Did Charlottesvilel mean anything?

[Thumpalumpacus]

Not accusing anyone in particular of doing it.

Others, though, are -- and they're doing that as a smoke-screen. They're being called racist why? Because they're marching under swastika flags? Oh dear, cry me a river. Of course they're going to be called racist at that point, and they should grow a set of balls and own their opinions.

If I call someone racist, it's only because I've got the goods on them. If that discomfits them, that's not my problem, and I will not apologize for them being uncomfortable. At a certain point they have to put on their big-boy pants and venture into the arena of ideals, where words are the weapons. If they're afraid of that, okay -- let them go buy their silly tiki-torches while I and others like me point up the obvious ridiculousness of their bugbears.

Calling someone racist is not in and of itself a bad thing. Sometimes people are racist, and they need to be pointed out. If you're uncomfortable with doing that, that's you. It'd be nice if some of those little assholes would actually show up here for this "discussion" you long for, but oddly enough they're notable by their absence.

There is no discussion with supremacists because they do not want discussion. Get that through your head. They do not want to talk about their racism. They want to enforce it.

[bennyboy]

Is "Charlottesvilel" german for "Charlottesville?" People. . . I think we've found our nazi!

---

Apparently you didn't listen to what they were saying. Mostly white protestant religious racism. This is the "new" religious freedom of discrimination.

Stalin had a mustache.
Stalin was a communist.
Therefore, anyone with a mustache is a communist.

David Duke is a white supremacist.
David Duke is a protestant.
Therefore every protestant is a white supremacist.

It doesn't work.

That brings me to a question.  When that nazi fuck plowed into a crowd of people, I didn't hear much about the one nazi fuck.  I heard about how white supremacists had gone violent, and were so unconscionable, and had to be denounced.

But all I really saw is that those guys were for the most part marching around in their Halloween costumes with tiki torches.  How did it go from "That racist asshole" to "all racists are violent criminals"?

(btw I'm not arguing, I'm asking for credible info)

[Aroura]

Not accusing anyone in particular of doing it.

I know. You said it on a general way. I'm saying people, in general, don't really do that.
It's instead something people who are themselves racist seem to claim, in order to make it seem as if they have been wronged. Or people who are out to paint "social justice warriors" as a bunch of loud mouthed toddlers.

I don't think you are racist, so I find it distressing to see you using their buzz terms and reverse accusations, and wrongfully dismisding those standing up for social justice. This particular argument is a way of dismissing those calling out racist behavior or language, and it is both unfair and untrue.

I do agree more dialog and more education is needed, and we could teach people better ways of opening that dialog than "hey, that's racist and you are privilaged" as that probably tends to cause the accused to leave the conversation without actually considering if the accusation is correct, or the hurtful impact their words or behaviors are actually having. But it's extremely difficult to get a person to change behaviors let alone beliefs, and even the gentlest dialog is probably fruitless on the internet.

Why facts don't change our minds: a completely relevant and interesting read!
http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2017/0...-our-minds

[bennyboy]

Or people who are out to paint "social justice warriors" as a bunch of loud mouthed toddlers.

Me me! I think that. Absolutely. SJWs are waayyyyyyy more influential, and no more tolerant of opposing views, than actual nazis.

Yeah, I see potential friction and possible violence in a group of white men parading around in their Superman underoos. But those idiots aren't going to succeed in shutting down college campuses or harassing white kids who have dreads or like rap.

Here's the litmus test for fascism: if there are cultural views in place which CANNOT be discussed because they are known to be the right way of thinking-- if anyone who opposes them is instantly stigmatized and marginalized-- you've got fascism. And there are for sure views on race, gender, class and so on that meet that criterion, and the loud-mouthed assholes called SJWs are so eager for a pat on their heads that they are the spear tip for ignorance.

[Amarok]

LOl no

[Catholic_Lady]

Not accusing anyone in particular of doing it.

Others, though, are -- and they're doing that as a smoke-screen. They're being called racist why? Because they're marching under swastika flags? Oh dear, cry me a river. Of course they're going to be called racist at that point, and they should grow a set of balls and own their opinions.

If I call someone racist, it's only because I've got the goods on them. If that discomfits them, that's not my problem, and I will not apologize for them being uncomfortable. At a certain point they have to put on their big-boy pants and venture into the arena of ideals, where words are the weapons. If they're afraid of that, okay -- let them go buy their silly tiki-torches while I and others like me point up the obvious ridiculousness of their bugbears.

Calling someone racist is not in and of itself a bad thing. Sometimes people are racist, and they need to be pointed out. If you're uncomfortable with doing that, that's you. It'd be nice if some of those little assholes would actually show up here for this "discussion" you long for, but oddly enough they're notable by their absence.

There is no discussion with supremacists because they do not want discussion. Get that through your head. They do not want to talk about their racism. They want to enforce it.

