Nazis showing up at places uninvited.

[The 12th Commandment]

18 minutes ago, Dan T. said:

 

I tend to agree with you, but twa's drive-by, half-baked, 3 or 4 word utterances do a disservice to "his side."  They are troll posts.  They do break up the "circle jerks of righteousness," [I like that phrase!] but if we're hungry for sustenance from the right wing, he's serving up rancid baloney sandwiches. 

 

He can do better.  I've seen it.  But only on very rare occasions.  Heartfelt, thought-provoking posts from twa seem to be rarer than the upcoming solar eclipse.

What I've noticed, and I address this to @Mr. Sinister too, is that when he doesn't have a valid take, that's when the trollish 3 or 4 word utterances prevail.  It's kinda his tell.  That has indeed been very frequent lately.

 

I don't mean to take the thread off topic and make it about our buddy.  I like a lot of people who have what I consider to be really ****ed up views in real life.  It's pretty much impossible, where I live, not to.  It's a little sad maybe, that that's the case, but life is imperfect.

Edited August 16, 2017 by KAOSkins

[AsburySkinsFan]

5 hours ago, Spaceman Spiff said:

 

And @twa come on, man.  You can admit that the guy you voted for is a ****up and a racist.  Doesn't make you less of a conservative.  

Refusing to admit it does, refusing to criticize does, staunchly digging in his heels and still pretending that the Racist in Chief is still the better option does. 

 

Hell Reagan knew how to do this...THIS is how a Conservative does it...at the NAACP Convention no less...the one Trump skipped. 

 

5 hours ago, Dan T. said:

 

He can do better.  I've seen it.  But only on very rare occasions.  Heartfelt, thought-provoking posts from twa seem to be rarer than the upcoming solar eclipse.

Indeed, it seems that the sun has set on the days of thoughtful active engagement. I'm not sure what changed, but I miss the guy who would actually engage rather than passive aggressive drive-bys.

Edited August 16, 2017 by AsburySkinsFan

[StillUnknown]

 

[Destino]

Back on topic please, everyone.  

 

 @twa no more trolling, it's best if you stay out of this thread.

@AsburySkinsFan it's not lost on me that you basically summoned TWA to this thread just to beat him over the head.  

 

 

[Mr. Sinister]

29 minutes ago, No Excuses said:

 

Why now? We knew exactly what Trump was. And many social knuckledraggers like twa voted for him anyways. 

 

Nvm

Edited August 16, 2017 by Mr. Sinister

[Larry]

Deleted.  Less discussion about a poster needed.  

 

Edited August 16, 2017 by Larry

[Dont Taze Me Bro]

Edit:  I just saw there is another thread for the statues and the article on gov. Roy Cooper calling for the removal in NC was already posted.

 

Edited August 16, 2017 by Dont Taze Me Bro

[twa]

53 minutes ago, AsburySkinsFan said:

YOU VOTED FOR HIM.

 

Technically yes.....and against him.

And given the same choices would do so again. 

 

and what else is new

 

add

OK , I'll leave the thread

Edited August 16, 2017 by twa

[LadySkinsFan]

Here's a thought.

 

If Trump doesn't like losers as he's often stated, then why does he support white supremacists, Nazis, and the KKK? I mean, these are all losers! 

 

Of course, this is sort of a rhetorical question because Trump is a long time racist as exemplified by his rental policies not to rent to Blacks, for which he was fined by the Federal government.

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

My politics should be obvious at this point. However, for reasons I can't explain, my favorite political writers are almost always on the Right. I've become a particular fan of Kevin Williamson lately (who is probably more libertarian than Conservative). He's probably the best pure writer working in this field right now.

 

His article today is pretty spectacular.

 

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/450501/white-nationalists-alt-right-vague-grievances-what-do-they-want

 

What does an angry white boy really want? “A girlfriend,” comes the mocking answer, and there’s probably more to that than mockery. The proprietor of one of the nation’s premier websites for neo-Nazi knuckleheads advised his colleagues in Charlottesville that, after the protest — which included a murder — “random girls will want to have sex with you.” I ran this proposition past a few random girls, and I suspect that the apfelstrudelführers are going to go home disappointed. There are many shades of white, and Mom’s-basement white is the least popular crayon in the box.

 

Of course we should mock them, criticize them, lament them, and, in the case of James Alex Fields Jr., the trust-funder from Ohio charged in the death of Heather Heyer, prosecute them. What does James Alex Fields Jr. want? A transcript of a 911 call from his mother describes him beating her after she told him to stop playing a particular video game. She is disabled and uses a wheelchair. That wasn’t the only 911 call she made in fear of her son.

