US government says I'm not. What do I know
Advertisement
by Thermodolia » Mon Aug 14, 2017 1:44 pm
by Ostroeuropa » Mon Aug 14, 2017 1:45 pm
Staniel wrote:Ostroeuropa wrote:
Strikes me as fairly irrelevant anyway.
It's like arguing over whether the french or british "Initiated" the murders at waterloo.
If you turned up, you knew what was going to happen. Removing anti-fa goons and only allowing or inviting "Good behavior" anti-fascist groups to protest one of these marches would answer the question definitively.
The oath-keepers for instance, don't ALWAYS cause a breakout of violence when they turn up, and argue they never have.
Anti-Fa DOES.
Thank you.
by Thermodolia » Mon Aug 14, 2017 1:45 pm
by Senkaku » Mon Aug 14, 2017 1:46 pm
Soldati Senza Confini wrote:Genivaria wrote:I'm sorry back up.
Did you just claim that the African climate and geography is actually EASIER then European?
*full face-desk*
Civilization fucking FLOURISHED in Europe because of the temperate climate and abundant natural resources as well as several inland rivers.
HOW can you have this so backwards?
Well, to be fair Africa also had temperate climates along the river deltas, and it does make sense that we do find their most advanced civilizations around a river and not in the middle of the jungle.
Having access to bodies of water does help with technology and social advances.
by Ostroeuropa » Mon Aug 14, 2017 1:47 pm
Senkaku wrote:Ostroeuropa wrote:
It is, yes. Violent intent cannot reasonably be assumed given the historical and cultural context of bearing arms in america, especially if the issue of "rights" is the topic at hand.
Lemme strut around your house with all my friends waving assault rifles and symbols that offend you and loudly talking about how we hate your political views, and see how you feel!Soldati Senza Confini wrote:
Well, to be fair Africa also had temperate climates along the river deltas, and it does make sense that we do find their most advanced civilizations around a river and not in the middle of the jungle.
Having access to bodies of water does help with technology and social advances.
And that's why Africa's greatest civilizations were along the Niger and the Nile, but there's a whole list of reasons why things didn't go better for African states and why they didn't develop as much as Eurasia:
north-south axis preventing crop diffusion (as opposed to Eurasia's east-west axis), tsetse flies preventing large domesticated animals from being a thing (and malaria and stuff just generally killing ppl left and right), lack of natural ports (Europe has a longer coastline than Africa), terrain unsuited to agriculture (low-rainfall Sahara, super high-rainfall jungles of the Congo Basin), sheer distance from other cradles of civilization (Mesopotamia/Europe separated by the Sahara and oceans, China and India and the Americas separated by oceans)
Furthermore, the basic argument whoever started this whole nonsense proposed was "cold speeds up evolution", which is dumb and wrong. Firstly, evolution in most species proceeds at a more rapid rate in the tropics, with more species emerging there, and secondly, humans haven't been out of Africa long enough for "evolution" to do much of anything to us. Thirdly, Europe's climate is cooler than Africa's, but much of Africa is either arid or dependent on the monsoon (see: Ethiopian famines,
why am I even arguing about this smh it's dumb
by Senkaku » Mon Aug 14, 2017 1:49 pm
Ostroeuropa wrote:Staniel wrote:
Thank you.
It's fairly ridiculous that the progressive memory hole problem has led so many to forget that papers and academics and progressive activists and such spent a long time arguing that Klan marches and such WERE violence, to give them license to respond with violence.
Remember the spencer punch?
Right, exactly.
Now, why would they have needed to perform such ridiculous mental gymnastics and put forward those arguments?
You know why. We all know why.
Only one of these factions has argued that they have license to perform violence when the other performs a demonstration. It's a written confession by hundreds of their activists in positions of power, and massively undermines the claim of "Well, they started it!".
by Staniel » Mon Aug 14, 2017 1:49 pm
NewsFastTicker: Nogal-Groot protests for more water in homes advance to second day | 3 wounded in New Staniel City concert shooting; suspect still at large | Phone lines still cut off in Avery due to powerful stormA 15.4 civilization, according to this index.
by Senkaku » Mon Aug 14, 2017 1:50 pm
Ostroeuropa wrote:Senkaku wrote:Lemme strut around your house with all my friends waving assault rifles and symbols that offend you and loudly talking about how we hate your political views, and see how you feel!
