNazis weren't defending them.

There was a time when it was possible to argue that it was about "Southern Heritage" or whatever. But IMO, that time ended when Dylann Roof murdered a bunch of people in a Church.
First Strike +1/+1 and Indestructible.

User avatar
eran_rathan
Mostly Wrong
Posts: 1822
Joined: Fri Apr 09, 2010 2:36 pm UTC
Location: in your ceiling, judging you

Re: Trump presidency

Postby eran_rathan » Thu Aug 17, 2017 8:46 pm UTC

KnightExemplar wrote:It'd be a lot easier to remove those Confederate Statues if the NeoNazis weren't defending them.

There was a time when it was possible to argue that it was about "Southern Heritage" or whatever. But IMO, that time ended when Dylann Roof murdered a bunch of people in a Church.


Considering how many of them were put up in the early 1900s as support for Jim Crow laws, I'm not at all sure that's relevant.
"Does this smell like chloroform to you?"
"Google tells me you are not unique. You are, however, wrong."
nɒʜƚɒɿ_nɒɿɘ

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 10268
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby CorruptUser » Thu Aug 17, 2017 8:52 pm UTC

@Eran
I brought up homosexuals as a group because they are a mostly innocent group that's obvious to us now that they shouldn't be harassed, but with one key similarity to Nazis; the majority hated them. All analogies break if you examine them too closely. A better example for your purposes would be abortion doctors. Rightly or wrongly, there are people who truly, absolutely believe abortion is murder, so for those people, should they be allowed to punch "literal" murderers in the face?

No I don't want to go down the road of arguing whether or not abortion is immoral, just accept that a large number of people do view abortion doctors as just as bad if not worse than Nazis, for what they say are perfectly valid logical reasons.

@Gmal
People here were arguing that we should punch Nazis. And if you think we should punch Nazis while still keeping Nazi punching illegal, you are effectively arguing that we should be allowed to break the law when we think we have the moral high ground. Well guess what, Nazis also think they have the moral high ground.

User avatar
Liri
Healthy non-floating pooper reporting for doodie.
Posts: 1113
Joined: Wed Oct 15, 2014 8:11 pm UTC
Contact:

Re: Trump presidency

Postby Liri » Thu Aug 17, 2017 8:58 pm UTC

But... we actually *do* have the moral high ground
There's a certain amount of freedom involved in cycling: you're self-propelled and decide exactly where to go. If you see something that catches your eye to the left, you can veer off there, which isn't so easy in a car, and you can't cover as much ground walking.

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 10268
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby CorruptUser » Thu Aug 17, 2017 9:02 pm UTC

Liri wrote:But... we actually *do* have the moral high ground


Yes we do.

But they *believe* they do too.

User avatar
Belial
A terrible sound heard from a distance
Posts: 30450
Joined: Sat Apr 15, 2006 4:04 am UTC
Contact:

Re: Trump presidency

Postby Belial » Thu Aug 17, 2017 9:26 pm UTC

Which we care about why?
addams wrote:A drunk neighbor is better than a sober Belial.


They/them

User avatar
Isaac Hill
Systems Analyst????
Posts: 531
Joined: Wed Mar 14, 2007 9:35 pm UTC
Location: Middletown, RI

Re: Trump presidency

Postby Isaac Hill » Thu Aug 17, 2017 9:30 pm UTC

Netreker0 wrote:Umm, tribalism doesn't mean what you think it does. It's an allusion to actual tribal groups of people, but it's actually more of a pejorative term for folks who are loyal to their own social group (whether that is ethnic or otherwise) and for whom that loyalty is a primary concern. So if you're a Republican who votes Republican no matter what, who praises Trump or McCain for advocating escalation in Syria but criticizes Democrats who do the same thing, then one could make the argument that you're motivated more by tribalism than by principles, issues, or specific policy goals.
Punching Nazis isn't tribal. If conservatives want to join in on the Nazi punching, I'll cheer them on, too.
Alleged "poems"
that don't follow a rhyme scheme
are not poetry

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 10268
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby CorruptUser » Thu Aug 17, 2017 9:42 pm UTC

Belial wrote:Which we care about why?


Consider the ex-doctor behind the vaccine autism hoax, who is currently running around spreading further misinformation. Boy, what a shitfuck! He's so terrible that I could argue that if he were to die tomorrow, the world would be better off.

Now hold on there, champ. What would the world actually look like if I could "encourage" him to have an accident? Well, I happen to be Jewish, at least ethnically (I'm an optimistic nihilistic at this point). There are literally millions of people in the world, and at least a hundred thousand I'm the US (including the Nazis at Charlotte) who *also* think that I'm a shitfuck that should die to make the world a better place. If I can off the vaccine hoaxer, what is stopping those from doing the same to me?

