Page 33 of 75

PostPosted: Sun Jul 21, 2019 7:24 pm
by Strahcoin
Thermodolia wrote:
Strahcoin wrote:1. Calling Steven Crowder a fascist is like calling the Black Hole "white". Nothing could be farther from the truth.
2. Then why did Hitler and the Nazis violate the Treaty of Versailles and attack Britain and France?

Because Britain and France declared war on Germany for invading Poland. The invasion of Poland and the dismissal of the treaty of Versailles was in line with Nazi ideology for more living space and subjugation of non-aryans.

Seriously dude crack open a book.

3. And that's why nobody could debate a leftist...

Nobody who listens to the shit that is PragerU can.

4. Trump is not failing. He's thriving. Look at the unemployment numbers. Look at the wall being built at the border. Frankly, the politicians of the Democrat Party seem to "whine" about Trump and conservatives significantly more. And as for Trump unable to focus for a long time, neither can the American people. Trump connects with us, and he doesn't pretend to be intellectually better than us.

Dude his poll numbers are constantly in the tank. And what wall? You mean the one that won’t be started until 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021?

5. Does that mean laissez-faire capitalism and right-libertarianism are left-wing ideologies?

No. Only a few far left ideologies are for the destruction of the state.

6. Well, who's going to make sure the "bourgeoisie" don't rise and "seize the means of production" from the laborers?

The state.

1/2. I know. But the Germans were under the British/French. They had to overthrow the "oppressors" to become oppressive themselves (much like other forms of socialism, like in Venezuela).
3. It's because debate requires open minds. One spit upon PragerU without giving it a try is being rather stubborn.
4. The polls predicted Trump wouldn't win in 2016. They were wrong. And here is the wall being built right now.
5. Last time I've heard, laissez-faire capitalism and right-libertarianism advocated for a smaller government and more economic freedoms, not the abolition of the state. But even so, that contradicts Wallenburg's statement, saying that far-leftism "believes in the total dissolution of the state".
6. And who's going to run the state? The government, of course. So essentially, the government becomes the bourgeoisie to prevent other bourgeoisie from seizing the means of production. Seems like a breeding ground for corruption...

PostPosted: Sun Jul 21, 2019 7:26 pm
by Washington Resistance Army
Strahcoin wrote:1/2. I know. But the Germans were under the British/French. They had to overthrow the "oppressors" to become oppressive themselves (much like other forms of socialism, like in Venezuela).


I'd like to give you a casual reminder that the Nazis were so far from being socialists that the word "privatization" was literally created to describe Hitlerian economic policy in the mid 1930's lol.

PostPosted: Sun Jul 21, 2019 7:27 pm
by Wallenburg
Washington Resistance Army wrote:
Wallenburg wrote:Exclusion of all non-whites from society and expulsion of all non-whites from the country is fully incompatible with liberalism, by any definition of the word.


As stated above, not inherently. Indeed the early era of our nation could be described as one that excluded and expelled non-whites but was still markedly liberal.

The history of the US is one of plenty of contradictions, including a longstanding "liberty for me but not for ye" mentality. I would challenge that the US has ever been totally liberal or even overwhelmingly liberal.

It's also important to note that liberals are at their core capitalists, and will not accept the overthrow of that system. When the going gets tough, and it's the socialists against the fascists, liberals will consistently side with fascism out of their desire not to see capitalism destroyed.

PostPosted: Sun Jul 21, 2019 7:28 pm
by Ifreann
The Greater Ohio Valley wrote:
Washington Resistance Army wrote:
Not inherently. Whilst it is very meme worthy Richard Spencer and his "peaceful ethnic cleansing" where he'd just pay all the non-white people to leave is a good example of one such sort.


Hatterleigh wrote:Not necessarily.

I mean, you guys say that, but how else is a white ethnostate gonna be achieved without using dictatorial totalitarian or authoritarian power to cleanse the nation of nonehites? Pizza parties? Ice cream socials? Moving all WN’s to an uninhabited island somewhere? You guys might see different but I honestly can’t. Ethnostates (to me) require as much governmental and state power as possible to make a reality since you can’t remove the “””undesirables””” any other way.