And that's why Africa's greatest civilizations were along the Niger and the Nile, but there's a whole list of reasons why things didn't go better for African states and why they didn't develop as much as Eurasia:
north-south axis preventing crop diffusion (as opposed to Eurasia's east-west axis), tsetse flies preventing large domesticated animals from being a thing (and malaria and stuff just generally killing ppl left and right), lack of natural ports (Europe has a longer coastline than Africa), terrain unsuited to agriculture (low-rainfall Sahara, super high-rainfall jungles of the Congo Basin), sheer distance from other cradles of civilization (Mesopotamia/Europe separated by the Sahara and oceans, China and India and the Americas separated by oceans)
Furthermore, the basic argument whoever started this whole nonsense proposed was "cold speeds up evolution", which is dumb and wrong. Firstly, evolution in most species proceeds at a more rapid rate in the tropics, with more species emerging there, and secondly, humans haven't been out of Africa long enough for "evolution" to do much of anything to us. Thirdly, Europe's climate is cooler than Africa's, but much of Africa is either arid or dependent on the monsoon (see: Ethiopian famines,
why am I even arguing about this smh it's dumb
Strutting around a house could constitute harassment dependent on how long it took.
Strutting past a house would not.
by Ostroeuropa » Mon Aug 14, 2017 1:51 pm
Senkaku wrote:Ostroeuropa wrote:
It's fairly ridiculous that the progressive memory hole problem has led so many to forget that papers and academics and progressive activists and such spent a long time arguing that Klan marches and such WERE violence, to give them license to respond with violence.
Remember the spencer punch?
Right, exactly.
Now, why would they have needed to perform such ridiculous mental gymnastics and put forward those arguments?
You know why. We all know why.
Only one of these factions has argued that they have license to perform violence when the other performs a demonstration. It's a written confession by hundreds of their activists in positions of power, and massively undermines the claim of "Well, they started it!".
No one would be that torqued if it had been "some violence". In this case a fucking Nazi ran a bunch of people over with his car. I don't particularly care who started it, the white supremacist in this case was the fucking terrorist, and he was enabled by the mob of reactionary hooligans that decided to start this whole fucking retarded protest over a damn statue (aka white supremacist neo-Nazi snowflakes).
by Ostroeuropa » Mon Aug 14, 2017 1:53 pm
Senkaku wrote:Ostroeuropa wrote:
Strutting around a house could constitute harassment dependent on how long it took.
Strutting past a house would not.
I'm sure you'd be completely fine with it then, so long as I danced right up to the very edge of the legal limit. Hateful people waving killing machines isn't scary at all, right?
by Vassenor » Mon Aug 14, 2017 2:00 pm
Staniel wrote:Ostroeuropa wrote:
Strikes me as fairly irrelevant anyway.
It's like arguing over whether the french or british "Initiated" the murders at waterloo.
If you turned up, you knew what was going to happen. Removing anti-fa goons and only allowing or inviting "Good behavior" anti-fascist groups to protest one of these marches would answer the question definitively.
The oath-keepers for instance, don't ALWAYS cause a breakout of violence when they turn up, and argue they never have.
Anti-Fa DOES.
Thank you.
by Thermodolia » Mon Aug 14, 2017 2:00 pm
by Unified Kekistan » Mon Aug 14, 2017 2:01 pm
by Vassenor » Mon Aug 14, 2017 2:04 pm
Unified Kekistan wrote:Before you call me a liar, watch the non-news organization videos of the protests on YouTube for yourself. The media WILL lie about this, just as they did with Berkeley. My post was NOT apologia for the right. I wanted to objectively portray the events that occurred, where so many in this thread refuse to. The Unite the Right (catchy as fuck) members did not initiate the violence. You can't tell from the videos so I didn't say anything about it, but the right was probably instigating the left. Still. They did not. Hit. First. The left always hits first. They did at Berkeley, they did with Milo, they did with Richard Spencer, they did at the inauguration.