If we can beat the crap out of people with reprehensible opinions because we know we are right, why can't Nazis beat the crap out of me because they "know" they are right?

User avatar
Quercus
Posts: 1757
Joined: Thu Sep 19, 2013 12:22 pm UTC
Location: London, UK
Contact:

Re: Trump presidency

Postby Quercus » Thu Aug 17, 2017 9:49 pm UTC

CorruptUser wrote:why can't Nazis beat the crap out of me because they "know" they are right?

They can, and they do.

User avatar
Pfhorrest
Posts: 5005
Joined: Fri Oct 30, 2009 6:11 am UTC
Contact:

Re: Trump presidency

Postby Pfhorrest » Thu Aug 17, 2017 9:50 pm UTC

I've been wanting somewhere to sum up my thoughts on all this recent hubbub and here seems as good a place as anywhere.

Going all the way back to the beginning:

Slavery is bad, duh.

But secession should always be legal, so the Confederacy seceding was okay in principle (though, again, their slavery was not).

However, invading another country to liberate an oppressed people in it (with said people's consent) is also okay, so the Union invading the Confederacy was also okay, or at least it easily could have been had it been construed on the right grounds.

But forcing the annexation of that other country is not okay, for the same reasons that secession is okay, so the liberated/reconstructed Confederacy really should have been left its own country, free to rejoin the Union under appropriate conditions if it likes.

But that's history now, and the slavery was far and away the worst of the wrongs in the mess of wrongs committed back then. There's no equivocation here, no false balance, just honestly acknowledging the tiny shred of merit that pro-Confederate arguments hang the rest of their implied baggage on so we can move past it; yes, you guys have a small point, but it's not nearly enough to paint a picture of equal wrongs on both sides, much less a picture of innocent southern victimhood of unprovoked northern aggression.

Now on to the present.

I can see the value of keeping statues around for their historical interest, even if the things they commemorate are no longer valued. I don't worship the Egyptian pharaohs of the Greek gods but I appreciate the pyramids and the Parthenon for their historical interest. I don't approve of Stalin either but it could be interesting to see a historical statue of him somewhere some day.

That said, for statues commemorating particularly reprehensible things, like Stalin or Lee, maybe a history museum is a better place to keep it than a public square.

And in any case, it is totally up to the people of a locale to decide what to do with it, and from what I understand they did decide to move it to a museum, which sounds like a good decision to me.

But it is totally okay for other people to peacefully protest that decision if they disagree with it.

It is morally repugnant for them to also be displaying racist and fascist imagery and chanting Nazi slogans and so on, and it's completely understandable that a lot of people would be very angry about that, and rightly so. (And it shows that the statue issue was clearly a mere pretense to rally about the reprehensible things already on the Nazis minds, and not out of historical interest or anything legit like that).

However it is both not legally or morally okay to attack people for speech alone, however morally repugnant the speech may be; and also pragmatically counter-productive to do so. Those people want attention, like trolls on the internet, so the best counterattack, though a hard one to do given the righteous anger they arouse, is to deny them what they want, by ignoring them. Let them have their little protest, and let nobody else show up to watch it; it'd be best if even the news crews stayed out of it. Delegitimize them by not even deigning to hear them, much less respond to them.

That doesn't make the protestors and counter-protestors morally equivalent though. Had things not escalated further, the news story should have been that a Nazi protest unsurprisingly met an angry response which was uneventfully broken up by local police, the hook being "Nazi protest" and the rest being the predictable consequences of that and not really newsworthy. "People really angry at Nazis, violence erupts" is like "dog bites man", or maybe "guy punches asshole who grabbed his wife's ass in bar": yeah, it's technically not okay, but it's also not news; really, what did you expect?

And of course the minor assaults committed by the counter-protestors against the Nazi protestors in absolutely no way warrant the escalation to murder and terrorism committed by the guy who drove the car into the crowd.

And I've little doubt that the bulk of the rest of the Nazi protestors, though they thankfully didn't murder anyone themselves, probably cheered inwardly (if not outwardly) when the one guy did. These weren't statue fans and history buffs one of whom went rogue; these were genocide-advocating assholes, most of whom managed to confine their hate to words, for now, but who no doubt would love if they could get away with more.

And all of that nuance is way, way too much detail for a sound bite or a presidential press briefing. The sound bite version boils down to: slavery is bad, Nazis are bad, asshole Nazi in the car is a murderer and a terrorist. And Trump is an absolute moron for (among many other things) not being able to just say that without ad-libbing some equivocating bullshit on the end of it to try to keep the approval of people nobody should care for the approval of.

