Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

https://www.timesofisrael.com/jews-agree-that-farrakhan-is-anti-semitic-after-that-it-gets-complicated/


This is a very illuminating read, because it shows the blind spots identity politics creates in people.

In the article, it claims Jews on the right believe anti-semitism on the left is the problem. Jews on the left believe anti semitism on the right is the problem. Centrists are caught in the middle.


And this, in a nutshell, is why I just can't take all this political arguing seriously. They're not really about issues! They're about your party affiliation. And that's just stupid... What's the point of winning, if you have to sacrifice any sense of integrity to win? Isn't the point of politics an expression of your values?


If the answer is no, and you believe values is "relative" or some such hogwash, you're probably a terrible person who shouldn't have kids. Just saying.

centrist autofelatio imo.

Bashy is an Expert on having his head up his Fascist Hole.

I myself stick to a certain set of principles, the principles of classical liberalism largely set forth by John Locke, and my moral principles as a Christian. I don't really care for holding to a stance just based on tribalism.

Politicians don't have to anymore...This is why they invented the "Grey" concept.

Making it OK to do BAD Things for "Good Reasons".

It seems right now politicians operate with the concept of "at least we aren't the other guys," which is just insipid.

Can't really speak to anti-semitism. But more generally, I do have an issue with political groupings as a whole, how imprecise they are, and how they promote attacks on individuals and/or the group itself instead of ideas.

I mean, think about the umbrella that is "liberal" or "conservative." Think about how many different demographics fall under each. Should a Texas rancher and Wall Street business mogul be described using the same terminology? Should an anti-war protesting hippie and a middle class urban school teacher? And could you craft a policy platform to please them both? Possibly, but only if they both idealize the party affiliation over their actual interests. Hundreds of examples like that could be found.

I'm of the debate philosophy that you pull zero punches, but separate argument from individual and attack only the idea. But when it comes to identity politics specifically, it's hard to find anyone who doesn't conflate certain ideas with their self-image. So an attack on the former is an attack on the latter. Cue rants and rage, and watch as it spirals and compounds on itself.

It's like trying to use the term millenial unironically to describe anything. By most definitions, it includes kids waiting to have their first legal drink, and early 30-somethings who could easily be on their 10th job, 3rd kid, 2nd mortgage, etc. Tell me that sh*t is one demographic with a straight face. It isn't; it's just a marketing buzzword, but we eat it up, attack it or embrace it to suit our needs.

So it's not that I'm espousing a centrist view on whatever topic. But yeah, f*** political labels and the way they dumb down our national discussion of nearly anything.

Originally posted by Digi
Can't really speak to anti-semitism. But more generally, I do have an issue with political groupings as a whole, how imprecise they are, and how they promote attacks on individuals and/or the group itself instead of ideas.

I mean, think about the umbrella that is "liberal" or "conservative." Think about how many different demographics fall under each. Should a Texas rancher and Wall Street business mogul be described using the same terminology? Should an anti-war protesting hippie and a middle class urban school teacher? And could you craft a policy platform to please them both? Possibly, but only if they both idealize the party affiliation over their actual interests. Hundreds of examples like that could be found.

I'm of the debate philosophy that you pull zero punches, but separate argument from individual and attack only the idea. But when it comes to identity politics specifically, it's hard to find anyone who doesn't conflate certain ideas with their self-image. So an attack on the former is an attack on the latter. Cue rants and rage, and watch as it spirals and compounds on itself.

It's like trying to use the term millenial unironically to describe anything. By most definitions, it includes kids waiting to have their first legal drink, and early 30-somethings who could easily be on their 10th job, 3rd kid, 2nd mortgage, etc. Tell me that sh*t is one demographic with a straight face. It isn't; it's just a marketing buzzword, but we eat it up, attack it or embrace it to suit our needs.

So it's not that I'm espousing a centrist view on whatever topic. But yeah, f*** political labels and the way they dumb down our national discussion of nearly anything. I've been making this point for months, as a European, Socialist and Unionist, I bear no resemblance to a feminist SJW. We are both of the left though and Fly attractor and other retards with agendas would call us both leftists ascribing the same views and drives to us both.

Awww...Is Puttybot getting all triggerd cause no one will treat it seriously.



AAAAAAAAAAAAAAWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Originally posted by Flyattractor
Awww...Is Puttybot getting all triggerd cause no one will treat it seriously.



AAAAAAAAAAAAAAWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW!!!!!!!!!!!!!! silly retard.