No, see, they'll just ask all the bad non-white people to go away, and some of them will but most of them won't, and then the white nationalists will definitely be perfectly happy with their nation having almost exactly the same non-white demographics as before they took power. No way they'll start doing anything contrary to the highest principles of freedom and equality.


Washington Resistance Army wrote:
Wallenburg wrote:Exclusion of all non-whites from society and expulsion of all non-whites from the country is fully incompatible with liberalism, by any definition of the word.


As stated above, not inherently. Indeed the early era of our nation could be described as one that excluded and expelled non-whites but was still markedly liberal.

I think you mean "relatively liberal".

PostPosted: Sun Jul 21, 2019 7:39 pm
by Great Trinton
People killed in the last 10 years -

Antifa: 0

Right wing terrorists: 313

ICE: 81

CBP: 98

PostPosted: Sun Jul 21, 2019 7:42 pm
by Rojava Free State
Great Trinton wrote:People killed in the last 10 years -

Antifa: 0

Right wing terrorists: 313

ICE: 81

CBP: 98


Antifa isn't as organized as the alt right and definitely isn't as organized as ICE or CBP. Ideologically antifa and the alt right are morally equal but in practice the right wing extremists are worse

PostPosted: Sun Jul 21, 2019 7:51 pm
by Wallenburg
Rojava Free State wrote:
Great Trinton wrote:People killed in the last 10 years -

Antifa: 0

Right wing terrorists: 313

ICE: 81

CBP: 98


Antifa isn't as organized as the alt right and definitely isn't as organized as ICE or CBP. Ideologically antifa and the alt right are morally equal but in practice the right wing extremists are worse

Being against fascism and being fascist are morally equal. Super cool my friend, very solid argument.

PostPosted: Sun Jul 21, 2019 7:51 pm
by Thermodolia
Strahcoin wrote:
Thermodolia wrote:Because Britain and France declared war on Germany for invading Poland. The invasion of Poland and the dismissal of the treaty of Versailles was in line with Nazi ideology for more living space and subjugation of non-aryans.

Seriously dude crack open a book.


Nobody who listens to the shit that is PragerU can.


Dude his poll numbers are constantly in the tank. And what wall? You mean the one that won’t be started until 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021?


No. Only a few far left ideologies are for the destruction of the state.


The state.

1/2. I know. But the Germans were under the British/French. They had to overthrow the "oppressors" to become oppressive themselves (much like other forms of socialism, like in Venezuela).

“the Germans were under the British/French” in what world is this even fucking true? No where in Fascist or Nazi manifestos does it say anything about overthrowing oppressors. Also as another poster pointed out the word “privatization” was literally invented for the Nazis economic polices. As I said before pick up a book

3. It's because debate requires open minds. One spit upon PragerU without giving it a try is being rather stubborn.

Again if my mind was any more open my brain would fall out

4. The polls predicted Trump wouldn't win in 2016. They were wrong.

No the polls predicted a close race. The majority of the polls where within the margin of error.

And here is the wall being built right now.

Biased source is biased. Hate to break it to ya but the construction for the wall hasn’t even started and most likely won’t until 2021

5. Last time I've heard, laissez-faire capitalism and right-libertarianism advocated for a smaller government and more economic freedoms, not the abolition of the state. But even so, that contradicts Wallenburg's statement, saying that far-leftism "believes in the total dissolution of the state".

No that doesn’t contradict anything. This is exactly why you shouldn’t listen to PragerU because you come up with shit debating tactics.

6. And who's going to run the state? The government, of course. So essentially, the government becomes the bourgeoisie to prevent other bourgeoisie from seizing the means of production. Seems like a breeding ground for corruption...

Do you even know what the bourgeoisie is? Define it I dare you

PostPosted: Sun Jul 21, 2019 7:55 pm
by Totally Not OEP
The Greater Ohio Valley wrote:
Washington Resistance Army wrote:
Not inherently. Whilst it is very meme worthy Richard Spencer and his "peaceful ethnic cleansing" where he'd just pay all the non-white people to leave is a good example of one such sort.


