Political Thread Of Fail And AIDS (Geeto ahead!)

[RedRocket1647545505]

Do you read anything I post? You are like a goldfish sometimes. I've posted proof twice in this thread that they are growing. It's even in the link in the post you are responding to with the above quote.

 

So how does one keep these groups from growing? I don't want them proliferating either, but how do you do that? Hate is an idea, so I'm not sure how you prevent it. Don't talk about it as much? Talk about it more? Do we start censoring people and their free speech? Perhaps increasing things like Affirmative Action and adding a few more things like the BET channel and the United Negro College Fund will help out race relations in this country?

[RedRocket1647545505]

This is OK?

 

http://www.cnn.com/2017/08/18/us/unmasking-antifa-anti-fascists-hard-left/index.html

[BStowers023]

ANTIFA = cowards who won't show their face

[Geeto67]

ANTIFA = cowards who won't show their face

 

So let's talk about this for a second because as usual you have an opinion without understanding what's in play.

 

One of the bigger issues nobody seems to be talking about is the freedom to privacy and what are the boundaries.

 

Freedom of speech is pretty clear: you are free to say anything you want without government interference (with very limited exceptions) but you have to still accept the consequences of how private citizens may judge you.

 

But in the last 50 or so years your rights to privacy have sort of shrunk. Well the rights haven't shrunk per se, more like the scope of the public has broadened and your methods for maintaining your privacy have shrunk.

In the olden days if you were in public, unless you made the national news, your public persona was pretty much restricted to being local. You had to kind of work really hard or get really lucky to get national exposure. Now however, everything you do in public has the potential to be globally viewed. This means that the world is a lot less forgiving for your mistakes. 50 years ago the social ramifications were pretty predictable - your neighbors would judge you, talk about your dumb ass when drunk at cocktail parties, and if you moved or died all was pretty much forgotten. Now you have to live with anybody with an internet connection having the ability to discover your mistake, your family has to love with it, your kids, and if you die they go on living with it pretty much for as long as there is an internet. Your only ability to reclaim the right is to obscure your identity, but there are some very specific laws and limiting about how you can do that.

 

 

I bring this up because of the recent activity of posting the identities of the white supremacists in order to get them fired or keep them from holding jobs. Personally I don't give a shit what happens to those assholes but those assholes have families and kids who do end up as unfair victims of this activity even if they are not complicit in them. If they want to waive this right they can, but I don't think it is cowardice if anybody involved in this controversy wants to obscure their identity for the sake of their family.

[Geeto67]

So how does one keep these groups from growing? I don't want them proliferating either, but how do you do that? Hate is an idea, so I'm not sure how you prevent it. Don't talk about it as much? Talk about it more? Do we start censoring people and their free speech? Perhaps increasing things like Affirmative Action and adding a few more things like the BET channel and the United Negro College Fund will help out race relations in this country?

 

To be honest I don't know, that's kind of where the focus need to be for the future. In the past the way is was suppressed was national attention and the heavy hand of law enforcement. But that drove the more extreme groups underground and hardened their resolved, it just cleared out all the on the fence people.

 

The recent surge is mostly driven by islamaphobia and xenophobia as possible explanations for societal ills. The sad part is they are usually not the cause of those ills but are a convinent scape goat. Technology is the root cause of some of the problems that illegal immigrants usually get blamed for. Hunter Thompson gave this interview in the 60's about the hells angels, but I think there is a lot we can apply to current groups that feel like outsiders. The thing he says that is the most haunting to me is "the people who are most affected are in the position to least understand why":

 

[LJ]

So let's talk about this for a second because as usual you have an opinion without understanding what's in play.

 

One of the bigger issues nobody seems to be talking about is the freedom to privacy and what are the boundaries.

 

Freedom of speech is pretty clear: you are free to say anything you want without government interference (with very limited exceptions) but you have to still accept the consequences of how private citizens may judge you.

 

But in the last 50 or so years your rights to privacy have sort of shrunk. Well the rights haven't shrunk per se, more like the scope of the public has broadened and your methods for maintaining your privacy have shrunk.

In the olden days if you were in public, unless you made the national news, your public persona was pretty much restricted to being local. You had to kind of work really hard or get really lucky to get national exposure. Now however, everything you do in public has the potential to be globally viewed. This means that the world is a lot less forgiving for your mistakes. 50 years ago the social ramifications were pretty predictable - your neighbors would judge you, talk about your dumb ass when drunk at cocktail parties, and if you moved or died all was pretty much forgotten. Now you have to live with anybody with an internet connection having the ability to discover your mistake, your family has to love with it, your kids, and if you die they go on living with it pretty much for as long as there is an internet. Your only ability to reclaim the right is to obscure your identity, but there are some very specific laws and limiting about how you can do that.