by Torrocca » Mon Aug 14, 2017 2:05 pm
Unified Kekistan wrote:Before you call me a liar, watch the non-news organization videos of the protests on YouTube for yourself. The media WILL lie about this, just as they did with Berkeley. My post was NOT apologia for the right. I wanted to objectively portray the events that occurred, where so many in this thread refuse to. The Unite the Right (catchy as fuck) members did not initiate the violence. You can't tell from the videos so I didn't say anything about it, but the right was probably instigating the left. Still. They did not. Hit. First. The left always hits first. They did at Berkeley, they did with Milo, they did with Richard Spencer, they did at the inauguration.
by Vassenor » Mon Aug 14, 2017 2:06 pm
Torrocca wrote:Unified Kekistan wrote:Before you call me a liar, watch the non-news organization videos of the protests on YouTube for yourself. The media WILL lie about this, just as they did with Berkeley. My post was NOT apologia for the right. I wanted to objectively portray the events that occurred, where so many in this thread refuse to. The Unite the Right (catchy as fuck) members did not initiate the violence. You can't tell from the videos so I didn't say anything about it, but the right was probably instigating the left. Still. They did not. Hit. First. The left always hits first. They did at Berkeley, they did with Milo, they did with Richard Spencer, they did at the inauguration.
If you're so cocksure that the counter-protesters initiated violence, surely you'd have 100% concrete proof to post here backing you up, no?
by Ostroeuropa » Mon Aug 14, 2017 2:08 pm
Vassenor wrote:Unified Kekistan wrote:Before you call me a liar, watch the non-news organization videos of the protests on YouTube for yourself. The media WILL lie about this, just as they did with Berkeley. My post was NOT apologia for the right. I wanted to objectively portray the events that occurred, where so many in this thread refuse to. The Unite the Right (catchy as fuck) members did not initiate the violence. You can't tell from the videos so I didn't say anything about it, but the right was probably instigating the left. Still. They did not. Hit. First. The left always hits first. They did at Berkeley, they did with Milo, they did with Richard Spencer, they did at the inauguration.
So let's see your evidence then. Because random out-of-context youtube videos aren't evidence.
Newsflash: People on YouTube can lie too.
by Aellex » Mon Aug 14, 2017 2:10 pm
by Vassenor » Mon Aug 14, 2017 2:11 pm
by Liriena » Mon Aug 14, 2017 2:16 pm
Ostroeuropa wrote:Explain to me how every fascist demonstration ends up having violent incidents, but not every progressive march, if fascists are violently opposed to progressive protest and not visa versa?
I am: A pansexual, pantheist, green socialist An aspiring writer and journalist | Political compass stuff: Economic Left/Right: -8.13 Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -8.92 For: Grassroots democracy, workers' self-management, humanitarianism, pacifism, pluralism, environmentalism, interculturalism, indigenous rights, minority rights, LGBT+ rights, feminism, optimism Against: Nationalism, authoritarianism, fascism, conservatism, populism, violence, ethnocentrism, racism, sexism, religious bigotry, anti-LGBT+ bigotry, death penalty, neoliberalism, tribalism, cynicism ⚧Copy and paste this in your sig if you passed biology and know gender and sex aren't the same thing.⚧ |
by Ostroeuropa » Mon Aug 14, 2017 2:17 pm
Vassenor wrote:Also it's still depressing the way people are trying to justify terrorism and murder because BUT THE OTHER SIDE IS JUST AS BAD or THE OTHER SIDE TOTALLY STRUCK FIRST SO THAT MAKES EVERYTHING OK BECAUSE YOUTUBE VIDEOS.
by Senkaku » Mon Aug 14, 2017 2:17 pm
Ostroeuropa wrote:If a mob intends violence against you, and there's arguments put forward the car was struck first, which will ultimately be settled in court, self-defense would apply.
by Vassenor » Mon Aug 14, 2017 2:17 pm
Ostroeuropa wrote:Vassenor wrote:Also it's still depressing the way people are trying to justify terrorism and murder because BUT THE OTHER SIDE IS JUST AS BAD or THE OTHER SIDE TOTALLY STRUCK FIRST SO THAT MAKES EVERYTHING OK BECAUSE YOUTUBE VIDEOS.
It's neither terrorism nor murder if the other side struck the car first, it is self-defense.
Advertisement
Users browsing this forum: Aadhiris, Al-Haqiqah, Castille de Italia, Elejamie, Ifreann, Jerzylvania, Likhinia, Neanderthaland, Shrillland, Temple of the computer2, The Two Jerseys, Valrifall, Western Arba Fir
Advertisement