FA+
Shop
4969
Views
Views
232
Favorites
Favorites
Category
All / All
Species Dinosaur
Size 1742 x 1650
File Size 424.4 kB
Report this content
★
More from NX-42
My Trailer, MY Rules
Jus' in case anyone was worried 'bout the last submission, imma make myself clear~
Posted using PostyBirb
Posted using PostyBirb
Category All / All
Species Dinosaur
Size 1742 x 1650px
File Size 424.4 kB
Dude, I don't know what the heck you're talking about.
The submission files litterally say "Male, Female, Herm, Intersex, Transmale, Transfemale, Nonbinary, Multiple characters and unspecified." There is every type of prono art posted on FA (the only ones discouraged involve minors for obvious reasons)
There are groups that hate on every religion (especially Christians), and just last year I got into discussions with people who were very much proAbortion (not just "ProChoice", ProAbortion specifically.) Along with a discussion about whether or not Zootopia went deep enough into it's anti-racism message.
My point is that either you haven't been on FA for very long OR you're full of crap.
And considering the very Racist statement you made, my money's on the latter.
The submission files litterally say "Male, Female, Herm, Intersex, Transmale, Transfemale, Nonbinary, Multiple characters and unspecified." There is every type of prono art posted on FA (the only ones discouraged involve minors for obvious reasons)
There are groups that hate on every religion (especially Christians), and just last year I got into discussions with people who were very much proAbortion (not just "ProChoice", ProAbortion specifically.) Along with a discussion about whether or not Zootopia went deep enough into it's anti-racism message.
My point is that either you haven't been on FA for very long OR you're full of crap.
And considering the very Racist statement you made, my money's on the latter.
So.... who are the Nazi Types? Because the definition varies wildly depending on who you ask or what definition one is using based off of a publication that may or may not be controlled by one political faction or another.
Sigh.... I miss the times when literally breathing wasn't a political statement.
Sigh.... I miss the times when literally breathing wasn't a political statement.
I've seen plenty of people being called "Centrists" or... oddly enough from Leftest circles, "Liberal" for not taking a huge hardline approach. Not sure on the Nazi part. But when I and those I'm friends with say Nazi, we're hardly mincing words. When I see people like Rebecca here mention Nazis, it's a pretty specific mindset. I dunno, maybe next time anyone calls you or someone else a Nazi or similar (and let's assume you or the other one indeed is not one), remind them they might be muddying the waters. The far right is something we need to keep an eye on, not conservatives who are reasonable.
I think we need to keep an eye on the far left as much as the far right. It tends to be those who are on the extreme end of the left that will call people Nazi with little to no evidence to back it up, and from my perspective, they are increasingly demanding censorship of anyone they don't like, without realising that the moment someone they dislike gains any power, the censorship they clamor for will be turned on them.
I've heard that argument before, and honestly, it just makes me facepalm, because I can't think of anyone who says that free speech means there should be freedom from consequences. However, I don't agree that people should be fired for their opinions if they keep their work and their views separate. Call them out or challenge them on their opinions, but don't go after their livelihood over an opinion.
No we don’t. The “right” has hissy fits when we suggest not to say racist epithets and terms that hurt people. The “far left” only demands respect for others. You sound more concerned with people wrongfully calling you a Nazi than fighting against the people who are of that persuasion. If you aren’t a Nazi, you aren’t a nazi, friend. There are far more hate groups from the “Far Right” than the “Far Left”, info supported by Southern Poverty Law Centre.
Is that really a surprise? Most people in this fandom are a part of the LGBTQ community. Trump appointed a guy as his vice president who supported gay conversion torture, he's removed protections for sexuality from government jobs, and he's banned transpeople from serving in the military, he's granted exemptions to adoption agencies that allow them to discriminate against queer parents, encouraged the OFCCP to allow religious exemptions that would discriminate against queer folk, and a whole slew of other anti-LGBTQ stances.
When you support taking human rights away from a group of people, you should probably expect parallels to be drawn with other anti-LGBTQ groups.
When you support taking human rights away from a group of people, you should probably expect parallels to be drawn with other anti-LGBTQ groups.
Oh I get that. The way I hear it, 'Redneck' used to be about taking pride in going outside and doing physical work, getting a red neck from sunburn. While my muscles and skills aren't really set up it, I totally respect and get that sentiment.
Nowadays it's just often associated with poor white people who are not just less educated but willfully ignorant, and blame other poor people for the shitty job market in their areas.
Nowadays it's just often associated with poor white people who are not just less educated but willfully ignorant, and blame other poor people for the shitty job market in their areas.
Oddly enough I think I do recall that on Twitter, and that confused me because unless you've drastically changed over the years, that description doesn't match well. What kinds of conversations lead to you being labelled that, if I may ask? If I was called that I'd probably be more confused than anything, but I'd probably have to think on it. Probably the worst thing I've been accused of is being a centrist honestly.
What is true is the Nazi label might have been thrown around a bit much a while ago, but almost everyone I've seen specifically says statements like what Rebecca made here, they mean the real deal. There has been a surge of people openly expressing opinions that get very, close to actual Nazi rhetoric and it's both disheartening and disturbing.
What is true is the Nazi label might have been thrown around a bit much a while ago, but almost everyone I've seen specifically says statements like what Rebecca made here, they mean the real deal. There has been a surge of people openly expressing opinions that get very, close to actual Nazi rhetoric and it's both disheartening and disturbing.
True, context matters, but as of late people who call others Nazis nowadays don't give a damn about Context. Hell, most of the ones I've seen act far more like the Nazis than the people that they accuse. Go ahead, look up the Brown Coats or the "Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei". You might find that certain groups mirror these facists far more closely that you'd be comfortable with.
I've seen Blacks, Asians and Arabs all called, "white supremacists" and even seen a Jew called a "Nazi". I've also seen people who are attacked from the meer accusation of being these things.
Frankly, you don't have to actually be these things in order for someone to call you it. And most people don't bother doing any research into WHY someone would call another person these things either. Of which can, does and has lead to innocent people getting attacked. I've seen far more hate from "Anti-Hate" groups than I've ever seen from those that they attack. Most of the time, it's just innocent people getting hurt for no reason other than the group needing a reason to justify their own existence.
In fact, it's the reason that I object to calling myself a "Brony" despite loving MLP. "Love and Tolerance" is great in theory, however people have abused such an idea to say "I'm allowed to say and do whatever I want and you can't tell me I am wrong." For obvious reasons that's pretty crazy. However, It's also my personal belief that you cannot "love" something that you "hate". Doing so warps your own mind to the point that you will start to hate what you love. I know this sounds anecdotal, but I know from personal experience. People need to feel how they feel. Supressing your emotions whether possitive or negative, will only lead to selfdistruction. As such, I refuse to "love and tollerate" and just show people how I really feel, even if it gets me into trouble. Why? Because the alternative is far more harmful. Now of course, I try not to judge others. But just because I don't judge you for your interests, does not nessisarily mean that I aprove of it either. In the words of my late grandpappy, "So long as you do what you love, love what you do, and aren't hurting anyone, then you're living a good life."
I've seen Blacks, Asians and Arabs all called, "white supremacists" and even seen a Jew called a "Nazi". I've also seen people who are attacked from the meer accusation of being these things.
Frankly, you don't have to actually be these things in order for someone to call you it. And most people don't bother doing any research into WHY someone would call another person these things either. Of which can, does and has lead to innocent people getting attacked. I've seen far more hate from "Anti-Hate" groups than I've ever seen from those that they attack. Most of the time, it's just innocent people getting hurt for no reason other than the group needing a reason to justify their own existence.
In fact, it's the reason that I object to calling myself a "Brony" despite loving MLP. "Love and Tolerance" is great in theory, however people have abused such an idea to say "I'm allowed to say and do whatever I want and you can't tell me I am wrong." For obvious reasons that's pretty crazy. However, It's also my personal belief that you cannot "love" something that you "hate". Doing so warps your own mind to the point that you will start to hate what you love. I know this sounds anecdotal, but I know from personal experience. People need to feel how they feel. Supressing your emotions whether possitive or negative, will only lead to selfdistruction. As such, I refuse to "love and tollerate" and just show people how I really feel, even if it gets me into trouble. Why? Because the alternative is far more harmful. Now of course, I try not to judge others. But just because I don't judge you for your interests, does not nessisarily mean that I aprove of it either. In the words of my late grandpappy, "So long as you do what you love, love what you do, and aren't hurting anyone, then you're living a good life."
> even seen a Jew called a "Nazi"
A jew cannot be a nazi in the classic sense, but they CAN share most of the nazi ideology (e.g. considering brown people inferior to white people, wanting them out of the country) and I think that's enough for someone to be considered nazi. At the very least because they help nazis' cause, even if actual nazis will backstab them in the future.
> Frankly, you don't have to actually be these things in order for someone to call you it.
Can you point me at examples where a leftist called someone a nazi that didn't show any support for nazi ideology or nazi dogwhistles?
Leftists don't call people "nazi" just for disagreeing, unless it's disagreement with scientific consensus with e.g. race and IQ.
A jew cannot be a nazi in the classic sense, but they CAN share most of the nazi ideology (e.g. considering brown people inferior to white people, wanting them out of the country) and I think that's enough for someone to be considered nazi. At the very least because they help nazis' cause, even if actual nazis will backstab them in the future.
> Frankly, you don't have to actually be these things in order for someone to call you it.
Can you point me at examples where a leftist called someone a nazi that didn't show any support for nazi ideology or nazi dogwhistles?
Leftists don't call people "nazi" just for disagreeing, unless it's disagreement with scientific consensus with e.g. race and IQ.
> A jew cannot be a nazi in the classic sense.
Technically true. Afterall, there was a very famous Jew who sold out his own people to the Nazis over the years. However, he, himself, is not a Nazi nor a White Supremisist. Evil yes. Evil in those particular ways, no.
>nazi ideology (e.g. considering brown people inferior to white people, wanting them out of the country) and I think that's enough for someone to be considered nazi.
Well, in this case you have a radically different definition of what a "Nazi" is. What you're describing is a "white supremacist". It's one of those "not all fingers are thumbs" type deals. Nazis didn't just believe that "white people" are the superior race. They believed that a very Specific Type of white people were superior. Namely the "Blue eyed blond Aryans". Yes, it was all based on Pseudo-Science, but that's not the point. Point is that Nazis had a very distinct belief, but executed tactics that are known as "Fascist". These tactics included, but were not limited to Silencing speech, preventing new parties from forming, killing political opponents, rioting, blaming all of the world's problems on one race of people. As such, AntiFa (despite the name) are Fascists because they are using these very same tactic, but I'd also wouldn't go so far as to say that they are "Nazis".
>Can you point me at examples where a leftist called someone a nazi that didn't show any support for nazi ideology or nazi dogwhistles?
Do you want the list in alphabetical order with their first names or last name? Milo Yianopoli, Candance Owens )(Just last week in fact), Ben Shapiro, Tim Pool (of whom also covered quite a number of them himself) Glen Beck, Jordan Peterson, Dinesh D'Souza and finally Nicolous Sandman (along with his entire class), and, of course, Trump himself on multiple occasions. Although to be fair he's more compared to Hitler than an acutal nazi, but trust me, we do not want to go down that particular rabbit hole. I could go on and on, because it's a really big list, but I don't feel like finding video evidence of these things happening, just for you to ignore them in the end.