Originally posted by Putinbot1
I've been making this point for months, as a European, Socialist and Unionist, I bear no resemblance to a feminist SJW. We are both of the left though and Fly attractor and other retards with agendas would call us both leftists ascribing the same views and drives to us both.

Good to see you agree, in part at least. I feel like you whiffed pretty hard on acknowledging the "attacks ideas, not people" part of my post. But at this point I'll take what I can get on this board.

Originally posted by Putinbot1
I am a silly retard-bot.

Good to see you finally admit to it.

Originally posted by Digi
Can't really speak to anti-semitism. But more generally, I do have an issue with political groupings as a whole, how imprecise they are, and how they promote attacks on individuals and/or the group itself instead of ideas.

I mean, think about the umbrella that is "liberal" or "conservative." Think about how many different demographics fall under each. Should a Texas rancher and Wall Street business mogul be described using the same terminology? Should an anti-war protesting hippie and a middle class urban school teacher? And could you craft a policy platform to please them both? Possibly, but only if they both idealize the party affiliation over their actual interests. Hundreds of examples like that could be found.

I'm of the debate philosophy that you pull zero punches, but separate argument from individual and attack only the idea. But when it comes to identity politics specifically, it's hard to find anyone who doesn't conflate certain ideas with their self-image. So an attack on the former is an attack on the latter. Cue rants and rage, and watch as it spirals and compounds on itself.

It's like trying to use the term millenial unironically to describe anything. By most definitions, it includes kids waiting to have their first legal drink, and early 30-somethings who could easily be on their 10th job, 3rd kid, 2nd mortgage, etc. Tell me that sh*t is one demographic with a straight face. It isn't; it's just a marketing buzzword, but we eat it up, attack it or embrace it to suit our needs.

So it's not that I'm espousing a centrist view on whatever topic. But yeah, f*** political labels and the way they dumb down our national discussion of nearly anything.

This is pretty much what I was trying to say.

If you want to go under the R or the D label, have at it. It's the "No enemies on our side" philosophy I can't stand, even if that enemy tramples on a fundamental key issue.

I mean, sure, no one wants their side to look bad. But taking a principled stance isn't bad, imo. It shows you actually give a crap about the things you claim to care about when it hurts the other team.

Selective outrage just looks like you care more about image then substance.

Originally posted by cdtm
It's the "No enemies on our side" philosophy I can't stand

while i definately agree with this statement, i personally can't stand all false equivalencies peddled by self-styled centrists. the problem is not equal on both sides of the spectrum.

Originally posted by Bashar Teg
while i definately agree with this statement, i personally can't stand all false equivalencies peddled by self-styled centrists. the problem is not equal on both sides of the spectrum.

Again, No: there is no superior side here. It's not up for debate.

there is a vastly more numerous and violently radicalized side in the US, and apologists waiting to dismiss even their terrorist attacks of mass-murder attempts. and it's not on the left.

Originally posted by Surtur
Again, No: there is no superior side here. It's not up for debate.

i will point out false equivalency where i see it. cry about it, silly pretend-mod.

Originally posted by Bashar Teg
i will point out false equivalency where i see it. cry about it, silly pretend-mod.

And I'll point out what you're pointing out is bullshit when I see it. Deal with it.

Originally posted by Bashar Teg
there is a vastly more numerous and violently radicalized side in the US, and apologists waiting to dismiss even their terrorist attacks of mass-murder attempts. and it's not on the left.

No, sorry. eg Antifa is just as bad as the Alt-Right (Nazis), cos fisticuffs and broken windows is a crime and murder is a crime.

Originally posted by Surtur
And I'll point out what you're pointing out is bullshit when I see it. Deal with it.

nah you're trying to dictate the discussion via pretend-modding and i called you out for being a clown. that's what happened.

Originally posted by Robtard
No, sorry. eg Antifa is just as bad as the Alt-Right (Nazis), cos fisticuffs and broken windows is a crime and murder is a crime.

remember when the topic of the mass-murder attempt at charlottesville was dutifully derailed at every occurance? because a nazi getting punched in the nose is totally just as much of a victim as heather heyer.

There are apologists for terrorists on both sides chump. Deal with it.

Originally posted by Bashar Teg
remember when the topic of the mass-murder attempt at charlottesville was dutifully derailed at every occurrence? because a nazi getting punched in the nose is totally just as much of a victim as heather heyer.

Robtard remembers.

Originally posted by Robtard
Robtard remembers.

You or Bash ever derail a topic, Rob? Search that memory and let me know.

Originally posted by Surtur
You or Bash ever derail a topic, Rob? Search that memory and let me know.