Hatterleigh wrote:Not necessarily.

I mean, you guys say that, but how else is a white ethnostate gonna be achieved without using dictatorial totalitarian or authoritarian power to cleanse the nation of nonehites? Pizza parties? Ice cream socials? Moving all WN’s to an uninhabited island somewhere? You guys might see different but I honestly can’t. Ethnostates (to me) require as much governmental and state power as possible to make a reality since you can’t remove the “””undesirables””” any other way.


Authoritarian Government =/= Fascism

It's the same senselessness in use that has made the term lose its effect in political discourse.

PostPosted: Sun Jul 21, 2019 8:03 pm
by Wallenburg
Totally Not OEP wrote:
The Greater Ohio Valley wrote:

I mean, you guys say that, but how else is a white ethnostate gonna be achieved without using dictatorial totalitarian or authoritarian power to cleanse the nation of nonehites? Pizza parties? Ice cream socials? Moving all WN’s to an uninhabited island somewhere? You guys might see different but I honestly can’t. Ethnostates (to me) require as much governmental and state power as possible to make a reality since you can’t remove the “””undesirables””” any other way.


Authoritarian Government =/= Fascism

It's the same senselessness in use that has made the term lose its effect in political discourse.

We aren't talking about all authoritarianism here. We're talking about culturally reactionary far right ethnostates. That's what a fascist state is.

PostPosted: Sun Jul 21, 2019 8:04 pm
by Totally Not OEP
Wallenburg wrote:
Totally Not OEP wrote:
Authoritarian Government =/= Fascism

It's the same senselessness in use that has made the term lose its effect in political discourse.

We aren't talking about all authoritarianism here. We're talking about culturally reactionary far right ethnostates. That's what a fascist state is.


It is not.

PostPosted: Sun Jul 21, 2019 8:09 pm
by Iridencia
I think the part of this I'm most tired of is the constant appeals to "just as bad." Every defense of Antifa and those like them comes back to it, that they're not as bad as fascists and therefore squeaky clean good guys.

You do not need to be "just as bad" as someone else to still be bad. Yes, fascists are much, much, much, much worse than Antifa, objectively. No, that does not mean Antifa is good. Just because smashing someone's mail box isn't as bad as setting their entire house on fire it doesn't justify smashing mail boxes. "Just as" and "too" are not the same damn thing.

The argument about whether or not calculated violence works in circumstances like these is more complex and a worthy debate to have, but I'm sick of this stupid-ass strawman argument. "NOT AS BAD NOT AS BAD NOT AS BAD NOT AS-" It doesn't fucking matter. Our disapproval is not and should not be reserved exclusively for the worst of the worst.

PostPosted: Sun Jul 21, 2019 8:24 pm
by Strahcoin
Washington Resistance Army wrote:
Strahcoin wrote:1/2. I know. But the Germans were under the British/French. They had to overthrow the "oppressors" to become oppressive themselves (much like other forms of socialism, like in Venezuela).


I'd like to give you a casual reminder that the Nazis were so far from being socialists that the word "privatization" was literally created to describe Hitlerian economic policy in the mid 1930's lol.

That seems to contradict quotes where Hitler supported socialism.
“We are socialists, we are enemies of today’s capitalistic economic system for the exploitation of the economically weak, with its unfair salaries, with its unseemly evaluation of a human being according to wealth and property instead of responsibility and performance, and we are all determined to destroy this system under all conditions”

It does seem strange that the Nazis would endorse privatization when their platform stated they demanded "the nationalization of all trusts" and the creation of an "unconditional authority by the political central parliament of the whole State and all its organizations". Who else was in the government at that time?

PostPosted: Sun Jul 21, 2019 8:27 pm
by Wallenburg
Another important item of note: Nazis always lie. They will say anything to increase their power, even pretending to support things they do not.