So allow me to give a few random Nameless Examples "black man" "man with cancer" "YAF".
Although you also may have to define what a "Dogwhistle" is, because frankly if you don't then it could mean litterally Anything from the "Ok" handsign to drinking milk. (Btw, both were hoaxes.) Hell, just for saying what I just said, I could be accused of "dog whistling" by you. Now I hope for the sake of civil discussion that wont happen, but I'm not exactly getting my hopes up either.
Technically true. Afterall, there was a very famous Jew who sold out his own people to the Nazis over the years. However, he, himself, is not a Nazi nor a White Supremisist. Evil yes. Evil in those particular ways, no.
>nazi ideology (e.g. considering brown people inferior to white people, wanting them out of the country) and I think that's enough for someone to be considered nazi.
Well, in this case you have a radically different definition of what a "Nazi" is. What you're describing is a "white supremacist". It's one of those "not all fingers are thumbs" type deals. Nazis didn't just believe that "white people" are the superior race. They believed that a very Specific Type of white people were superior. Namely the "Blue eyed blond Aryans". Yes, it was all based on Pseudo-Science, but that's not the point. Point is that Nazis had a very distinct belief, but executed tactics that are known as "Fascist". These tactics included, but were not limited to Silencing speech, preventing new parties from forming, killing political opponents, rioting, blaming all of the world's problems on one race of people. As such, AntiFa (despite the name) are Fascists because they are using these very same tactic, but I'd also wouldn't go so far as to say that they are "Nazis".
>Can you point me at examples where a leftist called someone a nazi that didn't show any support for nazi ideology or nazi dogwhistles?
Do you want the list in alphabetical order with their first names or last name? Milo Yianopoli, Candance Owens )(Just last week in fact), Ben Shapiro, Tim Pool (of whom also covered quite a number of them himself) Glen Beck, Jordan Peterson, Dinesh D'Souza and finally Nicolous Sandman (along with his entire class), and, of course, Trump himself on multiple occasions. Although to be fair he's more compared to Hitler than an acutal nazi, but trust me, we do not want to go down that particular rabbit hole. I could go on and on, because it's a really big list, but I don't feel like finding video evidence of these things happening, just for you to ignore them in the end.
So allow me to give a few random Nameless Examples "black man" "man with cancer" "YAF".
Although you also may have to define what a "Dogwhistle" is, because frankly if you don't then it could mean litterally Anything from the "Ok" handsign to drinking milk. (Btw, both were hoaxes.) Hell, just for saying what I just said, I could be accused of "dog whistling" by you. Now I hope for the sake of civil discussion that wont happen, but I'm not exactly getting my hopes up either.
> At the very least because they help nazis' cause, even if actual nazis will backstab them in the future.
Yep, that's AntiFa and the Far Left to a T.
Why shouldn't you "punch a Nazi"? Because by doing so you prove them right, thus justifying their own hateful rhetoric. Just like how an officer (reguardless of his own race) shooting an unarmed black man proves BLM's own hateful rhetoric.
Why should we allow "Hate Speech" as "Free Speech"? Because the people in charge are constantly changing. What constitutes as "Hate Speech" today, may not be considered as hate speech in a few years.
Or to put it simply: Who gets to decide what constitutes as "Hate Speech"?
"First they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a socialist.
Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a trade unionist.
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me."
Now for a quote that I've heard quite a number of people I agree with have said multiple times. "I don't have to agree with what you have to say, but will defend to the death your Right to say it."
Not to mention what constitutes as a Human Right. To expect to be allowed to do something, but not allow others to do the same OR to force others to do something that you are exempt from yourself… is the very definition of Tyrany.
Like my Grandpappy said, "So long as you do what you love, love what you do and aren't hurting anyone, then you're living a good life."
Yep, that's AntiFa and the Far Left to a T.
Why shouldn't you "punch a Nazi"? Because by doing so you prove them right, thus justifying their own hateful rhetoric. Just like how an officer (reguardless of his own race) shooting an unarmed black man proves BLM's own hateful rhetoric.
Why should we allow "Hate Speech" as "Free Speech"? Because the people in charge are constantly changing. What constitutes as "Hate Speech" today, may not be considered as hate speech in a few years.
Or to put it simply: Who gets to decide what constitutes as "Hate Speech"?
"First they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a socialist.
Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a trade unionist.
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me."
Now for a quote that I've heard quite a number of people I agree with have said multiple times. "I don't have to agree with what you have to say, but will defend to the death your Right to say it."
Not to mention what constitutes as a Human Right. To expect to be allowed to do something, but not allow others to do the same OR to force others to do something that you are exempt from yourself… is the very definition of Tyrany.
Like my Grandpappy said, "So long as you do what you love, love what you do and aren't hurting anyone, then you're living a good life."
Oh yeah and one more for good measure…
QuetzaDrakeOf whom says so himself, In this Very Thread that we are commenting on. Hell, you RESPONDED to it yourself.
I think this is what's known as "Cognitive Dissonance".
Although it has been a few days since you made that comment, so I'll give you the benifeit of doubt with the understanding that you just simply forgot.
So yeah, not trying to be a jerk here, but remember what you said to him while looking over my own list of people who were accused of being Nazis. Something about "Context Matters"?
QuetzaDrakeOf whom says so himself, In this Very Thread that we are commenting on. Hell, you RESPONDED to it yourself.I think this is what's known as "Cognitive Dissonance".
Although it has been a few days since you made that comment, so I'll give you the benifeit of doubt with the understanding that you just simply forgot.
So yeah, not trying to be a jerk here, but remember what you said to him while looking over my own list of people who were accused of being Nazis. Something about "Context Matters"?
No, needing to set trans people up as an 'other' group rather than simply counting them has just people. The same can be said for any protected class of people honestly. Just treat everyone decently and with respect. I do not give a rat's greasy ass if your white, black, gay, straight, trans, cis, what ever. I'm sick of seeing people used as a battering ram to take other people down and others being oppressed. Live your damn lives and stop looking for nazis under every rock. Sides let nazis speak, let em yell their ideas from the roof tops, it makes them easier to spot and mock with a choir of laughs, jeers, and honks.
normally if it just went to that extent I wouldn't have an issue. But it more and more it seems the loudest members of the trans community wish to be 'more equal' to get special treatment. Not to mention pushing to pull in kids into this mess, it can get a lil ridiculous fast if not handled carefully. I do support transpeople getting treated like everyone else, as long as they act respectably like everyone else.
intolerance is part of human nature, and no matter how much society shifts away from it there will always be pockets of it in any given culture. ive also found that tolerance itself is a relative term, what people define as "tolerant" can be two completely different things depending on who you're asking
since most of the industrialized world has a right to free speech, tolerance in my mind would be letting both extremes spew their dogma...so long as its accepted that each side has a right to do so, and that each side should expect to spew their dogma without the risk of becoming the victim of a crime. hate speech is free speech, and that applies to both right and left wing ideologies
since most of the industrialized world has a right to free speech, tolerance in my mind would be letting both extremes spew their dogma...so long as its accepted that each side has a right to do so, and that each side should expect to spew their dogma without the risk of becoming the victim of a crime. hate speech is free speech, and that applies to both right and left wing ideologies
censorship is BAD. in ANY way. let the idiots spew their shit. only the terminally stupid will believe them.
when you start censoring their speech you justify them and cause them to begin escalating since they are no longer allowed to share their opinion.
the end of this path is nothing but suffering and and hate.
if someone chooses to believe hateful rhetoric, that is THEIR CHOICE. You can call them stupid, ignorant or simply ignore them but that is their RIGHT to choose what they want to believe and to talk about it.
The only speech that is illegal is speech that _Specifically_ calls for violence or harm.
Saying that, as an example "Gay people are evil" or "Tran sexuality isn't real" or something is. not. illegal.
Calling for violence against gays, or trans or whites or black? asking for people to assault, hurt, or kill them? that is very illegal.
Also, talking about both sides. both are _equally_ hateful and intolerant just in different ways. that's why they are considered extreme for starters. I don't get screamed at by nazi's for being gay but i have been screamed at by lefties for being white or for not being in support of third trimester abortions, etc.
both sides ignore evidence that doesn't support them as well.
when you start censoring their speech you justify them and cause them to begin escalating since they are no longer allowed to share their opinion.
the end of this path is nothing but suffering and and hate.
if someone chooses to believe hateful rhetoric, that is THEIR CHOICE. You can call them stupid, ignorant or simply ignore them but that is their RIGHT to choose what they want to believe and to talk about it.
The only speech that is illegal is speech that _Specifically_ calls for violence or harm.
Saying that, as an example "Gay people are evil" or "Tran sexuality isn't real" or something is. not. illegal.
Calling for violence against gays, or trans or whites or black? asking for people to assault, hurt, or kill them? that is very illegal.
Also, talking about both sides. both are _equally_ hateful and intolerant just in different ways. that's why they are considered extreme for starters. I don't get screamed at by nazi's for being gay but i have been screamed at by lefties for being white or for not being in support of third trimester abortions, etc.
both sides ignore evidence that doesn't support them as well.
Your drivel isn't an argument against anything I said, but what the hell. I'm bored.
Any censorship is bad? So you believe a company should be able to lie to consumers about what in its products or what its product even does? You think a doctor should be able to lie to you about having a disease and prescribe to you a drug or procedure that you don't need just to line their pockets? You believe the owner of a media organization should be able to lie about someone with the intent to destroy their life or business because it's profitable for them to do so?
Yours is a stupid, intellectually lazy argument.
Any censorship is bad? So you believe a company should be able to lie to consumers about what in its products or what its product even does? You think a doctor should be able to lie to you about having a disease and prescribe to you a drug or procedure that you don't need just to line their pockets? You believe the owner of a media organization should be able to lie about someone with the intent to destroy their life or business because it's profitable for them to do so?
Yours is a stupid, intellectually lazy argument.
all of your examples are strangely enough... intellectually lazy. the first is called false advertisement, the second is medical malpractice, and the third is what is termed 'Fake News' as of recently. most of which are beyond basic speech. conflating such things with free speech is pretty laughable.
People can argue whatever they want at the supreme court, That is all fine and well. making an argument in a court doesn't lend a point about a different matter more weight. Especially not since you didn't actually mention whether your examples were held up or thrown out or whatever else. Also, it doesn't change the fact that you are trying to make a point by conflating dissimilar things.
*sighs* can we keep politics out of the fandom? Like entirely? FFS people Furries have been the most enclusive group of people on the face of the earth. We dont care about your skin color, your eye color, your heretage, your religion, your kinks, if your fat or anerexic, if your gay or strait, if your bi, if your trans.
STOP giving the political discidence attention and live your fucking lives. There are block and mute buttons and shit like that for a reason.... USE THEM!!!!!
STOP giving the political discidence attention and live your fucking lives. There are block and mute buttons and shit like that for a reason.... USE THEM!!!!!
I never called you a Nazi either, you did that... Sorry but people like Rebecca are sick of their existence being politicized. Saying “No Nazis” isn’t politics, it’s a desire to keep “politics” out of this. “Nazi” ideology is unwelcome in the furry fandom. No one accused you of being one.
You specifically said, that because I am upset, I am a Nazi. IF I am not a Nazi, It shouldnt be a problem. That is calling some one a Nazi...
As I said, IGNORE THEM, Their bullies, they feed off the attention. They see this post and LAUGH at Rebecca. Stop giving them attention and they will go away because they arent getting a reaction. Your not changing any ones mind making posts and statements like this, only giving what you want to go away, attention.