I don't recall ever derailing a thread in an attempt to distract away from Nazis being Nazis and murdering people. No.

This is of course another distraction from you, cos the Alt-Right is looking poorly again and you be you.

Originally posted by Surtur
There are apologists for terrorists on both sides chump. Deal with it.

and then i challenge you to come up with one real leftist terror attack in recent history, you fail to produce any evidence, and do your little squirt-shtick as a distraction from your lack of evidence. we did this before, many times, and every time you proved to be a time-wasting simpleton. let's just skip to the part where you pretend triumph, k? "triggered. dur hur"

Originally posted by Bashar Teg
and then i challenge you to come up with one real leftist terror attack in recent history, you fail to produce any evidence, and do your little squirt-shtick as a distraction from your lack of evidence. we did this before, many times, and every time you proved to be a time-wasting simpleton. let's just skip to the part where you pretend triumph, k? "triggered. dur hur"

Lol Antifa are terrorists kiddo.

Originally posted by Robtard
I don't recall ever derailing a thread in an attempt to distract away from Nazis being Nazis and murdering people. No.

This is of course another distraction from you, cos the Alt-Right is looking poorly again and you be you.

Yes or no, did you ever derail?

same false-equivalency schtick, same colossal nothing-burger with zero recently documented leftist terrorist attacks. intellectually speaking, you are a deliberate and compulsive liar.

Originally posted by Bashar Teg
same false-equivalency schtick, same colossal nothing-burger with zero recently documented leftist terrorist attacks. intellectually speaking, you are a deliberate and compulsive liar.

LOL um Antifa are terrorists. They have committed politically motivated acts of violence.

Originally posted by Bashar Teg
intellectually speaking, you are a deliberate and compulsive liar.

...and while the left has it's share of the same, the right has a vast mobilized army of you retards on social media.

Originally posted by Surtur
LOL um Antifa are terrorists. They have committed politically motivated acts of violence.
Kek could you imagine being so deluded to think otherwise?

Originally posted by Bashar Teg
...and while the left has it's share of the same, the right has a vast mobilized army of you retards on social media.

The left puts retards on tv who spout dumb shit like its easier to buy a rifle than make plans with friends.

Who spread fake news that has been retweeted by CNN.

Originally posted by Emperordmb
Kek could you imagine being so deluded to think otherwise?

They've flat out said fear is one of their tactics to get what they want. Sure as hell sounds like terrorism. They commit violence to advance some political agenda, again, this is the definition of terrorism lol.

The line of thought seems to be "eh, ignore it until they murder someone".

In the MSM I have seen more defending of Antifa than I have nazis. Sometimes it's not outright defending, but more someone going "oh they're just against fascism". Which isn't true lol. It's what Antifa claims, but it is not true. But the notion is they solely use violence against neo nazis.

And you know if tomorrow someone in Antifa killed someone the left would just move the goal posts and say "neo nazis have killed more!".

Originally posted by Surtur
The left puts retards on tv who spout dumb shit like its easier to buy a rifle than make plans with friends.

Who spread fake news that has been retweeted by CNN.

^ Lack of self awareness

Originally posted by Robtard
^ Lack of self awareness

Rob, the bald headed chick you praised said what I just mentioned lol.

Will you acknowledge these kids are uninformed?

Who now?

And ins't comments like that an "Alt Fact" now? Why is it only okay when one side does it?

so let's take inventory of contradictory evidence to my point so far, and make sure i'm not missing anything:

https://i.imgur.com/Ydg9azM.jpg

Originally posted by Bashar Teg
so let's take inventory of contradictory evidence to my point so far, and make sure i'm not missing anything:

https://i.imgur.com/Ydg9azM.jpg

Antifa was noted and you ignored it, like you always do.

Originally posted by Robtard
Who now?

And ins't comments like that an "Alt Fact" now? Why is it only okay when one side does it?

How many Parkland survivors are female bald headed chicks? The one you praised before.

Originally posted by Surtur
How many Parkland survivors are female bald headed chicks? The one you praised before.

yet you can't reference on one single antifa act of terrorism on US soil. because you're an intellectually dishonest gas bladder? now tell me about that one car they flipped over.

Oh yeah, I'm sure Berkeley spent upwards of half a million dollars on security for the Ben Shapiro event because they were afraid of Ben and his JewJitsu skills

Originally posted by Bashar Teg
so let's take inventory of contradictory evidence to my point so far, and make sure i'm not missing anything:

https://i.imgur.com/Ydg9azM.jpg

Originally posted by Bashar Teg
yet you can't reference on one single antifa act of terrorism on US soil. because you're an intellectually dishonest gas bladder? now tell me about that one car they flipped over.