Look not to what Nazis say but to what they do if you want to know what they believe.

PostPosted: Sun Jul 21, 2019 9:21 pm
by Kubra
Strahcoin wrote:
Washington Resistance Army wrote:
I'd like to give you a casual reminder that the Nazis were so far from being socialists that the word "privatization" was literally created to describe Hitlerian economic policy in the mid 1930's lol.

That seems to contradict quotes where Hitler supported socialism.
“We are socialists, we are enemies of today’s capitalistic economic system for the exploitation of the economically weak, with its unfair salaries, with its unseemly evaluation of a human being according to wealth and property instead of responsibility and performance, and we are all determined to destroy this system under all conditions”

It does seem strange that the Nazis would endorse privatization when their platform stated they demanded "the nationalization of all trusts" and the creation of an "unconditional authority by the political central parliament of the whole State and all its organizations". Who else was in the government at that time?
Fun fact: Hitler never said that.
It is true that a prominent nazi said that, and it really is an uncomfortable fact that fascism did have its origins more on the left wing side than the right. However, it's disingenuous to continue that line of reasoning for the party after the 1934 purge.
And the mass selling of state assets during the nazi years is well established fact, bruv.

PostPosted: Sun Jul 21, 2019 9:29 pm
by Kubra
Wallenburg wrote:
Totally Not OEP wrote:
Authoritarian Government =/= Fascism

It's the same senselessness in use that has made the term lose its effect in political discourse.

We aren't talking about all authoritarianism here. We're talking about culturally reactionary far right ethnostates. That's what a fascist state is.
Yeah and nah. Mussolini's italy wasn't really an ethnostate, and the jewish zionist fascists (this was actually a thing, now that was some crazy shit) advocated equal rights for Palestinians. I mean that's not to say a lot of parties were in it for the ethnostate business, but the 20th century was weird place with weird people.

PostPosted: Sun Jul 21, 2019 9:35 pm
by The Greater Ohio Valley
Totally Not OEP wrote:
The Greater Ohio Valley wrote:

I mean, you guys say that, but how else is a white ethnostate gonna be achieved without using dictatorial totalitarian or authoritarian power to cleanse the nation of nonehites? Pizza parties? Ice cream socials? Moving all WN’s to an uninhabited island somewhere? You guys might see different but I honestly can’t. Ethnostates (to me) require as much governmental and state power as possible to make a reality since you can’t remove the “””undesirables””” any other way.


Authoritarian Government =/= Fascism

It's the same senselessness in use that has made the term lose its effect in political discourse.

You’re right, however, fascism is authoritarian by nature. It’s true that not all authoritarians are fascist but many fascists are authoritarian since the fascist ideology is 100% authoritarian.

PostPosted: Sun Jul 21, 2019 9:49 pm
by Hirota
Greater vakolicci haven wrote:
Gormwood wrote:No chance at all Trump supporters in government will hand out Antifa labels like Oprah.

Wouldn't that be ironic?
Given the trend some people have of labelling anyone they disagree with anything like: "Facist" or "Nazi" or a few others ... yeah there is some irony in certain people suddenly complaining about the potential for abuse of words to suppress people.

PostPosted: Sun Jul 21, 2019 9:52 pm
by The Black Forrest
Hirota wrote:
Greater vakolicci haven wrote:Wouldn't that be ironic?
Given the trend some people have of labelling anyone they disagree with anything like: "Facist" or "Nazi" or a few others ... yeah there is some irony in certain people suddenly complaining about the potential for abuse of words to suppress people.


They probably learned that from the Cons after all the years of comments like libtard and the recent snowflake and safe zone comments.....

PostPosted: Sun Jul 21, 2019 9:54 pm
by Wallenburg
Kubra wrote:
Wallenburg wrote:We aren't talking about all authoritarianism here. We're talking about culturally reactionary far right ethnostates. That's what a fascist state is.
Yeah and nah. Mussolini's italy wasn't really an ethnostate, and the jewish zionist fascists (this was actually a thing, now that was some crazy shit) advocated equal rights for Palestinians. I mean that's not to say a lot of parties were in it for the ethnostate business, but the 20th century was weird place with weird people.