As I said, IGNORE THEM, Their bullies, they feed off the attention. They see this post and LAUGH at Rebecca. Stop giving them attention and they will go away because they arent getting a reaction. Your not changing any ones mind making posts and statements like this, only giving what you want to go away, attention.
I partially agree. Again, I never called you that word, nor do you identify yourself as one nor do you seem to in any way be that kind of person. Why react at all? Or assume? I guess I felt if I asked one person I could get some perspective. I’d just like to ask why you reacted the way you did seeing this message.
Im sorry I misunderstood how you approched and over reacted a bit. Thats on me Ill admit that.
I reacted because I hate to see politics involved in things I enjoy such as this. I cant force any one to do anything, but I try and push people away from getting political. Iv seen too many youtubers, too many twitch streamers, too many artists, too many game designers, too many movie studios die, crumble, suffer, and loose because of politics. Doesnt matter if its Right wing or Left wind politics. Getting political any more is suicidal. Making a statement, choosing a side, destroys fandoms. We are here for furries, we are here for the roleplay, we are here for the artwork, we are here for the community of like minded individuals, we are here for porn, we are here for sex. If you want to talk politics feel free but take it a side and in private please.
Its just like politics here in America, every one is "If your not black lives matter your racist" "if your not pro arib, your racist" These people have forgotten their AMERICAN's first. AMERICA does not care what your skin color is, what you identify as, whats between your legs, who you share your bed with. we need to stop dividing ourselfs based upon these bullshit political lines. Politicans are not celeberties, their public servents. Something alot of people seem to have forgotten.
I reacted because I hate to see politics involved in things I enjoy such as this. I cant force any one to do anything, but I try and push people away from getting political. Iv seen too many youtubers, too many twitch streamers, too many artists, too many game designers, too many movie studios die, crumble, suffer, and loose because of politics. Doesnt matter if its Right wing or Left wind politics. Getting political any more is suicidal. Making a statement, choosing a side, destroys fandoms. We are here for furries, we are here for the roleplay, we are here for the artwork, we are here for the community of like minded individuals, we are here for porn, we are here for sex. If you want to talk politics feel free but take it a side and in private please.
Its just like politics here in America, every one is "If your not black lives matter your racist" "if your not pro arib, your racist" These people have forgotten their AMERICAN's first. AMERICA does not care what your skin color is, what you identify as, whats between your legs, who you share your bed with. we need to stop dividing ourselfs based upon these bullshit political lines. Politicans are not celeberties, their public servents. Something alot of people seem to have forgotten.
"Its just like politics here in America, every one is "If your not black lives matter your racist" "if your not pro arib, your racist" These people have forgotten their AMERICAN's first. AMERICA does not care what your skin color is, what you identify as, whats between your legs, who you share your bed with. we need to stop dividing ourselfs based upon these bullshit political lines."
...Interesting that the two examples you used are examples considered 'leftist', despite the fact that the far right ABSOLUTELY does care what your skin color is, does care what you identify as, does care what's between your legs, and does care who you share your bed with.
...Interesting that the two examples you used are examples considered 'leftist', despite the fact that the far right ABSOLUTELY does care what your skin color is, does care what you identify as, does care what's between your legs, and does care who you share your bed with.
Considering that Leftists dominate the media and most of the civilized modern world.... its hard to avoid speaking of them when their shutting down city blocks, public events, gatherings, starting riots. Whens the last time a white man was shot by the police and sparked a "White lives matter" riot? While the Radical, Fascist Right does exist, the Radical, Fascist Left is significantly more vocal and more frequently in the spotlight, at least from what Iv seen. Might be because I live in Washington (state not DC) and thats just how things are slanted here. Ill admit,
Either way it doesnt matter. Extremes reguardless which Extreme it is, is bad.
Either way it doesnt matter. Extremes reguardless which Extreme it is, is bad.
I do not like to presume, and honestly I still refuse to label you, but I still find what you said here being...poppycock. From my perspective, people in America and my country Canada are having their identities reduced to “politics”. I hate it. And it sounds like you may agree, although in different wording.
In my conclusion, Trans Rights are Human Rights. Fuck Nazis. This likely doesn’t conflict with anyone who at the end of the day believes people should live their own lives. I’ve lived 30 years on this planet and managed to avoid stepping on anyone’s toes. I hope you can say similar regardless where you are now.
In my conclusion, Trans Rights are Human Rights. Fuck Nazis. This likely doesn’t conflict with anyone who at the end of the day believes people should live their own lives. I’ve lived 30 years on this planet and managed to avoid stepping on anyone’s toes. I hope you can say similar regardless where you are now.
Let me put it as simply as I can.
I dont care if your Trans, I dont care if your Gay, I dont care if your otherkin, I dont care if you worship Allah. So long as you do not force it or your opinion in my face, we're cool. But I am not going to give you special treatment because of these things either. I will respect you, who you are, what you are, what you believe, so long as you behave in kin and respect me for who I am and what I believe. I may not agree with it, I may even say so, but its your right to be and believe what you wish.
I dont care if your Trans, I dont care if your Gay, I dont care if your otherkin, I dont care if you worship Allah. So long as you do not force it or your opinion in my face, we're cool. But I am not going to give you special treatment because of these things either. I will respect you, who you are, what you are, what you believe, so long as you behave in kin and respect me for who I am and what I believe. I may not agree with it, I may even say so, but its your right to be and believe what you wish.
It's because you spergs are literally screaming into the void and then acting like it makes you virtuous. There are no Nazis here. In fact, there are no Nazi's anywhere. They stopped taking applications in the 40s. The white supremacists who exist today are a hyper minority and a joke. And they certainly aren't on Furaffinity or going to furry conventions. They're completely banned from the space. So why are you talking about them like they're a thing???
I’m sorry but do I have to say NeoNazis/White Supremacists/White Nationalists whenever I speak of Nazis? Hatewatch groups document their movements and activities. Maybe these groups appear as jokes to you but in a tolerant society we need to make sure they don’t get out of control. Also what the hell is a Sperg? If these people don’t exist here, you can happily move along with your business. Good day.
The reason why people talk about politics is so that they are allowed to live their lives. Not all of us have the luxury of living in a place that protects our rights and not all of us have the money to just ignore the law.
And unfortunately there are furries who do, themselves, identify with far-right ideologies that - unlike the 'ebil antifa' - have actually committed terrorist attacks and seen people killed.
https://www.splcenter.org/20180723/terror-right
https://www.splcenter.org/hate-map
https://first-vigil.com/
Information on both sites can be verified elsewhere.
https://twitter.com/AltfurryL
And unfortunately there are furries who do, themselves, identify with far-right ideologies that - unlike the 'ebil antifa' - have actually committed terrorist attacks and seen people killed.
https://www.splcenter.org/20180723/terror-right
https://www.splcenter.org/hate-map
https://first-vigil.com/
Information on both sites can be verified elsewhere.
https://twitter.com/AltfurryL
/sigh, so, so tired of hearing about “muh Nazis”. The number of actual white supremacists number in the thousands, at most. They are not a threat and they have zero cultural or institutional power, despite the fetishization from the media and the Left. I’d be more concerned by the radical communists of antifa who ironically behave like the fascists they see under every bed. Calls for violence are increasingly coming from the Left (see CBS’s latest misstep where overtly called for the assassination of Trump and political violence against anyone they label as racist, which is one hell of a slippery slope). I miss the days when we just talked to each other and the best ideas won out from discourse instead of this new obsession with violence. But, hey, I’m sane.
BuT tHe lEfT iS jUsT aS bAD gUYs.
Yeah yawn heard it before. Its a fantasy to think that white power rehtoric and intolerant idologies arent exactly whats fuling the language used by the current American presidental administration. The influence is alove and well and anyone in agreement with it or defending it with “but the left tho” is an accomplice to hate.
“The best ideas” so what are those genius? Nazi inclusion? Hmmmmmm
MmmmmmmmmmmMmmmMmmm.
Yeah yawn heard it before. Its a fantasy to think that white power rehtoric and intolerant idologies arent exactly whats fuling the language used by the current American presidental administration. The influence is alove and well and anyone in agreement with it or defending it with “but the left tho” is an accomplice to hate.
“The best ideas” so what are those genius? Nazi inclusion? Hmmmmmm
MmmmmmmmmmmMmmmMmmm.
Youre tactic is to say as much wrong and ignorant shit as possible that the energy i would need to unpack it all is not in me. You are wrong on all accounts though but
I would like to highlight some stuff that made me laugh cause it was some good shitposting. Highlights of your stupidity below
*One guy hits someone with a bike lock = mass ongoing violence apprently
*Charlottsville (refering to your other shitposts) was just a buncha rightwings gettin a little riled up. NBD guyz quit hatin.
*Still admitted a second time that Nazis think like he does Oof.
Keep talking dude youre winning i promise.
I would like to highlight some stuff that made me laugh cause it was some good shitposting. Highlights of your stupidity below
*One guy hits someone with a bike lock = mass ongoing violence apprently
*Charlottsville (refering to your other shitposts) was just a buncha rightwings gettin a little riled up. NBD guyz quit hatin.
*Still admitted a second time that Nazis think like he does Oof.
Keep talking dude youre winning i promise.
Child, did you not watch any of the Berkeley riots? I mean, Antifa got the shit kicked out of them, but they did start it. Along with several fires and half a million in property damage.
Charlottesville is literally ONE occurrence and it was a mixture of white supremacists (the minority), militias (anti-government), legitimate conservatives, and other people on the right. And the only reason violence happened is because the Chief of Police intentionally pushed the protesters out of the park (where they had a constitutional right to rally) INTO the antifa protesters because he wanted violence to break out as an excuse to end the rally. He admitted to this and stated it was at the insistence of the Left wing mayor. Had the two differing sides be kept apart and peoples right to express themselves been protected, as is only proper, there would have been no violence. Instead, two sides who hate each other were allowed to attack each other with reckless abandon, resulting in someone getting killed and multiple people being injured. Bravo.
The fact you just made something up and then used the word "oof" says literally everything it can about you.
Charlottesville is literally ONE occurrence and it was a mixture of white supremacists (the minority), militias (anti-government), legitimate conservatives, and other people on the right. And the only reason violence happened is because the Chief of Police intentionally pushed the protesters out of the park (where they had a constitutional right to rally) INTO the antifa protesters because he wanted violence to break out as an excuse to end the rally. He admitted to this and stated it was at the insistence of the Left wing mayor. Had the two differing sides be kept apart and peoples right to express themselves been protected, as is only proper, there would have been no violence. Instead, two sides who hate each other were allowed to attack each other with reckless abandon, resulting in someone getting killed and multiple people being injured. Bravo.
The fact you just made something up and then used the word "oof" says literally everything it can about you.
TRIGGERED.
Yeah you got em. Femanisim caused Charlottesville. Oh god its all right there how could we not see. And the Democrats are putting stuff in the water to TURN THE FRIGGEN FROGS GAY RAAAAHHH.
* Nazis have consitituional right to drive muscle cars over highschoolers heads. America got a weird constitution.
* Nazis are more sane than anything opposing them. OBVIOUSLY GAWD.
* Still wont deny that he shares the same thoughts as Nazis.
Yeah you got em. Femanisim caused Charlottesville. Oh god its all right there how could we not see. And the Democrats are putting stuff in the water to TURN THE FRIGGEN FROGS GAY RAAAAHHH.
