Being denied from one platform does not mean one is denied from all platforms.

Breitbart et al continue to use many platforms to put their ideological message out. They're not being censored.

If they were, we wouldn't know exactly what vile thing they're advocating for this time.

Their fanbase is the most obnoxious of all the SJW-archetypes: the Alt-Right SJW. Complete with their own alternative dictionary (and you thought custom pronouns were bad?) and successful propaganda machine (Breitbart).

Hell, they're calling for using government to establish safe spaces for themselves to, unironically, use as a place to criticize safe spaces (usually only those within the left).

Always amazed at the "What?! If the general public hears me call Blacks 'niggers', they'll become angry with me? Political correctness has gone too far!" To some people, the world is their oyster and everyone else is trying to steal it.

The more you complain about all the things that "pc culture" isn't, the more plainly out yourself as exactly the type of person pc culture should be applied to. This nonsense resonates with you because you want to believe that it's true. You want to believe that any old place a bigot may go and say bigoted things is a "public space", and that bigots have a right to be bigoted at those places. You wan't to believe that any blowback a bigot gets for saying bigoted things is "censorship". You, clearly, want to believe that it's people telling bigots to stop being bigoted....rather than bigots being bigoted...that's a problem in america.

Now sure, it's a bunch of bullshit fed to you by bigots and their proxies...but you ate it up, didn't you.

(February 11, 2017 at 2:31 pm)Gawdzilla Sama Wrote: Actually, only the niggers, spics, wops, chinks and squawmen are still doing the PC thing. 

Unfortunately, there's some truth to this, even if it's stated with less offensive wording

PC is still big in GLBT communities.  Daring to question social justice groups in trans circles will make you a huge pariah; I've experienced it.  I don't live in those circles, but I have to imagine there are black and hispanic communities who feel the same way (or, at very least, feel that way about their own group).  Feminism nowadays is basically nothing but out-of-control PC culture.  And so many people can be so off-putting about these issues that it drives a lot of other people away from the cause.  Hell, it sometimes drives people within the group away from the cause.

And this is a shame because there are legitimate issues that need to be dealt with there.  I mean, I'll be the first to admit that there are people who are using social justice buzzwords to justify bad behavior, but there are also legitimate issues.  Black people make up a majority of prison populations, women are still a heavy minority in positions of corporate or political power and GLBT communities have a higher rate of suicide and substance abuse than straight communities.  Yes, these are real issues, but so many of us have gotten so caught up on the "You have _______ privilege so you suck!" ideology that we aren't making any progress with any of them.  We want to have condescending lectures towards everyone who isn't in our group and lose sight of what we should want: change.  

Truth is, if we ever want to make progress on these real issues, progressive circles need to do better at talking about these issues without being jerks.  Because, otherwise.... well, this was the election cycle where "White male" was infamously turned into an insult and look how that turned out.  If it continues to be an insult from progressives towards conservatives, the "white males" that we're insulting aren't going to want to help us.

(February 11, 2017 at 6:39 pm)TaraJo Wrote:

(February 11, 2017 at 2:31 pm)Gawdzilla Sama Wrote: Actually, only the niggers, spics, wops, chinks and squawmen are still doing the PC thing. 

Unfortunately, there's some truth to this, even if it's stated with less offensive wording

PC is still big in GLBT communities.  Daring to question social justice groups in trans circles will make you a huge pariah; I've experienced it.  I don't live in those circles, but I have to imagine there are black and hispanic communities who feel the same way (or, at very least, feel that way about their own group).  Feminism nowadays is basically nothing but out-of-control PC culture.  And so many people can be so off-putting about these issues that it drives a lot of other people away from the cause.  Hell, it sometimes drives people within the group away from the cause.

And this is a shame because there are legitimate issues that need to be dealt with there.  I mean, I'll be the first to admit that there are people who are using social justice buzzwords to justify bad behavior, but there are also legitimate issues.  Black people make up a majority of prison populations, women are still a heavy minority in positions of corporate or political power and GLBT communities have a higher rate of suicide and substance abuse than straight communities.  Yes, these are real issues, but so many of us have gotten so caught up on the "You have _______ privilege so you suck!" ideology that we aren't making any progress with any of them.  We want to have condescending lectures towards everyone who isn't in our group and lose sight of what we should want: change.  

Truth is, if we ever want to make progress on these real issues, progressive circles need to do better at talking about these issues without being jerks.  Because, otherwise.... well, this was the election cycle where "White male" was infamously turned into an insult and look how that turned out.  If it continues to be an insult from progressives towards conservatives, the "white males" that we're insulting aren't going to want to help us.

"I'm a white male and I approve this message"

There are outliers on both sides of the issues. I don't think any group or 'movement' as it were should be defined by its most vocal, assholish outliers.

(February 11, 2017 at 7:06 pm)SteelCurtain Wrote: There are outliers on both sides of the issues. I don't think any group or 'movement' as it were should be defined by its most vocal, assholish outliers.

Agreed.  The asshole extremists are only part of the problem.  We also have the problem in that we don't have enough of the big voices who are able to reasonably communicate reasonable issues.  

