The United States of Stupid. I mean, really, REALLY stupid ...

273 posts / 0 new

Tue, 2017-02-07 12:47

Sean in Ottawa

Cody87 wrote:

And @Sean, it's well known which globalist billionaire the right blames for the paid protests...I've seen it mentioned even on this tiny forum quite recently.

WRT: Hate crimes. It's impossible to know if there's been a significant change or "who has it worse," because we only know the stories that get reported and even then we cannot be sure of their veracity. And it should be abundantly clear by now that the media selectively reports stories that fit whatever narrative they are pushing on that given week. So it's quite possible that there are more attacks on identifiable groups (whether that be minorities, Trump supporters, or both), but anyone who claims to know either way is bullshitting because they don't know either.

First we know we are talking about Soros. The guy has 23 billion a large some. The protesters are coming out and keep coming out in millions. There are two big problems with the particularly stupid theory that he is paying protestors.

1) the numbers protesting are well beyond what even a billionare could afford effectively. We have seen tens of millions of protestors against trump globally. How much would you need to be paid to protest something you did not believe in? Would $100 be enough for the day? If so this would have cost him something like a billion dollars. Would there be value investing a small amount to double a protest that is already huge? Soros is not stupid. The scale of the protests defies anyone who pretends this is a paid activity and anyone pretending that this is a significant factor need to stop and think. Certainly he could fund organizations to get the word out, even pay for helping make signs, but the same is true of the propaganda machine on the other side. These mass protest are fuelled by masses of people wanting to make a statement.

2) If you were to pay millions of people, it would be impossible for there not to be widespread evidence of that. Conspiracies of millions of people are fantasies.

Secondly to equate anger against those who promote hate with those who are victims of rising intolerence is pathetic and it seems youa re doing that. Yes there is pushback. Some of it goes too far but the source is the original aggression. Pretending otherwise is bullshit and I doubt that bullshit will fly here. I do not condone violence against racist sexist assholes but being that kind of an asshole is a risking thing. So is associating with that type of asshole.

Tue, 2017-02-07 16:12

#253

Cody87

Sean in Ottawa wrote:

Secondly to equate anger against those who promote hate with those who are victims of rising intolerence is pathetic and it seems youa re doing that.

Who is promoting hate? Who are the victims of rising intolerance? If you check your own biases you will see that there is a fringe on both sides who promote hate, and there are mostly innocent victims of intolerance on both sides. No side even remotely has moral high ground on this issue.

You can pretend that exclusively Trump supporters are hateful and intolerant, and therefore deserve what's coming to them, and the violence against them (UC Berkley etc) is justified, but that attitude isn't going to make things better.

Quote:
Some of it goes too far but the source is the original aggression.

Voting differently isn't "aggression."

Political violence is becoming the norm in the United States, because everyone on the other side is literally seen as a hateful, intolerant enemy. The left calls out the right for being intolerant, the right turns around and says "nuh-uhh, you're the intolerant ones" and they basically just squabble like kids in school, except now the violence is getting real because the rhetoric is out of control. It needs to stop.

And with respect to Soros, of course he isn't paying millions of protestors - this is such an absurd interpretation I'd suspect a deliberate strawman if it was posted by someone else. But it's very possible - some would argue likely - that he's hired some organizers to plan demonstrations and hand out suspiciously similar professional signs to organic protestors. And if he's doing that it's not a stretch to wonder if those organizers also act as agitators similar to the paid agitators that were exposed during the campaign last year.

All I'm saying is, "your" victims aren't the only victims, "their" aggression isn't the only aggression, and both "sides" need to take a deep breath and chill out.

Tue, 2017-02-07 16:40

#254

Sean in Ottawa

@Cody

My victims??? And you ask me to check my biases?

The rest of your post has got to be one of the most offensive posts I have ever seen posted here and I have seen a few.

Who is promoting hate you ask? Really. You actually asked that? Do you just skip over all that the Trump campaign has said and done to come to this question? I think I do not have time to educate you if you are claiming ignorance of all we have seen for the last year.

Yes, reactions are strong and sometimes extreme and I have not condoned them. To pretend this anger is disconnected and therefore equivalent to what we have seen from the Trump camp is delusional when you consider that it is the hatefulness of the Trump camp that is evoked and pointed to for inspiration at every turn.