* Nazis have consitituional right to drive muscle cars over highschoolers heads. America got a weird constitution.
* Nazis are more sane than anything opposing them. OBVIOUSLY GAWD.
* Still wont deny that he shares the same thoughts as Nazis.
I don't have to deny anything, first of all. I don't need to disavow anything in particular since I'm not interested in seeking your approval. That being said I think I've been pretty clear about my opinion about Nazis and white supremacists (actually any kind of supremacist for that matter), so your persistence is perplexing. And as detestable as these people are, if they are in the US, they have a right to their bigoted, backwards opinion and a right to peacefully express it, despite that it bothers you. In fact, the fact that it's such a bothersome thing is a good thing, because unpopular opinions are the entire reason for putting free speech on a pedestal in the first place.
Lulz
*thinks everyone else reading his comments doesnt also think hes a bigoted peice of shit too (or a really bad way too longwinded and ineffective troll).
*Nazis are cool cuz underdogs. Racist Underdogs deserve applause while racial and minority ones deserve hatred and further policing.
*Only white supremecist free speech should be protected respected and defended. Opposition to it should be criticized and maybe even disbanded.
*whaaaaaa libtards have opinions whaaaaaaaaa
*thinks everyone else reading his comments doesnt also think hes a bigoted peice of shit too (or a really bad way too longwinded and ineffective troll).
*Nazis are cool cuz underdogs. Racist Underdogs deserve applause while racial and minority ones deserve hatred and further policing.
*Only white supremecist free speech should be protected respected and defended. Opposition to it should be criticized and maybe even disbanded.
*whaaaaaa libtards have opinions whaaaaaaaaa
I like how you disingenuously put "almost" and then try to ignore that some mass shooters aren't Right wing. Also, mass shooting is motivated by things other than racism, so it has NOTHING to do with your arguments. You get ZERO points. Oh, and just for pointers, the Christchurch shooter was a radical leftwing shooter and an ecofascist, he wasn't actually Right Wing and he didn't even like Donald Trump. You'd know this if you'd bothered to read his manifesto instead of being spoon fed bits and pieces cherry picked to fit a narrative.
The reality is most mass shooters are psychopaths and their actions aren't motivated by ideology at all. But keep trying to use tragedies to score points.
The reality is most mass shooters are psychopaths and their actions aren't motivated by ideology at all. But keep trying to use tragedies to score points.
I'd have loved for this guy to have gave me some examples of right wing violence that isn't Charlottesville (which was a result of clashing been antifa and right wing protesters, not one sided violence as you have falsely implied)? Cause, like, on example out of literally dozens of riots and hate hoaxes from the Left over the last 2 years isn't really going to win you the argument that the Left and Media aren't just hysterical.
https://www.splcenter.org/20180723/terror-right
https://www.splcenter.org/hate-map
https://first-vigil.com/
There are several organizations dedicated to monitoring far-right violence, though generally only when it results in death, assault, or had those goals. Even still, there are plenty. Also - Charlottesville was very much one-sided violence from the right.
https://www.splcenter.org/hate-map
https://first-vigil.com/
There are several organizations dedicated to monitoring far-right violence, though generally only when it results in death, assault, or had those goals. Even still, there are plenty. Also - Charlottesville was very much one-sided violence from the right.
The SPLC is a hate group in their own right who labeled and anti-Jihadist as an Islamophobic bigot (which tells you a lot about where Islam is come to think of it). Their job is to literally find and point out hate groups, which, surprise, they magically always keep seeming to find more. Strange that. It's almost like their livelihoods depend on it. Oh, and they're also pretty racist and backwards themselves if their recent firings and financial scandals are anything to go by. But you didn't link to that now, did you? They aren't reliable as a source and shame on you for citing them. Oh, and they don't consider Antifa a hate or terror group despite Antifa being on the official domestic terrorist watch list.
And as I stated previously, Charlottesville only happened because the peacefully protesting right wing demonstrators were allowed to be attacked by the Left wing mob. If they had been kept apart there would have been no violence. We can blame the douche in the car who ran Heather Hayer over for his actions (he was a white supremacist, but he didn't kill Heather because of that - she was white after all). He was surrounded by people banging on his car and not letting him leave the area, so I personally think they pushed an unstable person over the edge and he lashed out. It was tragic, but it was entirely AVOIDABLE had they been left alone to peacefully express themselves.
You people do realize you have the option to IGNORE the people on the Right, right? I mean, if you don't give them any attention what the fuck are they going to do to grow???
And as I stated previously, Charlottesville only happened because the peacefully protesting right wing demonstrators were allowed to be attacked by the Left wing mob. If they had been kept apart there would have been no violence. We can blame the douche in the car who ran Heather Hayer over for his actions (he was a white supremacist, but he didn't kill Heather because of that - she was white after all). He was surrounded by people banging on his car and not letting him leave the area, so I personally think they pushed an unstable person over the edge and he lashed out. It was tragic, but it was entirely AVOIDABLE had they been left alone to peacefully express themselves.
You people do realize you have the option to IGNORE the people on the Right, right? I mean, if you don't give them any attention what the fuck are they going to do to grow???
So your response to being provided with what you asked for is gaslighting to dismiss it?
You can verify these with third parties - nor was SPLC the only thing I provided. I could ask you to go through the list I linked 'terror on the right' and list each of the hoaxes, but instead I'd ask that maybe you undergo some significant introspection.
Also the notion that a white supremacist cannot be inspired by their ideology to kill another white person runs in the face of the fact that the every single fascist regime has killed its own citizens, that white people advocating on behalf of blacks were killed/arrested, and that white supremacy also has the vested interested in preserving itself. Its funny how when the left protest and kill no one you blame the left for some hypothetical violence, and when the right protest and kill people you blame the left - it makes me think you perhaps have a significant bias.
Further, I can't 'ignore' people on the right. Politics is not something that you can't ignore, its something that determines who society is structured and what freedoms you are afforded. The transgender military ban is just one example of many.
Also antifa is not a hate group. They don't go after religious minorities or ethnic groups.
You can verify these with third parties - nor was SPLC the only thing I provided. I could ask you to go through the list I linked 'terror on the right' and list each of the hoaxes, but instead I'd ask that maybe you undergo some significant introspection.
Also the notion that a white supremacist cannot be inspired by their ideology to kill another white person runs in the face of the fact that the every single fascist regime has killed its own citizens, that white people advocating on behalf of blacks were killed/arrested, and that white supremacy also has the vested interested in preserving itself. Its funny how when the left protest and kill no one you blame the left for some hypothetical violence, and when the right protest and kill people you blame the left - it makes me think you perhaps have a significant bias.
Further, I can't 'ignore' people on the right. Politics is not something that you can't ignore, its something that determines who society is structured and what freedoms you are afforded. The transgender military ban is just one example of many.
Also antifa is not a hate group. They don't go after religious minorities or ethnic groups.
Gaslighting is a nonsensical buzzword used by social justice warriors. Please do not waste my time.
You still haven't managed to counter the simple fact that if Heather Hayer hadn't of been banging on that skinheads car and threatening his safety he wouldn't have been provoked into running her over. No one told her to assault his vehicle or threaten him and NOTHING gave her the right to, no matter how repugnant his beliefs were. In fact, I GUARANTEE you she didn't even know he was a white supremacist. The only thing she ASSUMED was that he was "right wing" and probably a Trump supporter and therefore "evil".
Antifa hates white people. Specifically straight white males. They're pretty open about that in their literature and behavior. They're also mostly made up of anarcho communists. You can split hairs about it, but at the end of the day they're a TERRORIST organization, and that's what matters most.
You still haven't managed to counter the simple fact that if Heather Hayer hadn't of been banging on that skinheads car and threatening his safety he wouldn't have been provoked into running her over. No one told her to assault his vehicle or threaten him and NOTHING gave her the right to, no matter how repugnant his beliefs were. In fact, I GUARANTEE you she didn't even know he was a white supremacist. The only thing she ASSUMED was that he was "right wing" and probably a Trump supporter and therefore "evil".
Antifa hates white people. Specifically straight white males. They're pretty open about that in their literature and behavior. They're also mostly made up of anarcho communists. You can split hairs about it, but at the end of the day they're a TERRORIST organization, and that's what matters most.
Actually its a logical fallacy and you can't just dismiss it with another logical fallacy.
Victim blaming isn't something I have to counter - you are essentially still trying to find a way to blame the non-violent victim for the violent criminal's crimes. You've devolved into conspiracy theories now as well. Antifa doesn't hate white people, or straight people. The fact you consider a group like them terrorists but will be an apologist for groups that have caused actual deaths and committed actual terrorist attacks is telling.
Victim blaming isn't something I have to counter - you are essentially still trying to find a way to blame the non-violent victim for the violent criminal's crimes. You've devolved into conspiracy theories now as well. Antifa doesn't hate white people, or straight people. The fact you consider a group like them terrorists but will be an apologist for groups that have caused actual deaths and committed actual terrorist attacks is telling.
That which is asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence, as the saying goes. :)
And did you just claim that someone who was beating on a vehicle, not allowing it to leave and was verbally and physically threatening the drivers safety was being "non-violent". Oh. my. god.
If Antifa wants to protest peacefully I will support that. Instead, they start fires, smash property, assault people (anyone within arms reach who isn't wearing a mask) and shut down peoples attempt at expressing themselves. They behave like fascists and I don't support fascism.
And I consider Antifa a terrorist organization because they are classified as a domestic terrorist organization. And they act like one. I've seen it.
And did you just claim that someone who was beating on a vehicle, not allowing it to leave and was verbally and physically threatening the drivers safety was being "non-violent". Oh. my. god.
If Antifa wants to protest peacefully I will support that. Instead, they start fires, smash property, assault people (anyone within arms reach who isn't wearing a mask) and shut down peoples attempt at expressing themselves. They behave like fascists and I don't support fascism.
And I consider Antifa a terrorist organization because they are classified as a domestic terrorist organization. And they act like one. I've seen it.
The FBI also considered Civil Rights activists terrorists. Though, that isn't what I meant by 'little evidence'. I meant the other grandiose claims you've made. Though at this point your claims have collapsed in on themselves to the point where any source that provides a clear consistent viewpoint is going to contradict you no matter what. You've already outright stated you are fine with mass murder. I've already gotten you to admit you believe in that, there really isn't even much more reason to respond here.
People can now see where 'centrism' stands versus where socialism stands.
People can now see where 'centrism' stands versus where socialism stands.
Oh dear god "muh civil rights activists" canard. I mean, some of the black nationalists were literal terrorists, like the Black Panthers and the Weather Underground, but the broader label of "terrorist" was just used to persecute innocent protesters. But you already know that. :)
Antifa physically assaulted hundreds of people over 2 years, started numerous fires and did $500,000 worth of damage to UC Berkeley (and downtown as well). The intention was to suppress the constitutionally protected speech of others. That is literal terrorism.
Never said I was fine was mass murder. Try again. Socialism steals peoples stuff and kills people. Centrism doesn't.
Antifa physically assaulted hundreds of people over 2 years, started numerous fires and did $500,000 worth of damage to UC Berkeley (and downtown as well). The intention was to suppress the constitutionally protected speech of others. That is literal terrorism.
Never said I was fine was mass murder. Try again. Socialism steals peoples stuff and kills people. Centrism doesn't.
There are groups that identify with the nazi ideology in the modern day, quite sadly.