White supremacists are already too far gone I'd say. My post was mainly about people you'd actually be around. As the example on my other post, if you're hanging out with someone who says/does something racist, I think just calling them a racist and checking out would be counter productive (not accusing anyone here of doing that). I think the best thing to do in a scenario like that would be to explain to them why you think it's racist and wrong.

Anyway, it really wasn't supposed to be a controversial comment.

[Brian37]

Is "Charlottesvilel" german for "Charlottesville?"  People. . . I think we've found our nazi!

---

Stalin had a mustache.
Stalin was a communist.
Therefore, anyone with a mustache is a communist.

David Duke is a white supremacist.
David Duke is a protestant.
Therefore every protestant is a white supremacist.

It doesn't work.

That brings me to a question.  When that nazi fuck plowed into a crowd of people, I didn't hear much about the one nazi fuck.  I heard about how white supremacists had gone violent, and were so unconscionable, and had to be denounced.

But all I really saw is that those guys were for the most part marching around in their Halloween costumes with tiki torches.  How did it go from "That racist asshole" to "all racists are violent criminals"?

(btw I'm not arguing, I'm asking for credible info)

"Not all KKK members or Neo Nazis get violent" 

Please tell me this is sarcasm?

A good mafia boss always knows how to get their minions to do their bidding without ending up with any credible evidence pointing at them.

It is the same tactic a street gang leader will do getting under age kids to do their dirty work. They know if the kid gets caught they are less likely to point the finger and wont get punished as harshly.

Shouting fire in a theater doesn't mean you actually lit one, but if people are taking you seriously when you do that, you can start a stampede. 

The KKK and Neo Nazis cannot be allowed to get away with, "I didn't tell them to do that". I it is the same tactic Islamic radicals use to get lone wolves to do something, inspire from a distance without a direct connection.

And the fact that after the fact one of the members of the day rally said he was not sorry she was dead says it all. The intent of the Charlottesville rally was to instigate conflict.

[Amarok]

So we have people defending white nationalists (Not bringing up the fact of what they were chanting while holding said torches ) By saying white nationalists  (an inherently violent ideology ) are not all bad . Amazing .

---

A group that started out as a bunch of  guys in costumes holding torches . Who didn't have a lot of power to start with . (despite the fact the Unite the right has lawyers and wealthy backers )

But violence was not the intent of the rally (despite the organizers like Mike Peinovich saying they wanted "blood to flow in the streets ") On his podcast The Right Stuff. This attack was not an unintended event . It was the whole fucking point of the rally.

[bennyboy]

"Not all KKK members or Neo Nazis get violent" 

Please tell me this is sarcasm?

A good mafia boss always knows how to get their minions to do their bidding without ending up with any credible evidence pointing at them.

It is the same tactic a street gang leader will do getting under age kids to do their dirty work. They know if the kid gets caught they are less likely to point the finger and wont get punished as harshly.

Shouting fire in a theater doesn't mean you actually lit one, but if people are taking you seriously when you do that, you can start a stampede. 

The KKK and Neo Nazis cannot be allowed to get away with, "I didn't tell them to do that". I it is the same tactic Islamic radicals use to get lone wolves to do something, inspire from a distance without a direct connection.

Again, I think you have to condemn people for what they actually do, not what you think they might do, or even what you think they probably did. If there is collusion toward a crime, you need an investigative unit to dig up the dirt, and then the feds can go in with arrest warrants.

What nobody yet has demonstrated is that the protesters at Charlotteville were actually doing more than marching around in their Superman underwear with Tiki torches, protesting against the removal of a statue which they didn't want removed.

I mean, I know they're contemptible fucks, but if that were a crime, 90% of Americans would be in jail right now. So what facts actually exist by which those people should be condemned?

---

So we have people defending white nationalists (Not bringing up the fact of what they were chanting while holding said torches ) By saying white nationalists  (an inherently violent ideology ) are not all bad . Amazing .

If you're responding to me, given the sensitivity of this issue I'd ask you to respond to what I actually say, not what you want to pretend I said. I'm not going to be demonized because you don't know how the quote system works.

What I said is I don't know if those white nationalists were actually doing anything criminal or violent. I don't know what they did or didn't chant, whether they did or didn't make physical threats.

If they were holding tiki torches and chanting "Keep our statue. Southern history matters," then I'd understand and I'd probably support them. If they were chanting, "Death to niggers! Burn them in their houses!" then I'd expect them to be jailed, and right quick at that.

I'm not supporting them. I think they're dicks. But if everyone I thought was a dick had to be in jail, then who'd be left to make me my bagels in the morning?

[Amarok]

So in other words your ignorant so i'm wrong . Calling them dicks understatement of the year . Claiming I need to prove a group who's very ideology is violent were being violent ..... What am I demonizing again

---

https://www.eurweb.com/2017/08/leaks-sho...ers-rally/

Hmm maybe because they were talking about driving cars into people ....