 

 

I bring this up because of the recent activity of posting the identities of the white supremacists in order to get them fired or keep them from holding jobs. Personally I don't give a shit what happens to those assholes but those assholes have families and kids who do end up as unfair victims of this activity even if they are not complicit in them. If they want to waive this right they can, but I don't think it is cowardice if anybody involved in this controversy wants to obscure their identity for the sake of their family.

 

You do not and never have had any right to privacy in public

[Geeto67]

You do not and never have had any right to privacy in public

 

Agreed.

 

public used to mean your local town. Now it means anywhere with an internet connection. Can't blame people for wanting to dial that back a little through anonymity.

[Supplicium]

so they are protesting the christopher columbus statue downtown calling for it to be removed. lol people need to get a job

[BStowers023]

The left literally complain and protest something new every month. It's hard to take any of them seriously when they keep pulling this shit

[10phone2]

I'm going to stomp my feet until I get what I want and then I am going to stomp about something else that doesn't change anything. While people are being killed left and right in lower income neighborhoods and were going to ignore it because it doesn't drive votes.

 

This woman gets it

Edited August 20, 2017 by 10phone2

[LJ]

I agree that we should replace the columbus statue with one of someone way more meaningful and important to the city

[Furloaf]

This woman gets it

 

Racist.

[Geeto67]

The left literally complain and protest something new every month. It's hard to take any of them seriously when they keep pulling this shit

 

Unlike you who constantly complains about the left but also does literally nothing about anything you piss and moan about. At least they are trying. What have you done lately for government action you don't agree with.

 

 

 

I'm going to stomp my feet until I get what I want and then I am going to stomp about something else that doesn't change anything. While people are being killed left and right in lower income neighborhoods and were going to ignore it because it doesn't drive votes.

 

I'll just let the civil rights movement know all their protests didn't change anything.:dumb:

 

Seriously though, we have talked about this in the past: the public demonstration protest is part of a larger campaign against something. Government moves slow and requires constant pressure, any one singular act isn't usually going to change anything, collectively however they do. In addition to being a public display of numbers, the public protest also serves as a morale booster, a networking event, helps with fund raising, and helps drum up publicity. When coupled with letter writing campaigns, lobbying, and various other public activities is how the people make their voice heard in the system.

[ODoyle]

Seriously though, we have talked about this in the past: the public demonstration protest is part of a larger campaign against something. Government moves slow and requires constant pressure, any one singular act isn't usually going to change anything, collectively however they do. In addition to being a public display of numbers, the public protest also serves as a morale booster, a networking event, helps with fund raising, and helps drum up publicity. When coupled with letter writing campaigns, lobbying, and various other public activities is how the people make their voice heard in the system.

 

While I agree protesting is needed and works.

 

pro·test

noun

noun: protest; plural noun: protests

ˈprōˌtest

1.

a statement or action expressing disapproval of or objection to something.

 

What the left is consistently doing seems more like this...

 

ri·ot

ˈrīət

noun

1.

a violent disturbance of the peace by a crowd.

 

There is a difference between protesting and making your point and gathering just to cause trouble, throw piss bottles and have an agenda to fuck shit up.

 

Maybe I would take them seriously if they would start acting seriously.

[SpaceGhost]

Sorry, hate speech is not protected under the first amendment.

 

"In 1942, the Supreme Court ruled that "fighting words" are not protected under the First Amendment. The Court defines fighting words as "those which by their very utterance inflict injury or tend to incite an immediate breach of the peace."

 

Huffington Post reporter Christopher Mathias tweeted a video of demonstrators yelling, "Fuck you, faggots at counterprotesters:

 

https://mobile.twitter.com/letsgomathias/status/896379733050634240/video/1

 

A few hours later, Washington Post reporter Joe Heim said he heard demonstrators chanting, "Go the fuck back to Africa," and the n-word at a black woman across the street.

 

Constitutional law experts say these last two examples may not be protected forms of speech.

 

"You could make the case that it was an insulting epithet, obviously a slur and racist comment that would provoke someone to retaliate," said Caroline Mala Corbin, a constitutional law professor at the University of Miami.

 

When "fighting words" became exempt from protection under the Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire ruling, it was based on the idea that such language did nothing to further public discourse, and instead inflicted harm on people. Based on that, Mala Corbin says use of "faggot" and the n-word at Saturday's demonstration would clearly fit this category of unprotected speech.