Nazism, a type of fascism, is defined by ultra-nationalism, militarization of society (hyper aggression), stigmatization of an 'other', preservation of traditional hierarchies, and an opposition to liberalism and socialism - among other things. Fascist subsets will not, obviously as with any ideology, meet this cookie-cutter, but will come pretty close.
With the NRx movement being pulled to the forefront of politics by the rise of right-wing populism several groups who have identified as fascist or nazi have become several times more active. While the actual NSDAP might have existed in the past - fascism is still alive today.
https://www.splcenter.org/20180723/terror-right
https://www.splcenter.org/hate-map
https://first-vigil.com/
Information on both sites can be verified elsewhere.
There are even fascists inside the fandom as evidenced by the chatlog leaks here:
https://twitter.com/AltfurryL
As for transgender people already having rights - they may in your nation. However in mine they've even gone so far as to recently issue a ban from the military, and in several states people are restricted in their ability to fully transition.
Nazism, a type of fascism, is defined by ultra-nationalism, militarization of society (hyper aggression), stigmatization of an 'other', preservation of traditional hierarchies, and an opposition to liberalism and socialism - among other things. Fascist subsets will not, obviously as with any ideology, meet this cookie-cutter, but will come pretty close.
With the NRx movement being pulled to the forefront of politics by the rise of right-wing populism several groups who have identified as fascist or nazi have become several times more active. While the actual NSDAP might have existed in the past - fascism is still alive today.
https://www.splcenter.org/20180723/terror-right
https://www.splcenter.org/hate-map
https://first-vigil.com/
Information on both sites can be verified elsewhere.
There are even fascists inside the fandom as evidenced by the chatlog leaks here:
https://twitter.com/AltfurryL
As for transgender people already having rights - they may in your nation. However in mine they've even gone so far as to recently issue a ban from the military, and in several states people are restricted in their ability to fully transition.
Slight inaccuracy there. The Nazis were RABID socialists. Hitler often spoke, quite fervently, about his love of socialism. Nazi social policies were inherently socialistic. It was COMMUNISM that the Nazis wouldn't tolerate because it runs politically counter to how fascism operates.
Actually this is completely wrong - and you should stop listening to PragerU.
Nazism, like all fascism, is right-wing both economically and socially. The first people persecuted by the nazi regime were socialists and communists. There was even a patch given to left-wing elements of German society to wear inside the forced labour and death camps.
Germany, under Hitler, saw unions weakened, working conditions and quality of life plummet, social welfare scaled back, and conservative economic programs implemented.
Nazism, like all fascism, is right-wing both economically and socially. The first people persecuted by the nazi regime were socialists and communists. There was even a patch given to left-wing elements of German society to wear inside the forced labour and death camps.
Germany, under Hitler, saw unions weakened, working conditions and quality of life plummet, social welfare scaled back, and conservative economic programs implemented.
I don't listen to PragerU. I studied Nazi Germany, listened to Hitler's speeches and read Mein Kampf. The Nazis were socialists. It is literally in their name. The "National Socialists Workers Party". I didn't say the Nazis weren't right wing. I said they were socialist. You can be both. Don't be so restricted in your thinking. The Nazis fought in the streets against the communists for control over germany (and happened to be better at it), which is why they ultimately seized power. The Nazis did, in fact, institute socialist policies. Everyone had a radio. Everyone had a job. Everyone was paid the same wage (well, much like communism "everyone" excluded people in the Party who said one thing and did another, but that's just human nature, which happens to be why communism doesn't work).
Unions were weakened under the Nazis because they conflicted with the Party, which sought to dominate all spheres of life. Why would you need a union when you have the Party, after all?
Unions were weakened under the Nazis because they conflicted with the Party, which sought to dominate all spheres of life. Why would you need a union when you have the Party, after all?
Except that they changed that name from DAP to specifically appeal to the working class. Something being in the name doesn't make it true.They also fought against socialists and liberals - and specifically did nothing to the capitalist conservative parties that aided them and voted to give them more power. This argument of 'they were socialists' goes from a smug statement promoted by those with a tenuous grasp of history to a conspiracy theory that essentially says 'even if they were not socialist, they were still secretly socialist'. Any encyclopedia can tell you they implemented conservative economic policies and were very much anti-socialist.
They were also bank-rolled by rich industrialists and didn't nationalize the nation's economy. In fact, even the industries they did intervene in they made sure not to take total control of - specifically the arms industry.
As for unions...because even under statist socialism you saw socialist unions were a building block of societal organization. Its odd how the 'socialist' fascists would outlaw socialist unions specifically and instead favor corporatism.
They were also bank-rolled by rich industrialists and didn't nationalize the nation's economy. In fact, even the industries they did intervene in they made sure not to take total control of - specifically the arms industry.
As for unions...because even under statist socialism you saw socialist unions were a building block of societal organization. Its odd how the 'socialist' fascists would outlaw socialist unions specifically and instead favor corporatism.
It's a shame I don't have it, but there was this great interview with this octogenarian Austrian woman who went into exquisite detail about how Hitler was a socialist and how the Nazi policies were socialist. She was invited to speak at a dinner where the subject was warning of the dangers of socialism and how it undermines freedom, liberty and a successful country. I wish I had it, because obviously first hand testimony from someone who lived under Nazi rule is the highest standard, but I suppose you'll just have to take my word for it. Then again, you've been tacitly defending an ideology that directly opposes the concept of merit and advocates the theft of wealth from those who have earned it to be arbitrarily redistributed by the will of the state, so, I mean, I'm sensing a flaw in your reasoning.
I could likewise link accounts from people that were put in camps for being left-wing or 'anti-social' elements of society. Though I have a feeling you'd reject those. I could also provide you an account of how the Trump regime is far-right, but obviously when the first-hand account comes from a political enemy you'd reject it.
You've also spent this entire time using strawmen and demonstrating how horribly misinformed you are about the ideology you pretend is your absolute enemy. All of your comments have provided a strawmen and made the insinuation that I'm insane.
I could counter your strawmen with the Civil Rights Movement, the Union movement, philosophers like Rosa and Rocker - but I don't think you have a vested interest in truth at this point seeing as the aforementioned insinuations of my insanity are becoming more prevalent.
You've also spent this entire time using strawmen and demonstrating how horribly misinformed you are about the ideology you pretend is your absolute enemy. All of your comments have provided a strawmen and made the insinuation that I'm insane.
I could counter your strawmen with the Civil Rights Movement, the Union movement, philosophers like Rosa and Rocker - but I don't think you have a vested interest in truth at this point seeing as the aforementioned insinuations of my insanity are becoming more prevalent.
I never said the Trump ADMINISTRATION (it's not a regime, what is wrong with you people?) wasn't "far right". It's very conservative. But most of that is just pandering to his base. Trump is a money president who is socially quite liberal and behaves just like a 90s democrat (shows you how far to the Left we've drifted over the years). Trump isn't a neo-con or a neo-lib which is what is particularly maddening to the Establishment.
And, uh, you uh gonna ever address the Holodomor? How about Mao's "Great Leap Forward"? Stalin's gulags? Don't you dare tell me Stalin and Mao weren't left wing.
And, uh, you uh gonna ever address the Holodomor? How about Mao's "Great Leap Forward"? Stalin's gulags? Don't you dare tell me Stalin and Mao weren't left wing.
It is a regime:
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/regime
Stop making up reasons to paint your political enemies as insane if they are not.
Also, Trump socially liberal? His VP believes in conversion therapy and he has consistently implemented right-wing policies. If you compare him to right-wing democrats from when the party was dominated by social conservatives - then sure I guess he would be a 'democrat' - but I feel that is a bit of a stretch and a bit disingenuous. Trump is a reactionary - which has divided the 'establishment' between those on the center-right and those on the right.
As for the continuation of the assumptions and strawmen and logical fallacies - I'd already addressed them. Are you going to bring up all the stuff that you yourself have ignored? Again, if I have to answer for those you need to answer for the 100 million capitalism kills every five years and the millions more it has killed just the past 100 years.
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/regime
Stop making up reasons to paint your political enemies as insane if they are not.
Also, Trump socially liberal? His VP believes in conversion therapy and he has consistently implemented right-wing policies. If you compare him to right-wing democrats from when the party was dominated by social conservatives - then sure I guess he would be a 'democrat' - but I feel that is a bit of a stretch and a bit disingenuous. Trump is a reactionary - which has divided the 'establishment' between those on the center-right and those on the right.
As for the continuation of the assumptions and strawmen and logical fallacies - I'd already addressed them. Are you going to bring up all the stuff that you yourself have ignored? Again, if I have to answer for those you need to answer for the 100 million capitalism kills every five years and the millions more it has killed just the past 100 years.
That is a fake news, made up left wing smear about Pence. He does not believe in conversion therapy. The right only tolerates that because him shooting lighting out of his hands is a funny meme. Get your facts straight before you regurgitate made up talking points. And Trump is a Republican president who has to keep his base happy, hence him implements right-wing policies. This shouldn't be shocking, yet you folks act like it's bizarre and the end of the world. I mean, Obama was an unabashed globalist and we had to suffer through that for 8 years while the US withered, but fair is fair, right? And I said Trump PERSONALLY is socially liberal. He is a MONEY PRESIDENT. He only actually cares about the economy. The rest is purely designed to keep his base happy, who are genuinely conservative. Trump ran on tax reform and better border security. The rest of his campaign was calling the press out for their shit and making fun of Hillary.
And I'm not going to agree to your terms, sorry. Capitalism does not kill 100 million every five years. Those are just people dying, completely unrelated to capitalism. If we were living under a universally socialist system, they'd be dying anyway, because we would still have separate countries and death tolls per country are based on resources and things like disease. You put waaaaaaay too much stock in the economy as the prime factor in what kills people.
And I'm not going to agree to your terms, sorry. Capitalism does not kill 100 million every five years. Those are just people dying, completely unrelated to capitalism. If we were living under a universally socialist system, they'd be dying anyway, because we would still have separate countries and death tolls per country are based on resources and things like disease. You put waaaaaaay too much stock in the economy as the prime factor in what kills people.
https://www.hrc.org/realmikepence
You have enough egg on your face to feed the world over. You are devolving deeper into conspiracies. Mike Pence and Trump are 'secretly' 'liberal'? Conservatives oppose conversion therapy?
But I'm very glad to see you are doubling down on 'capitalism didn't kill those people' as an argument. It lets people reading this exchange know who the real 'evil murderer' is here. Probably the one who literally is okay with death, genocide, and murder - and has outright stated as much.
You have enough egg on your face to feed the world over. You are devolving deeper into conspiracies. Mike Pence and Trump are 'secretly' 'liberal'? Conservatives oppose conversion therapy?
But I'm very glad to see you are doubling down on 'capitalism didn't kill those people' as an argument. It lets people reading this exchange know who the real 'evil murderer' is here. Probably the one who literally is okay with death, genocide, and murder - and has outright stated as much.
Why are you generalizing about all conservatives? Only the deeply religious believe in conversion therapy and that's a very small percent of conservatives. Don't talk out of your ass, it's impolite. Genocide and murder require intent. With capitalism, there is no intent to kill millions of people. They are dying parallel to the system, not as a result of it. Also, I'm sorry, I completely forgot.