 

The angry white boys do not have a serious political agenda. They don’t have any straightforward demands like the Teamsters or PETA do, and they do not have a well-developed ideological position like the Communists do, though it would be inaccurate to say that they lack an ideology entirely. Their agenda is their anger, an anger that is difficult to understand. Middle-class white men in the United States of America in anno Domini 2017 have their problems, to be sure. Life is full of little disappointments. But their motive is not to be found in their exterior circumstances, which are pretty good.

 

Maybe too good: A great many of these young men have an interest in evolutionary psychology and evolutionary sociology — they like to think of themselves as “alpha males,” as though they were living in a chimpanzee troop — but it never occurs to them to consider their own status as rejects and failed men in that context. Online fantasy lives notwithstanding, random girls do not want to have sex with them. How do we know this? Because they are carrying tiki torches in a giant dork parade in Charlottesville. There’s no prom queen waiting at home. If we credit their own sociobiological model, they are the superfluous males who would have been discarded, along with their genetic material, by the pitiless state of nature. The fantasy of proving that they are something else is why they dream of violence and confrontation. They are the products of the soft liberal-democratic society they hold in contempt — and upon which they depend, utterly. James Alex Fields Jr. is angry at the world, and angry at his mother, probably for the same reason.

 

What does an angry white boy want? The fact that they get together to play dress-up — to engage in a large and sometimes murderous game of cowboys and Indians — may give us our answer. They want to be someone other than who they are. That’s the great irony of identity politics: They seek identity in the tribe because they are failed individuals. They are a chain composed exclusively of weak links. What they are engaged in isn’t politics, but theater: play-acting in the hopes of achieving catharsis. Their online personas — knights, Vikings, reincarnations of Charles Martel — will be familiar enough to anybody with a Dungeons and Dragons nerd in his life. But sometimes, role-playing around a card table isn’t enough: Sometimes, you need a stage and an audience. In the theater, actors and audience both can forget ourselves for an hour or two. Under the soft glow of the tiki torches, these angry white boys can be something else — for a night.

 

 

[The Evil Genius]

 

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

I don't think you can necessarily draw conclusions about the motivations behind Confederate monuments in a specific sense. There was a movement to honor the Lost Cause from the precise moment Lee surrendered.

 

It seems to me that the more grandiose monuments started occurring when municipalities actually began having some money again. The Monument Ave Lee statue in Richmond went up in the 1890s for example. It also seems that while Birth of a Nation had an impact, a lot of this really picked up in the 20s and 30s when erecting monuments of all kinds was truly a national movement.

 

I'm sure there are specific examples of Confederate iconography being an F-You. The Georgia state flag change in '56 is the most obvious example. But the South has been seeking to redeem the war in ways large and small since April 1865.

 

 

[DogofWar1]

There was an article posted here about how the Alt-Right's rebranding effort for White Supremecists has failed, but nothing demonstrated that more than Trump's attempt yesterday to brand antifa as "alt-left."

 

The goal of the rebranding to alt-right was to clean up the image of white supremecists.  That Trump is now using a mirror term as a negative just demonstrates that the negative perception of the alt-right has won.

 

That, in my mind, is good.  Them being called out for what they are is important.

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

I disagree. I think the danger in what Trump did is that he separated the "good" alt right from the White Supremacists. So, going forward, anyone slightly less odious than Richard Spencer can push an alt-right agenda while saying they are the good alt right.

[Larry]

3 minutes ago, DogofWar1 said:

The goal of the rebranding to alt-right was to clean up the image of white supremecists.  That Trump is now using a mirror term as a negative just demonstrates that the negative perception of the alt-right has won.

 

 

I was admiring the irony of the guy on Fox who was trying to defend the folks holding Nazi flags by comparing the counter-protesters to Nazis.  

 

Even Nazi defenders use Nazi as an insult.  

 

[Larry]

3 minutes ago, Lombardi's_kid_brother said:

I disagree. I think the danger in what Trump did is that he separated the "good" alt right from the White Supremacists. So, going forward, anyone slightly less odious than Richard Spencer can push an alt-right agenda while saying they are the good alt right.

 

But we've already seen that type of reasoning used.  For decades.  

 

Recently, there were a whole bunch of people with perfectly straight faces, asserting that they weren't prejudiced for saying that they don;t think gays should be allowed to marry, because well, they don;t think being gay should be criminal.  

 

For some time, there's been a whole lot of people who "aren't prejudiced" because they were willing to admit that some discriminatory position is wrong, after that side has lost that fight.  

 

I think that's kinda where some of the anger that Trump tapped into, has come from.  The folks who have "aren't prejudiced", but who feel like hey, they gave up on this fight (after fighting to their final defeat), and then gave up on this other fight (after they finally lost), and dammit, they're tired of losing.  (But still won;t admit that it's the wrong side.)  