You calmly, on a progressive board no less, equate intolerance for hate as equal to intolerance directed at people because they have a different religion, country of origin,or colour.

You go on with your denials in a dramatic fashion suggesting that the claim that protestors are being paid appeared like a straw man. It makes me wonder how you could be interested enough in this topic to come here and yet so selective or oblivious as not to notice that Trump dismissed millions of protestors saying they were paid protestors. Why come here and post if you are either not paying attention or being this selective?

Then you go on to pretend that Trump's words are not so offensive as to inspire millions of protestors such that it could take paid agitators to get things going. The movement of anger against Trump is so great that any small scale agitation would either have no effect due to being puny or would require an impossible scale.

What an insult to bring here. I take massive offense. I have protested Trump three times myself. I was not paid. I did so in reaction to words I heard and saw come out of his mouth. No need for a third party to interpret that hateful shit for me.

Your comment about Soros is actually bordering on the libelous completely unsupported by fact other than your dubious, extreme and fantastical attempt at creating a false equivalency between those who made a movement out of hate and those reacting because they hate the basis of that movement.

Finding a few isolated example of law-breaking at a time when millions around the world are protesting does not change the fact that there is an overwhelming, peaceful movement here angry at hate. And you call that hateful.

Calling both sides equivalent is insulting to the intelligence, observations and motivations of millions. It is a denial of every single value this board is based on. It is at once racist, sexist and bigoted because it denies the fact that racism bigotry and sexism are behind why people are so angry.

Please explain why you are here since you have no respect for the values of this community.

Tue, 2017-02-07 16:52

#255

Sean in Ottawa

And this comment:

"both "sides" need to take a deep breath and chill out."

hmm -- do you think this would have been good advice for those upset with any other hateful demagogue the world has known?

Tue, 2017-02-07 16:52

#256

quizzical

good post Sean

Tue, 2017-02-07 17:01

#257

Michael Moriarity

Thank you, Sean, for putting Cody's post in its proper perspective.

Tue, 2017-02-07 17:09

#258

Sean in Ottawa

Thanks Quizzical and Michael -- I had to share his post with people here in my house as an example of what the Trump camp have to say or believe to justify their hateful positions. False equivalency is the twin of fake news. And the accusations of fake news from the Trump camp are in themselves false equivalencies.

Wed, 2017-02-08 03:40

#259

NDPP

'Putin Continues Advance into Korea'

https://youtu.be/mAMbZWrYlwM

Wed, 2017-02-08 12:31

#260

Paladin1

6079_Smith_W wrote:

@ Paladin

If you can't find a couple of good corroborating sources (not two blogs using the same source) there is a good chance it might be propaganda.

That is so for both ends of the spectrum and everyplace in between.

Pretty much anything and everything is propaganda in one form or another. I recall reading a thing where Al jazzeria was noted as one of the most unbiased news agencies.

I'm all for combatting fake news. It's annoying. My nemesis is movie trailers on youtube that are listed as official but turn out to be fan based. Dante would have reserved a level of hell just for those jerks.

Quote:

Same goes for buzzwords like the one mentioned above being a sign of where some people are coming from.

Systemic. Problematic. Fascist. Islamaphobe. Anti-semite. Zionist. Brown shirt. Nazi.

I guess "punch a Nazi" is a thing now too? The US is pretty fucked up at the moment.

Wed, 2017-02-08 12:49

#261

Michael Moriarity

Paladin1 wrote:

I guess "punch a Nazi" is a thing now too? The US is pretty fucked up at the moment.

I have substantial sympathy for Woody Allen's suggestion from "Manhattan" in 1979.

Wed, 2017-02-08 14:21

#262

Sean in Ottawa

Michael Moriarity wrote:

Paladin1 wrote:

I guess "punch a Nazi" is a thing now too? The US is pretty fucked up at the moment.

I have substantial sympathy for Woody Allen's suggestion from "Manhattan" in 1979.

A lot can be said for speaking the same language

Wed, 2017-02-08 14:27

#263

6079_Smith_W

Paladin1 wrote:

Pretty much anything and everything is propaganda in one form or another.

No, though the propagandists might want to spin it as that kind of equivalancy. There is a difference between news coverage, even biased news coverage, and propaganda.

