The left does not hold any sort of moral high ground.

[Conserative Morality]

A lot of people believe that line has already been crossed.

There are laws in place to stop people from acting like Nazis. You don't beat fascists by becoming fascists. You beat fascists by adhering to the rule of law and liberal ideals.

[Galloism]

Quote Orwell all you want.

He agreed with me...that's why he fought in the Spanish Civil War, was a socialist and said "Pacifism is objectively pro-fascist".

Yes, let that be a warm comfort to help you sleep at night, I will gladly fulfill my role in the Ministry of Truth, by removing the nipples of our idealogical opponents and sewing them on backwards.

Wait, by backwards, do you mean on their backs or inside out?

Inquiring minds want to know.

[The balkens]

That's because SJWs don't exist outside the imagination of reactionaries on the internet.

Antifa actually does exist.

Not in America. I'd be the only one to take it seriously.

Because America (Thankfully) is not Europe.

[The New Sea Territory]

Note the difference between "believing in" and "running for executive office with the expressed goal of" deporting millions and barring Muslims from entering the US.

One of which, while horrendously inhumane and probably quite racist, is not illegal, and the other is likely unenforceable.

Look, I know Trump is a piece of shit, but democracy doesn't mean "only people who agree with me can run".

This assumes representative "democracy" is actually a very democratic system of government.

More importantly, defending immigrants and Muslims (actual living people) is more important than lofty, nominal and intangible concepts about government.

[Conserative Morality]

Yes, let that be a warm comfort to help you sleep at night, I will gladly fulfill my role in the Ministry of Truth, by removing the nipples of our idealogical opponents and sewing them on backwards.

Get your hand out of your pants; some of us are trying to discuss politics.

[Jumalariik]

You know, when Hillary herself endorses violence as a viable action, as Trump already did, you may have a point.

Yes, some people are violent regardless of political persuasion. This is not news.

What IS news is that Trump has already endorsed violence, and he's a presumptive nominee.

Even assuming Trump has endorsed violence, Trump as far as we know has 0 deaths to his name. Regardless of what you think of the Iraq War, Hillary supported it. That is an endorsement of violence. (we also know how destructive and senseless the war wound up being) Trump, unlike Hillary has not caused the death of one person nor endorsed it that we know of.

[Minzerland]

Ministry of the Truth

Quote Orwell all you want.

He agreed with me...that's why he fought in the Spanish Civil War, was a socialist and said "Pacifism is objectively pro-fascist".

Correct me if I'm wrong, he also thought Freedom of belief was a good thing, if I recall. Unlike you, of course.

[Shaggy Dog Story]

A lot of people believe that line has already been crossed.

There are laws in place to stop people from acting like Nazis. You don't beat fascists by becoming fascists. You beat fascists by adhering to the rule of law and liberal ideals.

That's the concern though. Laws that, should he be elected, Trump would do everything in his power to repeal. There were laws in place in 1935 Germany preventing murder. They didn't actually stop the Holocaust.

[The balkens]

Yes, let that be a warm comfort to help you sleep at night, I will gladly fulfill my role in the Ministry of Truth, by removing the nipples of our idealogical opponents and sewing them on backwards.

Wait, by backwards, do you mean on their backs or inside out?

Inquiring minds want to know.

Nyyyyyeeeeees

[Conserative Morality]

This assumes representative "democracy" is actually a very democratic system of government.

It's moderately democratic. The most democratic system with any practicality.

More importantly, defending immigrants and Muslims (actual living people) is more important than lofty, nominal and intangible concepts about government.

You *do* realize that those 'lofty', 'intangible' ideals are precisely why we choose to defend immigrants and Muslims?

You fucking think that minorities have their rights protected without the rule of law? That mass movements occur in the absence of free flow of information and opinions?

[Shaggy Dog Story]

You know, when Hillary herself endorses violence as a viable action, as Trump already did, you may have a point.

Yes, some people are violent regardless of political persuasion. This is not news.