Prove it. You're the one making the claim, so YOU prove it. I am under zero obligation to try and prove a negative. I mean, I've kind of done with the "dying parallel to the system" statement, but, I'm kind of curious to see where you go with this. Oh and your'e going to have to work real hard to explain away the middle class and the continued economic growth and quality of life improvements across the world every year since the beginning of capitalism. It is literally the best thing there has ever been. The thing that came after capitalism was communism and socialism and those failed miserably.
Your turn.
Prove it. You're the one making the claim, so YOU prove it. I am under zero obligation to try and prove a negative. I mean, I've kind of done with the "dying parallel to the system" statement, but, I'm kind of curious to see where you go with this. Oh and your'e going to have to work real hard to explain away the middle class and the continued economic growth and quality of life improvements across the world every year since the beginning of capitalism. It is literally the best thing there has ever been. The thing that came after capitalism was communism and socialism and those failed miserably.
Your turn.
Here is the impact of the 'small number of conservatives' this guy is talking about.
http://www.lgbtmap.org/equality-map.....ersion_therapy
https://www.hrc.org/resources/the-l.....rative-therapy
http://www.nclrights.org/bornperfec.....rsion-therapy/
A reminder he has already in this thread openly admitted to believing in mass murder and verified that information himself.
http://www.furaffinity.net/view/311.....#cid:137716706
http://www.lgbtmap.org/equality-map.....ersion_therapy
https://www.hrc.org/resources/the-l.....rative-therapy
http://www.nclrights.org/bornperfec.....rsion-therapy/
A reminder he has already in this thread openly admitted to believing in mass murder and verified that information himself.
http://www.furaffinity.net/view/311.....#cid:137716706
You mean this one?
"We are Socialists, enemies, mortal enemies of the present capitalist economic system with its exploitation of the economically weak, with its injustice in wages, with its immoral evaluation of individuals according to wealth and money instead of responsibility and achievement, and we are determined under all circumstances to abolish this system!"
-- Adolf Hitler.
Imagine my surprise, maybe I have to reconsider my views... except that Hitler didn't say it. It was another member from the Nazi party, Gregor Strasser.
Gregor Strasser was killed by Hitler alongside all other commies.
Hitler borrowed the idea of socialism and replaced "class" by "race". And dictatorship of the proletariat with the dictatorship of the leader.
"We are Socialists, enemies, mortal enemies of the present capitalist economic system with its exploitation of the economically weak, with its injustice in wages, with its immoral evaluation of individuals according to wealth and money instead of responsibility and achievement, and we are determined under all circumstances to abolish this system!"
-- Adolf Hitler.
Imagine my surprise, maybe I have to reconsider my views... except that Hitler didn't say it. It was another member from the Nazi party, Gregor Strasser.
Gregor Strasser was killed by Hitler alongside all other commies.
Hitler borrowed the idea of socialism and replaced "class" by "race". And dictatorship of the proletariat with the dictatorship of the leader.
Oh, yeah, and communism also killed 100 million people (and is still at it) while fascism has killed, if we're generous, no more than 60 million (and that's if we assign them blame for all the deaths of WWII). And if you think communists would be down with transgenderism, you're sorely mistaken. They are utterly opposed to anything remotely "decadent" and if you think self-actualization in the form aligning yourself with your "true" gender doesn't fall under that category, I have bad news for you. Be more concerned about the communists who have actual institutional power (academia) and social power (several countries) than at most a few thousand fascists who typically maladjusted idiots.
100 million deaths gets thrown around a lot. Not even addressing the source for that - we can look at the fact that poverty, induced by capitalism - kills around 20 million a year. This is ignoring people killed in the past 150 or even just 100 years in 'anti-communist' crack-downs, by regimes that followed capitalism, colonialism which was inspired by a lust for new cheap markets and resources, and anti-leftist terrorist actions.
Also, you rely on myths and a mostly false version of history and reality to get you by. It isn't going to work with someone that has studied history and politics.
Also, you rely on myths and a mostly false version of history and reality to get you by. It isn't going to work with someone that has studied history and politics.
Incidental deaths are not the same as intentional deaths. The Holodomor, for example. was one of several intentional famines that killed millions of people. Also capitalism isn't a homogeneous system. It's economic, not political. People die in countries from things RELATED to capitalism, but you can't say that capitalism is the CAUSE of those deaths. That's pure propaganda. I have a dual masters in history, both european and cultural, so, I'm not sure what you studied, but I have a funny feeling it's not comparable. And, please, for the sake of my sanity, do reply with "the Holodomor was a hoax".
So when capitalism kills people its 'incidental'.
And when its 'your system' its not 'homogeneous' - do you think socialism is? I'm not allowed to hold you to deaths caused by capitalism because it 'wasn't my type of capitalism', but you are allowed to hold me to deaths caused by a strain of socialism that came about 60 or so years after Marxism? Laughable.
I'd argue capitalism is also very much political and economic - afterall society has to be structured a certain way in order for capitalism to work. Not to mention that economics and politics are inherently linked.
People also died in countries for things related to communism, but you claim that communism caused those deaths and are now claiming the opposite for capitalism. Its a double standard.
You are seemingly seeing how your misconceptions are a little bit out there with all the insults and insinuations.
And when its 'your system' its not 'homogeneous' - do you think socialism is? I'm not allowed to hold you to deaths caused by capitalism because it 'wasn't my type of capitalism', but you are allowed to hold me to deaths caused by a strain of socialism that came about 60 or so years after Marxism? Laughable.
I'd argue capitalism is also very much political and economic - afterall society has to be structured a certain way in order for capitalism to work. Not to mention that economics and politics are inherently linked.
People also died in countries for things related to communism, but you claim that communism caused those deaths and are now claiming the opposite for capitalism. Its a double standard.
You are seemingly seeing how your misconceptions are a little bit out there with all the insults and insinuations.
Socialism is literally a codified ideology that exists with the express purpose of ushering in Communism. Thus sayeth Marx. Capitalism is an economic system, not an ideology. It's application is influenced and applied differently from country to country and intersects with things like cultural and social norms. People who die as a consequence of Capitalism die just as much as a consequence of eating Big Macs. It's simply a factor. Communism intentionally kills people because it willfully intends to wipe out entire "classes" of people. It's inherently genocidal, as is fascism. They're opposite ends of the spectrum after all. Socialism doesn't have strains. It's a consistent, albeit paradoxical and unworkable ideology that always works towards the implementation of Communism because Marx was economically illiterate. Hence the workers of the world not rising up and uniting.
And, again, the Holodomor.
And, again, the Holodomor.
Capitalism is also an ideology - its why there are ideologies built around capitalism. Capitalism, as I mentioned, necessitates certain societal things in order to exist. What you describe is literally an ideology:
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dic.....onary/ideology
I could also argue the poverty is intentional. Capitalism does nothing to stop it, and in fact most capitalists will say its 'desirable' or 'just how it is'. Communism also doesn't aim to 'wipe out classes', it intents to dismantle the class structure - stop the strawmen and ignorance.
Also, you once again claim it doesn't have strains, even though it does:
Syndicalism
Mutualism
Autonomism
Leninism/Stalinism/Maoism
Marxism
Utopian Socialism
Christian Socialism
Agrarian Socialism
Just to name a few. Again, you are not going to be able to get away with these asinine arguments with someone who has studied fascism, socialism, liberalism, and a broad overview of political theory.
Your last line sums up your argument perfectly, because it makes no sense in this argument. Its tilting at wind-mills, grasping at straws, and pretending those that disagree with you are the absolute evil. I've tried to explain things to you in a pretty polite way, given you the benefit of the doubt and provided sources. You've done nothing but insinuate that I am insane, proclaim double standards, and deflect from any responsibility for your own beliefs.
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dic.....onary/ideology
I could also argue the poverty is intentional. Capitalism does nothing to stop it, and in fact most capitalists will say its 'desirable' or 'just how it is'. Communism also doesn't aim to 'wipe out classes', it intents to dismantle the class structure - stop the strawmen and ignorance.
Also, you once again claim it doesn't have strains, even though it does:
Syndicalism
Mutualism
Autonomism
Leninism/Stalinism/Maoism
Marxism
Utopian Socialism
Christian Socialism
Agrarian Socialism
Just to name a few. Again, you are not going to be able to get away with these asinine arguments with someone who has studied fascism, socialism, liberalism, and a broad overview of political theory.
Your last line sums up your argument perfectly, because it makes no sense in this argument. Its tilting at wind-mills, grasping at straws, and pretending those that disagree with you are the absolute evil. I've tried to explain things to you in a pretty polite way, given you the benefit of the doubt and provided sources. You've done nothing but insinuate that I am insane, proclaim double standards, and deflect from any responsibility for your own beliefs.
No, my point about the Holodomor is that you've defended socialism (and tacitly communism) while condemning capitalism with the canard that it kills 20 million a year, yet the Holodomor was one of SEVERAL man made famines designed to achieve a genocide against a group of people. You haven't acknowledged this. You keep avoiding it.
Except that I didn't defend Stalinism, or the Holodomor - you are the one that brought both up. I'm not a Stalinist, nor do I believe that Ukrainians are inferior to Russians. But then you have also not condemned any of the anti-communist actions or the poverty or the colonialism that have resulted in more deaths than your claim of 100 million. You also haven't condemned any of the famines that happened before the October Revolution or the Russification policies under the Tzar - which, if I am to be forced to answer for the Holodomor - you should also answer for.
Oh, that's because I don't oppose the persecution of Communism. It is the evilest, most degenerate ideology to ever be concocted. It is the arch enemy to Western civilization. People typically can't be talked down off the ledge of communism; they can only be contained in an attempt to prevent them from doing harm to the world around them. See, fascists don't pretend they're good. They know, either completely, or partially, that what they're doing is evil. They just believe it's a necessary evil. Communists, on the other hand, are the most self righteous zealot imaginable. They believe they are the literal saviors of mankind and will do any kind of atrocity conceivable in order to obtain their goal. And it doesn't work. Ever. And every time it fails they just claim "it wasn't real communism". So, on top of being evil, it's adherent are INCAPABLE OF LEARNING.
And your collectivism is showing. Colonialism isn't a monolith. All different countries did it and those countries had all different ethnic make ups. It's like slavery - literally everyone practiced it, yet only white people ever seem to get shit for it (despite being the ones who made it illegal). Poverty isn't the fault of capitalism. Poverty has always existed. In fact, it was WORSE before capitalism. Capitalism CREATED the middle class! Ever since capitalism was created, the quality of life for more and more people has been increasing annually. We live in the most abundant and prosperous time, EVER, yet I guess it's just not "good enough". I mean, we could be living in utopia, if just only, right?
And your collectivism is showing. Colonialism isn't a monolith. All different countries did it and those countries had all different ethnic make ups. It's like slavery - literally everyone practiced it, yet only white people ever seem to get shit for it (despite being the ones who made it illegal). Poverty isn't the fault of capitalism. Poverty has always existed. In fact, it was WORSE before capitalism. Capitalism CREATED the middle class! Ever since capitalism was created, the quality of life for more and more people has been increasing annually. We live in the most abundant and prosperous time, EVER, yet I guess it's just not "good enough". I mean, we could be living in utopia, if just only, right?
So just to be clear, you are fine with communists and socialists being killed? And are fine with all the deaths, authoritarian repression, and genocides that took place to fulfill that over the course of the Cold War and the decades before it?
I'm starting to see that your arguments are falling even more onto themselves. While I reject the need for a central state at all, or authoritarian rule, and am very much anti-Stalinist and oppose the murderous actions of the likes of Stalin, you very much don't care about the actions that resulted in deaths or oppression as long as its those you disagree with.