Sauce?

PostPosted: Sun Jul 21, 2019 10:08 pm
by Hirota
The Black Forrest wrote:
Hirota wrote:Given the trend some people have of labelling anyone they disagree with anything like: "Facist" or "Nazi" or a few others ... yeah there is some irony in certain people suddenly complaining about the potential for abuse of words to suppress people.


They probably learned that from the Cons after all the years of comments like libtard and the recent snowflake and safe zone comments.....
It's probably a chicken and egg scenario. Regardless of "who started it" it's a continuation of the undermining of legitimate discourse.

PostPosted: Mon Jul 22, 2019 1:17 am
by Vassenor
Iridencia wrote:I think the part of this I'm most tired of is the constant appeals to "just as bad." Every defense of Antifa and those like them comes back to it, that they're not as bad as fascists and therefore squeaky clean good guys.

You do not need to be "just as bad" as someone else to still be bad. Yes, fascists are much, much, much, much worse than Antifa, objectively. No, that does not mean Antifa is good. Just because smashing someone's mail box isn't as bad as setting their entire house on fire it doesn't justify smashing mail boxes. "Just as" and "too" are not the same damn thing.

The argument about whether or not calculated violence works in circumstances like these is more complex and a worthy debate to have, but I'm sick of this stupid-ass strawman argument. "NOT AS BAD NOT AS BAD NOT AS BAD NOT AS-" It doesn't fucking matter. Our disapproval is not and should not be reserved exclusively for the worst of the worst.


I don't know about anyone else but I'm more concerned about the government trying to give themselves carte blanche to round up protesters under the guise of "counter terrorist actions".

PostPosted: Mon Jul 22, 2019 2:13 am
by Telconi
Vassenor wrote:
Iridencia wrote:I think the part of this I'm most tired of is the constant appeals to "just as bad." Every defense of Antifa and those like them comes back to it, that they're not as bad as fascists and therefore squeaky clean good guys.

You do not need to be "just as bad" as someone else to still be bad. Yes, fascists are much, much, much, much worse than Antifa, objectively. No, that does not mean Antifa is good. Just because smashing someone's mail box isn't as bad as setting their entire house on fire it doesn't justify smashing mail boxes. "Just as" and "too" are not the same damn thing.

The argument about whether or not calculated violence works in circumstances like these is more complex and a worthy debate to have, but I'm sick of this stupid-ass strawman argument. "NOT AS BAD NOT AS BAD NOT AS BAD NOT AS-" It doesn't fucking matter. Our disapproval is not and should not be reserved exclusively for the worst of the worst.


I don't know about anyone else but I'm more concerned about the government trying to give themselves carte blanche to round up protesters under the guise of "counter terrorist actions".


Today I learned non-binding Senate resolutions give government powers to black bag protesters...

PostPosted: Mon Jul 22, 2019 2:20 am
by Kubra
Wallenburg wrote:
Kubra wrote: Yeah and nah. Mussolini's italy wasn't really an ethnostate, and the jewish zionist fascists (this was actually a thing, now that was some crazy shit) advocated equal rights for Palestinians. I mean that's not to say a lot of parties were in it for the ethnostate business, but the 20th century was weird place with weird people.

Sauce?
https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/.pr ... -1.5468898
I mean, coming from Haaretz, I mean you know what's up.
It's not all fascistic sunshine and roses of course, the topic of forced removal of palestinian arabs did come up and some figures were definitely for it, but the big political concern for the fascists was great britain and the soviets. In their mind, I suppose they saw the arabs as natural allies.

PostPosted: Mon Jul 22, 2019 2:22 am
by Nakena
Kubra wrote:
Wallenburg wrote:Sauce?
https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/.pr ... -1.5468898
I mean, coming from Haaretz, I mean you know what's up.


How do you can possibly know the content of the article without being a subscirber to the newspaper given that it is premium? :p