Yes, there are some technical points in favor of the Confederacy, keeping the statue, and not punching Nazis. But raising those as though they defeat the wall of argument in the other direction is like refuting someone's doctoral thesis by pointing out a few spelling errors.
Last edited by Pfhorrest on Thu Aug 17, 2017 9:56 pm UTC, edited 1 time in total.
Forrest Cameranesi, Geek of All Trades
"I am Sam. Sam I am. I do not like trolls, flames, or spam."
The Codex Quaerendae (my philosophy) - The Chronicles of Quelouva (my fiction)

KnightExemplar
Posts: 5494
Joined: Sun Dec 26, 2010 1:58 pm UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby KnightExemplar » Thu Aug 17, 2017 9:53 pm UTC

Pfhorrest wrote:However it is both not legally or morally okay to attack people for speech alone, however morally repugnant the speech may be; and also pragmatically counter-productive to do so. Those people want attention, like trolls on the internet, so the best counterattack, though a hard one to do given the righteous anger they arouse, is to deny them what they want, by ignoring them. Let them have their little protest, and let nobody else show up to watch it; it'd be best if even the news crews stayed out of it. Delegitimize them by not even deigning to hear them, much less respond to them.


This isn't going to work because President Trump is taking their side.

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/sta ... 4236687361

Robert E Lee, Stonewall Jackson - who's next, Washington, Jefferson? So foolish!


This is the fucking President. We can't just ignore him, as much as most of us want to. Mr. Trump is clearly stating the side of the debate he wants to be on, giving these "trolls" the attention they want.

So game over, as far as "ignoring the troll" and "don't feed the troll" is concerned. Mr. Trump has completely fucked that opportunity over through his tweets and official statements through this past week.
First Strike +1/+1 and Indestructible.

User avatar
Pfhorrest
Posts: 5005
Joined: Fri Oct 30, 2009 6:11 am UTC
Contact:

Re: Trump presidency

Postby Pfhorrest » Thu Aug 17, 2017 10:00 pm UTC

Yeah, now that it's a national news topic with the President commenting on it, it's far too late to ignore it. I wouldn't be here talking about it if it were still in the "just ignore them" phrase. I was speaking on general principle as applied to the counter-protestors who were there on that day when all of this happened. It would have been better of them, and better for them, and for everyone, not to show up, to just ignore the Nazi protest and give it no news coverage. It's too late for that with this incident now, but next time Nazis have a rally, people can ignore those ones then. Not that I expect they will, and I get why, just... it'd be good if they did.
Forrest Cameranesi, Geek of All Trades
"I am Sam. Sam I am. I do not like trolls, flames, or spam."
The Codex Quaerendae (my philosophy) - The Chronicles of Quelouva (my fiction)

iamspen
Posts: 474
Joined: Tue May 01, 2012 2:23 pm UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby iamspen » Thu Aug 17, 2017 10:05 pm UTC

I recall reading in history books a time when most people ignored Nazi rallies until it was too late.

speising
Posts: 2288
Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2012 4:54 pm UTC
Location: wien

Re: Trump presidency

Postby speising » Thu Aug 17, 2017 10:06 pm UTC

What i don't get is why trump is saying the things he does? I mean, normally politicians have an agenda, a reason for their words, and businessmen like trump too, i guess.
So does he really want to advance the nazi agenda? He's not definite enough for that.
He also doesn't seem to want to calm the waves, as would be his job here, really.

Is he really just such a moron that he blabbs anything that goes through his little mind without a thought of the consequences? How did a man with the social development of a five year old become president?
It doesn't even help his own popularity.

User avatar
DaBigCheez
Posts: 835
Joined: Tue Jan 04, 2011 8:03 am UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby DaBigCheez » Thu Aug 17, 2017 10:10 pm UTC

Pfhorrest wrote:Yeah, now that it's a national news topic with the President commenting on it, it's far too late to ignore it. I wouldn't be here talking about it if it were still in the "just ignore them" phrase. I was speaking on general principle as applied to the counter-protestors who were there on that day when all of this happened. It would have been better of them, and better for them, and for everyone, not to show up, to just ignore the Nazi protest and give it no news coverage. It's too late for that with this incident now, but next time Nazis have a rally, people can ignore those ones then. Not that I expect they will, and I get why, just... it'd be good if they did.

It sounds from natraj's account and the article Belial linked a bit back like that protest may have already been past the point of "mere speech", and counterprotestors/antifa ignoring the rally would have been a good way to both embolden the protestors and let people get beaten or killed without a group there to defend them. Since the police weren't being that thing, and all.
Last edited by DaBigCheez on Thu Aug 17, 2017 10:12 pm UTC, edited 1 time in total.
existential_elevator wrote:It's like a jigsaw puzzle of Hitler pissing on Mother Theresa. No individual piece is offensive, but together...

If you think hot women have it easy because everyone wants to have sex at them, you're both wrong and also the reason you're wrong.