Which is why, as I said, the first step is to look at who else is saying the same thing, and what others are saying that is different.

That, and the more in-depth step of looking at what jives with the known facts.

Wed, 2017-02-08 14:43

#264

Sean in Ottawa

6079_Smith_W wrote:

Paladin1 wrote:

Pretty much anything and everything is propaganda in one form or another.

No, though the propagandists might want to spin it as that kind of equivalancy. There is a difference between news coverage, even biased news coverage, and propaganda.

Which is why, as I said, the first step is to look at who else is saying the same thing, and what others are saying that is different.

That, and the more in-depth step of looking at what jives with the known facts.

You are quite right on the equivalancy. We are used to bias in reporting particularly weight and tone as well as commentary that acts as editorial comment in news where it should not be. But what we are seeing now that is being presented to be equivalent is wholesale fabrication on a different scale. The Trump camp want to erase the difference between outright fraud and biased reporting.

This is in the same basket as relatively isolated cases of violence against Trump supporters and general hostility to hatemongers. It is back to the same group demanding that we be tolerent of their intolerance. It defies any logic but they, and their supporters, are beyond logic. It is rather pathetic that these false equivalancies are being brought to rabble.

It is difficult to tell the differnce between arguments like this brought just to confuse and make people walk away or arguments presented by people who actually believe this garbage. I have no intention of being gentle and polite when these equivalancies are brought here. I don't actually care if they are being brought by a person who is delusional or dishonest. I do not care to explore that since I don't intend to respect either one here.

The Trump camp are advocating a racist, sexist culture and they are also pushing specific policies to remove people's rights. That their advocates get called names, is the least of my concern. I don't go looking for them on right wing sites to troll them but if they want to come here I will tell them in the plainest way what I think of their bullshit. And that is what it is.

This place was not meant to be a "safe" or "friendly" place for them.

Wed, 2017-02-08 15:31

#265

kropotkin1951

NDPP wrote:

'Putin Continues Advance into Korea'

https://youtu.be/mAMbZWrYlwM

Imagine politicians representing both of the competing sides of the American oligarchy engage in rhetoric with little regard for truthful accuracy.

Wed, 2017-02-08 16:03

#266

pookie

Michael Moriarity wrote:

Thank you, Sean, for putting Cody's post in its proper perspective.

Wed, 2017-02-08 16:56

#267

Paladin1

6079_Smith_W wrote:

There is a difference between news coverage, even biased news coverage, and propaganda.

Yes. I searched propaganda really quick and came back with a this.

Quote:
information, especially of a biased or misleading nature, used to promote or publicize a particular political cause or point of view.

- from googles definiton.

Most of the stories I'm seeing from both sides these days falls under this IMO.

YMMV

Wed, 2017-02-08 17:16

#268

6079_Smith_W

Well if you want to run with that Paladin and say it is all propaganda, go ahead. But I think most people would but a bit of a finer point on it. The key word there is "misleading".

In its subtlest form it is advertising or marketing. But propaganda is generally spread by someone partisan who stands to gain, or a similar agent. Even biased media don't usually fall under that category unless they show a serious disregard for journalistic standards.

That is to say it is not so much a bias or perspective as a conscious attempt to sway someone without any regard for the truth, and a rejection of any criticism of the side they are promoting. In short, there is not even an attempt at fairness; the entire purpose is one message.

Wed, 2017-02-08 17:28

#269

kropotkin1951

So I think that the Washington Post and New York Times are two very good examples of propaganda sites. What do you think 6079?

Wed, 2017-02-08 17:59

#270

6079_Smith_W

I don't. Do they each have a bias? Yes. Can you find examples of some bad and even unfair articles on each? Sure.

But no, I don't consider them propagandist. You may disagree.

(edit)

And if they are propaganda machines, whom do they serve? Who will they not criticize? If anything, media coverage in this past election came under fire for not being discriminating enough:

https://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2016/09/26/the-falsity-of-false-equiva...

Thu, 2017-02-09 01:49

#271

NDPP

How the Left Killed the Anti-War Movement

https://youtu.be/R3gsAdAkdOY

"Once the home of the anti-war movement, under Barack Obama the Left advocated a continuation of war and mass murder by using the political expediency of humanitarian interventionism..."