What IS news is that Trump has already endorsed violence, and he's a presumptive nominee.

Even assuming Trump has endorsed violence, Trump as far as we know has 0 deaths to his name. Regardless of what you think of the Iraq War, Hillary supported it. That is an endorsement of violence. (we also know how destructive and senseless the war wound up being) Trump, unlike Hillary has not caused the death of one person nor endorsed it that we know of.

Any person in a high level of government in a major power is in some way responsible for decisions that result in deaths. She was a United States Senator and Secretary of State. The only reason Trump has never made any direct life and death decision is because he has had no actual role on government.

[The balkens]

One of which, while horrendously inhumane and probably quite racist, is not illegal, and the other is likely unenforceable.

Look, I know Trump is a piece of shit, but democracy doesn't mean "only people who agree with me can run".

This assumes representative "democracy" is actually a very democratic system of government.

More importantly, defending immigrants and Muslims (actual living people) is more important than lofty, nominal and intangible concepts about government.

I now require Chemo thanks to this post.

[Heidisteinian Fempire]

I'd love to curb stomp the shit out of a smug, skinny, fedora wearing white kid with a annoying voice that tells me certain people can't have rights because of how they were born. Pity Social Justice Warriors are not Warriors.

Or thank what ever deity exists because most of them lose their shit most of the time.

Hey, I'm losing my shit right now.

Not in America. I'd be the only one to take it seriously.

Because America (Thankfully) is not Europe.

Yeah, because in America, the last time assholes tried to make a race inferior, we reconstructed them. Last time they made them separate, we occupied their streets. They never took over Congress a la NSDAP.

[Galloism]

You know, when Hillary herself endorses violence as a viable action, as Trump already did, you may have a point.

Yes, some people are violent regardless of political persuasion. This is not news.

What IS news is that Trump has already endorsed violence, and he's a presumptive nominee.

Even assuming Trump has endorsed violence, Trump as far as we know has 0 deaths to his name. Regardless of what you think of the Iraq War, Hillary supported it. That is an endorsement of violence. (we also know how destructive and senseless the war wound up being) Trump, unlike Hillary has not caused the death of one person nor endorsed it that we know of.

Point, but that comes with being in a position of power anyway.

Look, even if Trump because the best president ever, to the point that we look at Donald Trump as the beacon of all that right and good with America, and Lincoln was basically a good guy we sorta liked by comparison. Even if all the wildest possible dreams came true, he would still kill people as part of his job.

Like Hillary, he wouldn't be holding the gun, but he would be killing people. It's something inevitable with presidents, senators, secretaries of state, etc. We hope they make the best decisions possible and limit the loss of life, but people will die due to your decisions. The difference between Trump and Hillary in this regard is that he's never been in high office. That means he's never had to make those choices.

Do I think Hillary has made the best of all possible choices? No. That doesn't mean I think Trump will.

[Conserative Morality]

That's the concern though. Laws that, should he be elected, Trump would do everything in his power to repeal. There were laws in place in 1935 Germany preventing murder. They didn't actually stop the Holocaust.

The Nazis were breaking the law far before that point. Our government has a system of checks and balances for a reason. If Trump were to get into office (whatever deity might exist forbid), he wouldn't have the power to do what he claims he's going to. He can fuck up a lot, but without the legislative and judicial branches, he can't meaningfully turn the US into his dream fascist Trumptopia.

[Jumalariik]

One of which, while horrendously inhumane and probably quite racist, is not illegal, and the other is likely unenforceable.

Look, I know Trump is a piece of shit, but democracy doesn't mean "only people who agree with me can run".

This assumes representative "democracy" is actually a very democratic system of government.

More importantly, defending immigrants and Muslims (actual living people) is more important than lofty, nominal and intangible concepts about government.

Defend Muslims and immigrants from what? Illegal immigrants are the only people who would suffer from Trump, and they are here illegally. Muslims have plenty of places where they can persecute anybody on NS all they want. If its our job to protect them, I don't know what isn't our job.