Remember MLK?  He was a master at communicating the problems black communities had with racial injustices without being a jerk.  He made it loud and clear that racism, not white people, was his enemy.  He repeatedly called white people his brothers and sisters.  It's gotten to be, unfortunately, rare to see leaders in civil rights take that kind of tone anymore.  And it doesn't help that the increasingly partisan liberal media has been jumping on the jerk bandwagon.  I mean, seriously, see what they have to say about white people on Buzzfeed or MTV News.  

Admittedly, part of that is because, when someone is being an outrageous jerk, they tend to draw attention to themselves.  Quiet, reasonable, intelligent people tend to unfortunately be ignored.

I think the time has passed though, where minorities are content or willing to treat racism and bigotry like some abstract concept that has no originator or purveyor.

It is hard to tell a community that continues to be oppressed and victimized that it has to keep being nice and reverent to its oppressors in order to make change.

(February 11, 2017 at 7:46 pm)SteelCurtain Wrote: I think the time has passed though, where minorities are content or willing to treat racism and bigotry like some abstract concept that has no originator or purveyor.

It is hard to tell a community that continues to be oppressed and victimized that it has to keep being nice and reverent to its oppressors in order to make change.

Being nice to oppressors is one thing.  Making enemies out of people who should be allies, or at least neutral parties, is another. 

We've seen some of that in atheist communities.  I mean, atheists tend to be allied more with leftie politics, seeing as how we don't exactly tend to get along with the religious fundamentalism that goes on in right wing circles.  Then PZ Myers, Rebecca Watson came in, started telling all the atheists we're a bunch of misogynists and rape apologists and, suddenly, I start seeing more and more libertarian identified atheists.  Which tends to mean they're atheists, but they don't vote with progressives; after all, the progressives are the ones calling them misogynists all the time.

I've been watching it happen in gamer circles, too.  4 years ago, gamers were a pretty politically neutral bunch, politically speaking.  I would have thought it would be easy to turn gamers liberal since we don't exactly want religious fundamentalists to start dictating how games are made, but instead we get the opposite: authoritarians on the left side are telling us the proper way to enjoy gaming.  Zoey Quinn, Anita Sarkeesian and their whole crew came in, told gamers that we're all a bunch of shitty misogynist neckbeards who live in our mothers basement.  And the progressive media went along with them.  Know who didn't go along with them?  Milo Yiannopoulos.  Guess how that worked out come election time?  Gamers, who just wanted to be left alone to play their games were turned into a wing of the alt-right by liberal bullies.  

And the thing is, I can see the progressives points.  I mean, there do tend to be more men than women in most atheist circles and, yeah, it was worse than this 10 years ago.  And, yeah, when I go into a gamestop or Vintage Stock (a retro/used video game chain) or pretty much any gaming environment, it's a sausage fest up in there.  There are gender imbalances there and dealing with them isn't a bad thing at all, but what we've been getting from progressives is an example on how NOT to fix those problems.

(February 11, 2017 at 1:40 pm)vorlon13 Wrote: A sad future is based on a sad past.

Palmieri might be spilling the beans to some, but I can't say I'm surprised:

(from Washington Examiner where you can read the rest)

Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton may have been the least surprised person in her campaign when President Trump defeated her for the White House, a top aide said.
Jennifer Palmieri, the communications director for Clinton's campaign, told CBS News that Clinton was saddened by the defeat but not surprised.


Makes the continuing protests look a tad misplaced.  Maybe actions against some DNC assets would get things looking better for 2018 than what they're doing now.

I don't think the protest are misplaced at all.  I 100% believe this is more about the man in office than some ideological argument.  Do you think half/third/any of these protest would be taking place had someone like Jeb Bush, Marco Rubio, or John Kasich had been elected President?

What's funny is to see all the never Trump republicans act like he's some unholy trinity of Kim Kardashian, Richard Nixon, and Jesus.

(February 10, 2017 at 2:42 pm)Neo-Scholastic Wrote: I got the sense from the above post that calling a spade a spade referred to something other than a card analogy. Was that the case?

That's because it's a digging tool analogy. You've two main types of digging tools, shovels (wide boss with a leaf shaped curve) and spade (narrow boss with straight edges). That's where the analogy comes from, and the card suit also derives from the digging tool.

---

(February 11, 2017 at 12:03 am)TaraJo Wrote: The basic rule to politics is this: whenever the people like things the way they are or they just don't want change, they vote for the party that's already in power.  When they want change, they vote for the other guy.  Clinton lost certain key states because people in the rust belt wanted change.

Your hypothesis founders on the rock that is the fact that Trump got the exact same vote as Mittens and McCain before him. He idin't bring new voters into the party, he didn't change the deomgraphics of the party, he did nothing to change the Republitraitor base.

Trump "won" because the Republitraitors' "supress the vote" operation was more effective than the Democrats' "get out the vote operation". While GotV was probably worth 2 to 3 million votes, Crosscheck, illegal voter ID laws, and plain simple not counting votes in Democrat precents was worth 10 million votes and more.