[Llevron]

4 minutes ago, Lombardi's_kid_brother said:

I disagree. I think the danger in what Trump did is that he separated the "good" alt right from the White Supremacists. So, going forward, anyone slightly less odious than Richard Spencer can push an alt-right agenda while saying they are the good alt right.

 

He tried, sure. But I think he largely failed. I know that is really up to the people most susceptible to this kind of radicalization, but the majority of the county at least pretended to see through the bull**** there.

 

I need to know who these not racist people are that are ok with protesting alongside the KKK as they terrorize a neighborhood. They are gonna have to prove that one, not just say it. 

[DogofWar1]

11 minutes ago, Lombardi's_kid_brother said:

I disagree. I think the danger in what Trump did is that he separated the "good" alt right from the White Supremacists. So, going forward, anyone slightly less odious than Richard Spencer can push an alt-right agenda while saying they are the good alt right.

Perhaps, but they all march together.  That's what kills them in the public eye, rightfully.

 

Further, I think it does make things harder for them.  Their goal was to push the overton window to allow them to climb in.  Trump is trying to salvage them but frankly, I don't think he can create a distinction between the good alt-right and the bad one.  There is no distinction, and people realize that.

 

It's like "good KKK" or "good Nazis."  Not gonna fly.

 

The public has pretty much fully seen what the alt right is, and condemned them.  The overton window is shrinking and they're being left out, but equally important, is that the slightly less extreme right is now, once again, right on that edge of the window.  They are less acceptable than a week ago.

[LD0506]

Ok, tell me I wasn't the only one that had to go look up what the overton window was.....................

 

Trying to explain some of this to my son this morning, my take was that the "alt-right" was just that, a rebranding so as to deny any connection or responsibility for previous atrocities, the "bad optics" thing, but there really is no such thing as an "alt-left" because they don't have any of that to apologize for. Sheepish looks for dumbassery? yeah, that but there isn't any "This isn't your father's Auschwitz" kinda spinning needed.

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

22 minutes ago, DogofWar1 said:

Perhaps, but they all march together.  That's what kills them in the public eye, rightfully.

 

 

They don't all march together. Bannon proudly stated that he created a platform for the alt-right, but he'll denounce Spencer (who created the phrase) if it allows him to keep his job in the damn White House.

 

Breitbart isn't pro-Nazi (at least not explicitly), but it still has a "black crime" section.

 

Hopefully, this threading of the needle won't work. But a President attempting it is pretty damn frightening.

[visionary]

 

 

 

 

 

[Barney B]

Monmouth has Trump's approve/disapprove at 41/59 right now. 

 

Those 

43 minutes ago, DogofWar1 said:

Further, I think it does make things harder for them.  Their goal was to push the overton window to allow them to climb in.  Trump is trying to salvage them but frankly, I don't think he can create a distinction between the good alt-right and the bad one.  There is no distinction, and people realize that.

 

It's like "good KKK" or "good Nazis."  Not gonna fly.

 

 

^^This. 

 

Monmouth has Trump's approve/disapproval polls at 41/59.

 

Those 41% are stuck with their fingers in their ears, but from now on, every Republican candidate will be forced to take a stand on the Alt-Right/Nazis/KKK, because Democrats will make the terms synonymous, as they should. Those who don't denounce the Alt-Right will have no chance to win the center. 

 

If Trump vs. Hillary 2.0 takes place tomorrow, Hillary wins in a walk.

 

 

 

 

Edited August 16, 2017 by Barney B

[visionary]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Larry]

14 minutes ago, visionary said:

 

 

Now let's get back to suppressing minority votes, legalizing discrimination, building a wall, kicking out people who aren't like us, and not letting them back in. But without the Nazi flag. 

[DogofWar1]

10 minutes ago, Lombardi's_kid_brother said:

 

They don't all march together. Bannon proudly stated that he created a platform for the alt-right, but he'll denounce Spencer (who created the phrase) if it allows him to keep his job in the damn White House.

 

Breitbart isn't pro-Nazi (at least not explicitly), but it still has a "black crime" section.

 

Hopefully, this threading of the needle won't work. But a President attempting it is pretty damn frightening.

I mean, they were all together in Charlottesville, or at least sufficiently close together that they were indistinguishable.

 

I think they try to make the distinctions outside of the IRL marches, but it seems like the only two groups trying to make that distinction are the alt-right/nazis/white supremecists, and Trump.

 

Everyone else knows what's up.  Trump trying to make that distinction probably hurts them more than it helps them, seeing how unpopular he is.

 

I understand that the needle they're trying to thread is dangerous if they pull it off, I just don't see them pulling it off in the near term.  They need to re-brand and wait at least an election cycle or two before anyone will take alt-right-lite as anything other than what we take the alt-right as now.