[Azurius]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q3bZ7SQJe4s

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-0NpqCm2OeM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8K1wEgDdO64

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_zaAs9Nsyuw

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cFfPei8wQG0

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Aw5J0YGryU

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QQmbn7ndvZQ

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ISB3-51Sdhs

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EwXlW_rm0Rs

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CnszDZkjBDE

Let me be clear. I am by no means pro-Trump, and this is not a post promoting Trump. I am just disgusted by the hypocrisy and willful ignorance of the modern American left. It seems that every god damn day there's a news report of liberals assaulting someone for being a trump supporter. I can think of a single case of trump supporters physically lashing out; the black man who clocked the shit out of the klansman at the Arizona(?) rally.

Now I know what the response is going to be from the NSG community. You're going to decry and disown them, and claim that they're a minority and don't represent the majority left. But here's the problem. They are still the left. It doesn't matter whether their particular flavor is the exact same as yours, you both fall under the same umbrella of populist and progressive philosophies. It doesn't mean a thing if you claim to stand for the marginalized or someone too socially weak or what the hell ever when Bernie and Hillary supporters are willing to attack anyone in the trump camp, be they Latino, African American, female, or elderly.

I'm going to leave it here because I don't really feel any more elaboration is needed. Basically what it comes down to is the left simply can't claim to hold any moral superiority anymore. You can say you represent (as a whole) what you wish, but when members of your camps act the exact opposite it totally flies in the face of everything you're trying to profess.

First of all: A "left" doesn´t really exist in america, neither does a prominent left wing party. Bernie so far is the first left wing candidate that actually gained recognition, still his party is anything but left wing.

Secondly: A klansman, wow. You over some KKK criminal? Wow. Though he should have been jailed, getting beaten up somewhat serves him right i´m sorry.

Thirdly: Yeah just ignore the fact that violance amongst the right wing is proportionally at least 4 times higher if not more then that of left wingers in every western 1st world country. Statistics and data are clear here, just take germany for example where right wing political motiviated crime is several times higher then left wing motivated crime and an astonishing 17 to 18 times higher then that of immigrants(despite that immigrant related political crime has more then doubled last year[gee I wonder why if right wingers all around the country start attacking immigrants?], before that the proportion was by 45 to 50 times less then the right wing).

Fourthly: What a lame argument. "they are still of the left wing!/fall under the same umbrella!", yes they are, and right wing crimes are several times higher, so basically the same stupid argument then equals right wingers like you too, congratulations. The utter and borderline schizophrenic delusion of the right wing once again intensifies.

Next point: "It doesn't mean a thing if you claim to stand for the marginalized or someone too socially weak or what the hell ever when Bernie and Hillary supporters are willing to attack anyone in the trump camp, be they Latino, African American, female, or elderly. "

Rofl doesn´t that mean that they are neutral and not "anti-white"? xD And that they judge people not by ethnicity or social class but by their actions? Isn´t that a good thing actually? Thanks that you yourself tear down that stupid argument as a right winger by yourself, thanks.

"Basically what it comes down to is the left simply can't claim to hold any moral superiority anymore" Really? Based on what? Your false delusions that have been debunked above? Or the fact that you yourself stated that they judge people by actions not background or social status? If you think that is a morally bad thing then your comment makes sense, otherwise not.

" You can say you represent (as a whole) what you wish, but when members of your camps act the exact opposite it totally flies in the face of everything you're trying to profess." That starkly contradicts what you just said actually congratulations, well again unless you view treating people by action and not background morally wrong, which is the only case where your argument would make logical sense.

P.S. Why is that you right wingers can never present hard data and facts but instead go for fearmongering with youtube videos that are either totally taken out of context or are not even from the place you claim them to be from? Must really suck to have no arguments to stoop down to that level.

[Heidisteinian Fempire]

Wait, by backwards, do you mean on their backs or inside out?

Inquiring minds want to know.