Also, fascists don't consider themselves evil. You are making up yet more things to try to paint them in a 'good' light - pretending that they 'at least openly admit it' - except they don't. Fascism literally presents itself as a savior of [insert civilization]. German fascists presented themselves as 'saviors' of Germany. Italian fascists as 'saviors' of Italy. They put out propaganda to make themselves seem not just as 'saviors', but almost deific
Also - you are going to say something as asinine as 'your collectivism is showing' when you've said all socialists are exactly the same?
Though your response shows exactly that you understand what my argument is, you just don't care. Its a double standard you won't let go of because your 'argument' hinges entirely on it. You rely on strawmen, a misunderstanding of the positions of those you disagree with, and hypocrisy to actually even 'hold your own' in a debate. Its really pathetic.
I'm starting to see that your arguments are falling even more onto themselves. While I reject the need for a central state at all, or authoritarian rule, and am very much anti-Stalinist and oppose the murderous actions of the likes of Stalin, you very much don't care about the actions that resulted in deaths or oppression as long as its those you disagree with.
Also, fascists don't consider themselves evil. You are making up yet more things to try to paint them in a 'good' light - pretending that they 'at least openly admit it' - except they don't. Fascism literally presents itself as a savior of [insert civilization]. German fascists presented themselves as 'saviors' of Germany. Italian fascists as 'saviors' of Italy. They put out propaganda to make themselves seem not just as 'saviors', but almost deific
Also - you are going to say something as asinine as 'your collectivism is showing' when you've said all socialists are exactly the same?
Though your response shows exactly that you understand what my argument is, you just don't care. Its a double standard you won't let go of because your 'argument' hinges entirely on it. You rely on strawmen, a misunderstanding of the positions of those you disagree with, and hypocrisy to actually even 'hold your own' in a debate. Its really pathetic.
I'd prefer them not be killed. I do giggle every time I hear someone say "Pinochet did nothing wrong", but that's because I'm a bit of a sick fuck haha. But I don't want them to obtain any power or station in society because I believe them to be extremely dangerous and unlike "nazis", communists have their claws in politics and are deeply entrenched in academia. Critical theory is directly from the Frankfurt School and that is the reason we have the cancer that is intersectional social justice today.
Dominance hierarchies are natural and, as history has demonstrated, essential for society (and culture), so you may reject them, but you still are obligated to be a part of them. And I happen to know at least one open fascist (he's an ecofascist which is a special kind of bizarre) and he very much recognizes that parts of his world view are "bad". He just believes them to be necessary to counter what he rationalizes as "degeneracy". So, don't generalize. They see themselves as having to "make the tough decisions". Communists don't see themselves as making a tough decision. They believe in victory at all costs and their special slogan for the left is "liberals get the bullet too".
As for hypocrisy, it's really quite stupid to bring that up. Everyone is a hypocrite, without exception.
Dominance hierarchies are natural and, as history has demonstrated, essential for society (and culture), so you may reject them, but you still are obligated to be a part of them. And I happen to know at least one open fascist (he's an ecofascist which is a special kind of bizarre) and he very much recognizes that parts of his world view are "bad". He just believes them to be necessary to counter what he rationalizes as "degeneracy". So, don't generalize. They see themselves as having to "make the tough decisions". Communists don't see themselves as making a tough decision. They believe in victory at all costs and their special slogan for the left is "liberals get the bullet too".
As for hypocrisy, it's really quite stupid to bring that up. Everyone is a hypocrite, without exception.
Alright, so the answer is yes. That is really the point I wanted to get to.
______
Alright - people reading this. This guy has openly admitted to believing in mass murder while dismissing people's arguments by accusing them of believing in it.
If you are reading this and have some sympathies to the 'center' or right - this should be a wake up call even if you ignore the nazi apologism.
The far-right do not stand up for your rights. They stand for death, destruction, and repression. Their only tactics are strawmen, deflection, gaslighting, and a gross - and often intentional - misunderstanding of history and reality.
______
Alright - people reading this. This guy has openly admitted to believing in mass murder while dismissing people's arguments by accusing them of believing in it.
If you are reading this and have some sympathies to the 'center' or right - this should be a wake up call even if you ignore the nazi apologism.
The far-right do not stand up for your rights. They stand for death, destruction, and repression. Their only tactics are strawmen, deflection, gaslighting, and a gross - and often intentional - misunderstanding of history and reality.
> And it doesn't work. Ever.
Most of the time because they're overthrown by fascists. It does work in Cuba, Vietnam, Laos and Kerala (China's private sector is way too big). I do not approve of the authoritarian regime of Cuba (or of any country for that matter).
The USSR also worked and there's no reason to believe it would have worked just as well without the atrocities. It was totalitarian, but communism doesn't need to be. The same way there's many authoritarian capitalist countries.
We'll see how well Rojava works.
> Capitalism CREATED the middle class!
No, industrialization did. And capitalism has been slowly erasing it.
> Ever since capitalism was created, the quality of life for more and more people has been increasing annually.
In some countries, at the cost of QoL of other countries.
The USSR also had an incredible increase in QoL. Most people didn't want the USSR to dissolve, and most people misses it (or at least they answered "it was good better than it was bad" in surveys).
Their economy slowed down in the 70s and 80s... and in the economic reform of '65 they introduced the concept of "profit" as measure of productivity... Coincidence?
Most of the time because they're overthrown by fascists. It does work in Cuba, Vietnam, Laos and Kerala (China's private sector is way too big). I do not approve of the authoritarian regime of Cuba (or of any country for that matter).
The USSR also worked and there's no reason to believe it would have worked just as well without the atrocities. It was totalitarian, but communism doesn't need to be. The same way there's many authoritarian capitalist countries.
We'll see how well Rojava works.
> Capitalism CREATED the middle class!
No, industrialization did. And capitalism has been slowly erasing it.
> Ever since capitalism was created, the quality of life for more and more people has been increasing annually.
In some countries, at the cost of QoL of other countries.
The USSR also had an incredible increase in QoL. Most people didn't want the USSR to dissolve, and most people misses it (or at least they answered "it was good better than it was bad" in surveys).
Their economy slowed down in the 70s and 80s... and in the economic reform of '65 they introduced the concept of "profit" as measure of productivity... Coincidence?
Cuba is a military dictatorship where the people are oppressed and live in grinding poverty. Vietnam, Loas and Kerala are also ruled by military's and deny people the liberty we enjoy under capitalism and western civilization. I mean, look at everything the west has created versus the nothing produced by these struggling nations. We get to be free, comfortable and creative. They get to be in poverty and oppressed. I'm so not seeing the upside here. The USSR "worked" by siphoning resources from captive nations (man made famines like the Holodomor were dual purpose); it was not sustainable. It was also massively corrupt and did not encourage innovation, which is a fatal flaw in communism.
The industrial revolution did NOT create the middle class. It created an entirely new breed of aristocrats - the robber barons of the oil and rail industries. Capitalism literally allowed average people to build businesses and grow wealthy, where us in the industrial period wealth was concentrated in the hands of a very few people. The "wealth disparity" argument of the modern day doesn't change this fact. The middle class may be shrinking NOW, but it appeared and grew over the last 100 years because of capitalism. Prior to that system only people who inherited wealth could get ahead in life.
And yes, some countries are going to have to suffer as life improves in others. The system is, and always has been, predatory. Them's the breaks. But even in the most impoverished countries, QoL has been improving steadily over the past 100 years, except in countries that adopted communism/socialism and/or a military dictatorship that concentrated wealth into the hands of the Party and the Military.
QoL in the USSR is irrelevant when you consider the existence of gulags and the complete lack of liberty. It was an oppressive travesty.
The industrial revolution did NOT create the middle class. It created an entirely new breed of aristocrats - the robber barons of the oil and rail industries. Capitalism literally allowed average people to build businesses and grow wealthy, where us in the industrial period wealth was concentrated in the hands of a very few people. The "wealth disparity" argument of the modern day doesn't change this fact. The middle class may be shrinking NOW, but it appeared and grew over the last 100 years because of capitalism. Prior to that system only people who inherited wealth could get ahead in life.
And yes, some countries are going to have to suffer as life improves in others. The system is, and always has been, predatory. Them's the breaks. But even in the most impoverished countries, QoL has been improving steadily over the past 100 years, except in countries that adopted communism/socialism and/or a military dictatorship that concentrated wealth into the hands of the Party and the Military.
QoL in the USSR is irrelevant when you consider the existence of gulags and the complete lack of liberty. It was an oppressive travesty.
Cuba is a democracy, there's no dictator. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2aMsi-A56ds
I don't know much about Laos and Kerala.
Vietnam is democratic and their people have all the liberty you have and some more, with the sole exception of not being to openly criticize the government. Other than that you can say ANYTHING, and do pretty much anything you can do in a western country. Free, comfortable and creative. It's one of the countries with the fastest growth in GDP in the world in the last 20 years.
If they were so miserable in the USSR, why most people still miss it to this day? 66% was last year's polls. And most people say the dissolution of the USSR did harm, even in countries that voted for independence.
It's funny you mention if worked "by siphoning resources from captive nations". Rich countries work exactly that way, except "poor" instead of "captive". Well, debt is a form of being captive, so it applies too.
You talk of "the industrial period" as if it existed before capitalism, but the opposite is true.
The middle class has been shrinking for decades, it's not a new thing. Social mobility in the USA is very low currently. It's really hard to escape poverty.
> The system is, and always has been, predatory.
No, it doesn't need to be. It is because we allow it.
The USSR didn't stifle innovation any more than capitalism does. There's an enormous list of soviet innovations. Also: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4ZnHwc6TfB0
I don't know much about Laos and Kerala.
Vietnam is democratic and their people have all the liberty you have and some more, with the sole exception of not being to openly criticize the government. Other than that you can say ANYTHING, and do pretty much anything you can do in a western country. Free, comfortable and creative. It's one of the countries with the fastest growth in GDP in the world in the last 20 years.
If they were so miserable in the USSR, why most people still miss it to this day? 66% was last year's polls. And most people say the dissolution of the USSR did harm, even in countries that voted for independence.
It's funny you mention if worked "by siphoning resources from captive nations". Rich countries work exactly that way, except "poor" instead of "captive". Well, debt is a form of being captive, so it applies too.
You talk of "the industrial period" as if it existed before capitalism, but the opposite is true.
The middle class has been shrinking for decades, it's not a new thing. Social mobility in the USA is very low currently. It's really hard to escape poverty.
> The system is, and always has been, predatory.
No, it doesn't need to be. It is because we allow it.
The USSR didn't stifle innovation any more than capitalism does. There's an enormous list of soviet innovations. Also: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4ZnHwc6TfB0
It's not inherently genocidal, there's nothing in the ideology that necessitates it. It's just that they decided to do so to have a quick industrialization, and it was not completely intentional (droughts, bad planning, etc made it worse).
Poverty and starvation however IS inherent to capitalism.
Poverty and starvation however IS inherent to capitalism.
The Holodomor was 100% an engineered famine designed to kill the Polish educated/semi-wealthy class. As a consequence it killed a lot of poor people to, but hey, it got the job done and communism is fine with collateral damage as long as the bourgeois are killed. Please don't parrot pro-communist propaganda talking points at me. You are literally apologizing for a genocide.