User avatar
Quercus
Posts: 1757
Joined: Thu Sep 19, 2013 12:22 pm UTC
Location: London, UK
Contact:

Re: Trump presidency

Postby Quercus » Thu Aug 17, 2017 10:11 pm UTC

Pfhorrest wrote:Yeah, now that it's a national news topic with the President commenting on it, it's far too late to ignore it. I wouldn't be here talking about it if it were still in the "just ignore them" phrase. I was speaking on general principle as applied to the counter-protestors who were there on that day when all of this happened. It would have been better of them, and better for them, and for everyone, not to show up, to just ignore the Nazi protest and give it no news coverage. It's too late for that with this incident now, but next time Nazis have a rally, people can ignore those ones then. Not that I expect they will, and I get why, just... it'd be good if they did.

I get the desirability of that as an approach, but I'd be really concerned about what happens to the synagogues that the police refuse to provide protection for (as happened in Charlottesville), and the black neighbourhoods that the Nazis try to storm, before being turned back by Antifas (as happened in Charlottesville). I'm afraid that buildings are going to get burned.

I also feel that the next rally (which is not a theoretical thing - there's one planned for this weekend in Berkeley, and one next weekend in Boston), if it is ignored, will still be in the news and the Nazis will be able to spin that as "we are unopposed, our enemies are on the run and everyone else secretly agrees with us"

Edit: Ninja'd by DaBigCheez

speising wrote:Is he really just such a moron that he blabbs anything that goes through his little mind without a thought of the consequences? How did a man with the social development of a five year old become president?
It doesn't even help his own popularity.

Trump isn't a moron, he's a narcissist. He's not capable of handling criticism rationally. It threatens him on a deeply personal level. Examined through that lens Trump's actions make a lot more sense. He also has a horribly short attention span, and doesn't appear willing to work around that effectively (probably because he's a narcissist who won't admit to himself that he has weaknesses), which means that he is terribly uninformed about all complex issues. It's not a good combination.
Last edited by Quercus on Thu Aug 17, 2017 10:18 pm UTC, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 10268
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby CorruptUser » Thu Aug 17, 2017 10:13 pm UTC

speising wrote:
Is he really just such a moron that he blabbs anything that goes through his little mind without a thought of the consequences?


2 years ago I would've said yes. But no one accidentally becomes president...

User avatar
Belial
A terrible sound heard from a distance
Posts: 30450
Joined: Sat Apr 15, 2006 4:04 am UTC
Contact:

Re: Trump presidency

Postby Belial » Thu Aug 17, 2017 10:14 pm UTC

Quercus wrote:
CorruptUser wrote:why can't Nazis beat the crap out of me because they "know" they are right?

They can, and they do.


Yeah, I guess I'm confused about why you're under the impression that they're waiting for us to give them permission. It's their entire ideology! They are always already into that! It's kindof the reason they trigger the paradox of tolerance!
addams wrote:A drunk neighbor is better than a sober Belial.


They/them

User avatar
Pfhorrest
Posts: 5005
Joined: Fri Oct 30, 2009 6:11 am UTC
Contact:

Re: Trump presidency

Postby Pfhorrest » Thu Aug 17, 2017 10:15 pm UTC

If a rally or protest goes beyond the point of mere speech, and there's not appropriate police response to defend the victims, then in that case absolutely defensive violence is warranted. I'm not saying anyone should lie down and take a beating, just not throw the first punch.

EDIT: And as to how Trump seems so stupid and undirected and yet managed to win the presidency anyway, I think the answer is that he is "shrewdly" (transparently to my eyes but apparently it's effective on many others) being noncommittal and unprincipled so as to let the people who want to like him like him for whatever their reasons without actually having to agree with their reasons himself. I don't know if he actually supports the Nazi ideology, but he seems very happy to have the Nazi ideologues support him, and so he tries not to alienate them. He also wanted the left to support him so he promised the Moon with regards to healthcare with no intention of actually delivering on it. He will say or not say whatever is required with no regard to consistency so long as it brings him approval. He is 100% bullshit all the time, in other words. Which means he often bullshits in his own mouth and blurts out something transparently stupid to anyone with two brain cells to rub together, because he didn't really think before speaking he's just constantly spinning bullshit from the top of his head, but on the whole that's effective enough to win him the presidency.
Last edited by Pfhorrest on Thu Aug 17, 2017 10:20 pm UTC, edited 1 time in total.
Forrest Cameranesi, Geek of All Trades
"I am Sam. Sam I am. I do not like trolls, flames, or spam."
The Codex Quaerendae (my philosophy) - The Chronicles of Quelouva (my fiction)


Return to “News & Articles”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Pfhorrest, The Great Hippo and 20 guests