Nyyyyyeeeeees

This assumes representative "democracy" is actually a very democratic system of government.

More importantly, defending immigrants and Muslims (actual living people) is more important than lofty, nominal and intangible concepts about government.

I now require Chemo thanks to this post.

You have the BEST HUMOR. Now call me a cuckold.

[Conserative Morality]

Yeah, because in America, the last time assholes tried to make a race inferior, we reconstructed them. Last time they made them separate, we occupied their streets. They never took over Congress a la NSDAP.

That's because we're better than the European governments which were taken over by fascist states. We have a tradition of liberal democracy, and the day we give that up is the day we become vulnerable to the fascists.

[The balkens]

Nyyyyyeeeeees

I now require Chemo thanks to this post.

You have the BEST HUMOR. Now call me a cuckold.

Nyyyy-nooooo.

[Azurius]

This assumes representative "democracy" is actually a very democratic system of government.

More importantly, defending immigrants and Muslims (actual living people) is more important than lofty, nominal and intangible concepts about government.

Defend Muslims and immigrants from what? Illegal immigrants are the only people who would suffer from Trump, and they are here illegally. Muslims have plenty of places where they can persecute anybody on NS all they want. If its our job to protect them, I don't know what isn't our job.

Jesus I love it when americans throw around the term "illegal immigrants". Not only are they: ignoring the true problem, blowing the immigrant thing totally out of proportion. But worse: You are utter hypocrites.

Fun fact for you: You americans ARE illegal immigrants yourselves! Rofl

Seriously you are the last people on earth to talk about illegal immigration.

[Shaggy Dog Story]

That's the concern though. Laws that, should he be elected, Trump would do everything in his power to repeal. There were laws in place in 1935 Germany preventing murder. They didn't actually stop the Holocaust.

The Nazis were breaking the law far before that point. Our government has a system of checks and balances for a reason. If Trump were to get into office (whatever deity might exist forbid), he wouldn't have the power to do what he claims he's going to. He can fuck up a lot, but without the legislative and judicial branches, he can't meaningfully turn the US into his dream fascist Trumptopia.

The presidency is a position of enormous power. Will he be able to rule like a king? No. But he could do profound damage to the national and international scene.

The point I am getting at is without weighing in on whether they are right or wrong, there is a significant number of people that consider the possibility of a Trump presidency to be a clear and present danger to the United States and the world. And when faced with what you believe to be a profound and significant threat violence is not necessarily an immoral choice. We have an entire military that exists because of that proposition.

[The New Sea Territory]

A lot of people believe that line has already been crossed.

There are laws in place to stop people from acting like Nazis. You don't beat fascists by becoming fascists. You beat fascists by adhering to the rule of law and liberal ideals.

No, no and no.

First, these laws don't stop trans people from being murdered. I have zero faith in any words on sheets of paper when bigots are armed and ready to kill. Self-defense, both individual and collective, is justified against a violently transphobic society.

Secondly, "becoming the fascists" is the standard argument of nonviolent liberals, and it doesn't hold up. If you believe that violence in the defense of marginalized peoples is just as bad as violence committed by bigots, then were those who participating in the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising "becoming the fascists"?

Liberal ideals defend and protect fascists, along with plenty of other unnecessary and tyrannical social hierarchies. These liberal ideals came from rich white Europeans and colonists with little to no introspective capabilities ("All men are created equal", except slaves obviously).

[Heidisteinian Fempire]

You have the BEST HUMOR. Now call me a cuckold.

Nyyyy-nooooo.

"Hey that's preeeeeety goooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooood XDXDXD u showed them cucks over there, nyesss cancur b0ss"

[Conserative Morality]

Defend Muslims and immigrants from what? Illegal immigrants are the only people who would suffer from Trump, and they are here illegally. Muslims have plenty of places where they can persecute anybody on NS all they want. If its our job to protect them, I don't know what isn't our job.

You question if its the job of the US government to protect the rights and safety of US citizens?

Really?