Yes, Using the bathroom that fits your gender = https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us.....lish/privilege
You know when you say 'you can ignore the right' and then constantly try to get the attention of people that try to ignore you it makes it obvious that you don't actually believe any of the gas-lighty bullshit you say.
I also think perhaps you should learn why we have sex segregated bathrooms yourself, as well as how absurd your hypotheticals sound. Not to mention that people without a penis, even, are in some cases forced to use the male restroom. Your position makes no sense and is based more on how you feel than anything else. Science isn't even on your side on this one.
I also think perhaps you should learn why we have sex segregated bathrooms yourself, as well as how absurd your hypotheticals sound. Not to mention that people without a penis, even, are in some cases forced to use the male restroom. Your position makes no sense and is based more on how you feel than anything else. Science isn't even on your side on this one.
Excuse me? At what point have I apologized for Nazis? I've defended peoples right to have an opinion, no matter how awful, because the notion of "thought crime" is repugnant and oppressive. I mean, by your logic civil rights shouldn't exist because that was an unpopular opinion at one time. I've done nothing but be insulting towards supremacists of all stripes. I debate people when I come into contact with views I disagree with and, if they are reasonable, seek to overcome them with logic and reason. I insult the shit out of ideologues because they don't care about fact, just feelings.
No, you defended people's violent actions resulting in murder because their victims you disagreed with. You painted Heather as a violent insane woman who was rightfully mowed down (along with other people I might add, though only she died).
The notion of 'thought crime' is repugnant - and your strawmanning to try to accuse me of them is even more so. What logical misstep occurred in order for you to now accuse me of not believing in civil rights? Also 'insult supremacists of all stripes' is a bit disingenuous to claim when you really mean that you believe 'ANTiFa AEr TeH rAEl Nathsiz'. Your entire belief system is based on false information that you refuse to accept is false - any information that contradicts you is 'left wing propaganda' and you use mental gymnastics (such as 'the deaths from capitalism don't count because it was just incidental and capitalism is not an ideology anyhow') to ignore counterpoints.
Also the 'facts, just feelings' shitspiro quote you'll be more than happy to work into your statements while rejecting all facts presented to you in favour of your 'feelings' as an 'enlightened centrist'. From a factual standpoint most of what you believe doesn't hold weight.
The notion of 'thought crime' is repugnant - and your strawmanning to try to accuse me of them is even more so. What logical misstep occurred in order for you to now accuse me of not believing in civil rights? Also 'insult supremacists of all stripes' is a bit disingenuous to claim when you really mean that you believe 'ANTiFa AEr TeH rAEl Nathsiz'. Your entire belief system is based on false information that you refuse to accept is false - any information that contradicts you is 'left wing propaganda' and you use mental gymnastics (such as 'the deaths from capitalism don't count because it was just incidental and capitalism is not an ideology anyhow') to ignore counterpoints.
Also the 'facts, just feelings' shitspiro quote you'll be more than happy to work into your statements while rejecting all facts presented to you in favour of your 'feelings' as an 'enlightened centrist'. From a factual standpoint most of what you believe doesn't hold weight.
That's a strawman. I stated her actions put her in the position to get hit by that car. If she had been peacefully protesting she would still be alive. You're engaging in victim worship and the oppression olympics. Her being dead doesn't excuse her actions that lead up to the event. By your logic a criminal who mugs someone and gets shot in the process is the victim in the situation. The reality is if the right and left want to attack each other, there will be bloodshed and I have zero sympathy for people who should frankly know better.
I mean, did it not occur to Heather or people like her (or you for that matter) to talk to the sorts of people who were at Charlottesville and attempt to persuade them to change their views? To maybe listen to WHY they feel the way they do and attempt to work out a constructive way to address their grievances instead of allowing them to continue down a path of hate? No, because that would require actual work.
I mean, did it not occur to Heather or people like her (or you for that matter) to talk to the sorts of people who were at Charlottesville and attempt to persuade them to change their views? To maybe listen to WHY they feel the way they do and attempt to work out a constructive way to address their grievances instead of allowing them to continue down a path of hate? No, because that would require actual work.
That isn't a strawman, that is exactly what I said you said - you blame her for getting killed.
Also, that second part is a massive strawman based on your assumptions that those you disagree with are evil, violent, and lazy. Did it not even cross your mind once that people tried? I, for example, reached out to several people on the right after getting death threats in the wake of the 2016 Presidential election in hopes of starting constructive dialogue. I was labeled a murderer for refusing to 'convert' and blocked by most of them. I'm also, right now, engaging with you only to have you refuse all constructive the conversation could have in favor of doubling down on things that are wrong.
Also, that second part is a massive strawman based on your assumptions that those you disagree with are evil, violent, and lazy. Did it not even cross your mind once that people tried? I, for example, reached out to several people on the right after getting death threats in the wake of the 2016 Presidential election in hopes of starting constructive dialogue. I was labeled a murderer for refusing to 'convert' and blocked by most of them. I'm also, right now, engaging with you only to have you refuse all constructive the conversation could have in favor of doubling down on things that are wrong.
I don't blame her for getting killed. I recognized her actions that lead to her death. It's like if someone starts a bar fight and gets stabbed to death - are they completely blameless because they died? Legally, it's irrelevant, but you know damn well if they hadn't of picked the fight they would be alive. A senseless death is just that, senseless.
Who the fuck labeled you a murderer? I'm in dire need of some context here.
Who the fuck labeled you a murderer? I'm in dire need of some context here.
Quite a bit:
Capitalism's nature.
The nature of fascism and Nazism.
The violence inherent to the far-right.
The nature, purpose, and mission of the SPLC.
What socialism believes and how broad of a term it is.
Several historic misconceptions, notably about LGBTQ rights under even statist communism.
Just among a few.
Capitalism's nature.
The nature of fascism and Nazism.
The violence inherent to the far-right.
The nature, purpose, and mission of the SPLC.
What socialism believes and how broad of a term it is.
Several historic misconceptions, notably about LGBTQ rights under even statist communism.
Just among a few.
Again, if you block someone and they've blocked you - and you've claimed that they can 'just ignore you' i.e. blocking - its probably not a good idea to keep responding to them in the most direct way that blocking will allow.
Also:
https://www.nature.com/news/sex-redefined-1.16943
https://medicalxpress.com/news/2015.....-identity.html
Science disagrees with you about your opinion on transgender individuals.
Also:
https://www.nature.com/news/sex-redefined-1.16943
https://medicalxpress.com/news/2015.....-identity.html
Science disagrees with you about your opinion on transgender individuals.
No, some agenda driven ideologues in the scientific community disagree with me. The majority of science agrees with biological essentialism. There are two sexes, intersex is not a special "third, fourth, fifth, etc" sex (particularly because they develop secondary sex characteristics specific to one sex). Gender is an CULTURAL CONSTRUCT with assigned roles that have some basis in biology (child rearing) that is not relevant in the developed world. Gender roles vary from society to society and differ dramatically in societies where Mazlowe's hierarchy of needs is focused on things like survival as opposed to higher orders like self-actualization.
All those "made up" genders are just a mix between male and female (including neither). That's why the meme "I identify as Apache attack helicopter" doesn't make sense. The expression "fourth gender" is very rare and refers just to one of the trans gender sides in some cultures. There's no such thing as "fifth gender".
Facebook recognizes 72 genders. Process that. And that's offensive to what's left of the Tumblr crowd because the math on their theoretical genders ranges from the upper thousands to literal infinity. The meme of the Apache attack helicopter exists to mock people who identify as a made up gender aka "transtrenders" people who don't suffer from gender dysphoria and are claiming to be an alternative gender for social status ie fetishizing a mental illness. And you're thinking of the Hidra's in India which is a "third gender" not a fourth. There is no mixture of male and female genders - you either identify as male or female. You are either biologically female or male. Even intersex people, rare as they are, fall on one side or the other. People can identify however they want because gender is purely performative. The trouble we run into is when ideologues make outrageous claims that there is "no such thing as biological sex" and then attempt to create laws that criminalize people who are capable of interpreting reality correctly (see Canada and NYC).
Antifa is largely made up of trust fund kids who don't work, congregate at starbucks all day, is predominately white (and ironically goes on and on about how evil the cis male hetero white patriarchy is), overly educated (with useless degrees) and their primary binding factor is that they are anarcho communists. Who behave exactly like fascists. Probably because they learned from history that if they fight like communists versus fascists the fascists will win 100% of the time, so, at least they're adaptable.
And they don't go break up nazi rallies. They label anyone right of Marx a nazi and use that as justification for violence. They openly oppose freedom of speech (yet expect that right will be preserved for them) and attempt to shut down people who are attempting to have a dialogue, primarily with violence. They attack innocent bystanders and specifically target journalists because they are afraid of being held accountable for their actions.
And they don't go break up nazi rallies. They label anyone right of Marx a nazi and use that as justification for violence. They openly oppose freedom of speech (yet expect that right will be preserved for them) and attempt to shut down people who are attempting to have a dialogue, primarily with violence. They attack innocent bystanders and specifically target journalists because they are afraid of being held accountable for their actions.
[citation needed]
While most are leftists, there's antifa people from all the political spectrum.
Antifa are not fascists, they are not the ones wanting to kill entire races and groups. They learned from history that fascism always rises when left unchecked, resulting in genocide, and they want to avoid exactly that. Nothing else.
While most are leftists, there's antifa people from all the political spectrum.
Antifa are not fascists, they are not the ones wanting to kill entire races and groups. They learned from history that fascism always rises when left unchecked, resulting in genocide, and they want to avoid exactly that. Nothing else.
The first video is just some stupid guys. Doesn't prove anything. Also, do you realize any person can call themselves "antifa"? There's no official organization of any sort.
In the second video, the black guy in the checkered shirt wasn't BLM. He was saying all night he would kill anyone that touched the statue or a cop. Said he was a crip. Formerly homeless and lived in the park and said the statue brought him peace because it was like living in a museum. And we don't even know if the other guy identified himself as antifa.
Is that all you got?
In the second video, the black guy in the checkered shirt wasn't BLM. He was saying all night he would kill anyone that touched the statue or a cop. Said he was a crip. Formerly homeless and lived in the park and said the statue brought him peace because it was like living in a museum. And we don't even know if the other guy identified himself as antifa.
Is that all you got?
"Are you trying to justify these masked art students attacking marginalized people."
Of course not! Quite the opposite. I'm defending that antifa ideals are not the reason they do stupid shit. The reason is that they're stupid. It should be obvious that I don't approve or like their stupid actions in any way.
Of course not! Quite the opposite. I'm defending that antifa ideals are not the reason they do stupid shit. The reason is that they're stupid. It should be obvious that I don't approve or like their stupid actions in any way.
People don't upload videos that look exactly the same as other 1000 ones. They upload noteworthy events, and not of all of them, like the times they protected people like Seth Wispelwey, Rebekah Menning, Brandy Daniels... Not everybody is recording with a camera all the time.
Are most antifa in the US stupid? I don't know, possibly. I don't even live there.
Are most antifa in the US stupid? I don't know, possibly. I don't even live there.
Omg I've seen that one before. It's pretty funny. The whole not knowing how to make a fist is pretty funny. The guy who sucker punched Richard Spencer didn't even throw a proper punch - he had a wrench hidden down his forearm and whacked him with it because of how soy laden he was. Incidentally that guy had an infantilization fetish and liked to be used as a human toilet. The heroes who are fighting muh Nazis indeed.
Comments