Edited August 20, 2017 by Benjamin

[SpaceGhost]

Also to continue to call anyone leftist for protesting white nataionalism, neo-nazis, and the KKK, shows me all I need to know about you. I know of several republicans that have and are currently protesting these groups. These people are left, middle, and right. There is only one side here.

 

http://www.dailywire.com/sites/default/files/mitt_romney_antifa_tweet.jpg

[BStowers023]

Unlike you who constantly complains about the left but also does literally nothing about anything you piss and moan about. At least they are trying. What have you done lately for government action you don't agree with.

 

Does voting count?

[Geeto67]

Does voting count?

 

It does but very little. It's like the leas amount someone can do and still claim to be doing "something."

[BStowers023]

So I guess a group of people protested to have the Christopher Columbus statue removed over the weekend? So why all of the sudden are these statues a huge deal? Serious question.

[Geeto67]

So I guess a group of people protested to have the Christopher Columbus statue removed over the weekend? So why all of the sudden are these statues a huge deal? Serious question.

 

Confederate Statutes/The confederate flag/Christopher Columbus have been an issue for over 30 years at least. I remember when I was in high school in the early 1990's all the publicity calling for the removal of the confederate state flags, specifically the Georgia State Flag (which was eventually changed in 2001). In the 1960's/70's there were movements to re-appropriate the confederate battle flag for non-racist connotations (ever wonder how it ended up on the dukes of hazard in prime time TV?) but it didn't work.

 

As far as the statutes are concerned the majority of those statutes were erected during two time periods: The Jim Crow Era and the Civil Rights Era. They were designed as statements opposing equality of black people in this country that hid behind "heritage" as a reason for commemorating literally 100 years later. Removing the statutes has been a long ongoing campaign since they went up, but if you wonder whether white supremacy has been an issue in government remember - hundreds of local governments allowed the Daughters of the Confederacy to fund and erect statutes commemorating some pretty loathsome individuals (like Nathan Bedford Forrest) knowing full well that it was a counter protest to the 1960's civil rights movement and in support of both slavery and the southern "Lost Cause".

 

So they aren't a "new issue" per se. So why now? Couple of reasons:

 

- The internet. The "Heritage" issue has always been the shield people in favor of these statutes hide behind, and if one did not have access to information about how frequently they went up, how they were paid for, or why they were erected then it was hard to challenge, esp since the DoC is a private organization not keen on sharing records. however, having a national network that allows public records searches shows has helped both to prove the ulterior motive of their erection but also make people more informed about it.

 

- The recent rise of white supremacy. Generally speaking statutes and flags get little press. They are purely symbolic and don't really help to drive economic growth or stem poverty. So they tend to get little political attention unless there is a reason to give them attention. The recent rise and public demonstrations of white supremacy have made these statutes an easy way for politicians in power to cater to a much larger base who would look favorably on them for resisting white supremacy. Just by being more vocal and bold than usual those supporting "confederate heritage" may have actually hurt themselves.

 

regarding Christopher Columbus - well this is a different story. CC was largely a forgotten historical footnote for centuries. It was only during racial backlash against italian immigrants in the 1800's did he start to receive any recognition as a way of combating that anti-Italian bigotry (along with Amerigo Vespucci). Washington Irving, the writer of sleepy hollow and other works of fiction, wrote a biography in 1828 that was probably his greatest work of fiction yet because it made CC seem like a pioneer in round earth theory, a rebel against the catholic church, and not the petty rape-y tyrant that he was in real life. His image got co-opted into national pride and patriotism and like anything that is wrong but accepted it took decades to undo the damage. The movement to disassociate CC with the founding of this country started in earnest in the 1980's at the state level. Although it is still a national holiday, a number of states don't recognize it anymore.

 

By the way it isn't an issue or in dispute that he was a horrible person - Spain took all monetary rights granted to him away when word of his exploits reached back to them and there was litigation regarding it for 200 years.

 

TL;DR: American really didn't care about the effect symbols of oppression had on minority groups like black people and Native Americans until recently, and only cares recently as an easy way to gain political favor in battling white supremacy.

[10phone2]

Well the Antifa manual was just released:

http://i.imgur.com/NdIgDKH.jpg

[Geeto67]

That is hilarious.

 

You don't believe it is real do you?

[10phone2]

ehhh 50/50 on it.

[Geeto67]

seriously? even 50/50 on it? Did you read the "New World Order Page"? AntiFa Regulators? Microchips? establishing a precentage color threshold to use the n word? I mean come on....

[BStowers023]

If that's legit, ANTIFA is just like a lot of who have eyes thought it was. An anti-white male movement. What a fucking joke.

 

 

Now let's hear Kerry's 8 paragraph explanation on why hating white males is justified.