Dude, any time Antifa has shown up to cause violence and destruction is an act of terrorism. How is it I need to explain this to an adult?

"dude. bro. i have zero evidence but still need to smuggly bluster as if i totally squashed your argument."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antifa_(United_States)

now we've arived at "vandalism and fisticuffs are acts of terrorism, because my fee-fees". what's the body count for left-wing terrorists? zero? how about attempted and thwarted terror attacks from the left? nothing? what underachievers!'

maybe you'll get lucky, and this current whacko who's planting bombs in texas will turn out to be a leftist. fingers crossed.

http://i66.tinypic.com/161n4o9.jpg

Originally posted by Surtur
How many Parkland survivors are female bald headed chicks? The one you praised before.

Oh, the one that made you shit your pants, baby Sinead. Yeah, that made me laugh.

Originally posted by Tzeentch
http://i66.tinypic.com/161n4o9.jpg

Neat! They aren't dumb. Just terrible.

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/terrorism

: the systematic use of terror especially as a means of coercion

Originally posted by Robtard
Oh, the one that made you shit your pants, baby Sinead. Yeah, that made me laugh.

Her being clueless made you laugh?

#MeToo

Originally posted by Bashar Teg
now we've arived at "vandalism and fisticuffs are acts of terrorism, because my fee-fees". what's the body count for left-wing terrorists? zero? how about attempted and thwarted terror attacks from the left? nothing? what underachievers!'

maybe you'll get lucky, and this current whacko who's planting bombs in texas will turn out to be a leftist. fingers crossed.

You're changing the definition of terrorism to fit your arguments. Sad.

Originally posted by Surtur
Her being clueless made you laugh?

#MeToo

No, a High Schooler making you (and people like you) shit your pants made be laugh. But you knew that and were trying to be clever and spin.

Originally posted by Surtur
You're changing the definition of terrorism to fit your arguments. Sad.

you're trying to conflate terrorism with vandalism and fisticuffs. any evidence yet of leftist terrorist attacks? nothing at all but more false equivalency shtick? okay then.

Originally posted by Surtur
You're changing the definition of terrorism to fit your arguments. Sad.

And there we go:

Originally posted by Robtard
No, sorry. eg Antifa is just as bad as the Alt-Right (Nazis), cos fisticuffs and broken windows is a crime and murder is a crime.

Originally posted by Bashar Teg
you're trying to conflate terrorism with vandalism and fisticuffs. any evidence yet of leftist terrorist attacks? nothing at all but more false equivalency shtick? okay then.

So you don't know the definition of terrorism. Okie dokie.

Originally posted by Surtur
So you don't know the definition of terrorism. Okie dokie.

nah you're just wasting my time with repeated false equivalencies and conflations. have your last word to prove yourself right, because your compulsive and strategic intellectual dishonesty bores me. most of what you post in this forum is fallacious dogshit, with an occasional peanut of reason, but very few and far between.

Originally posted by Bashar Teg
nah you're just wasting my time with repeated false equivalencies and conflations. have your last word to prove yourself right, because your compulsive and strategic intellectual dishonesty bores me. most of what you post in this forum is fallacious dogshit, with an occasional peanut of reason, but very few and far between.

How dare I point out the truth to you, a leftist cuck, I won't make the mistake again.

Originally posted by Digi
Can't really speak to anti-semitism. But more generally, I do have an issue with political groupings as a whole, how imprecise they are, and how they promote attacks on individuals and/or the group itself instead of ideas.

I mean, think about the umbrella that is "liberal" or "conservative." Think about how many different demographics fall under each. Should a Texas rancher and Wall Street business mogul be described using the same terminology? Should an anti-war protesting hippie and a middle class urban school teacher? And could you craft a policy platform to please them both? Possibly, but only if they both idealize the party affiliation over their actual interests. Hundreds of examples like that could be found.

I'm of the debate philosophy that you pull zero punches, but separate argument from individual and attack only the idea. But when it comes to identity politics specifically, it's hard to find anyone who doesn't conflate certain ideas with their self-image. So an attack on the former is an attack on the latter. Cue rants and rage, and watch as it spirals and compounds on itself.

It's like trying to use the term millenial unironically to describe anything. By most definitions, it includes kids waiting to have their first legal drink, and early 30-somethings who could easily be on their 10th job, 3rd kid, 2nd mortgage, etc. Tell me that sh*t is one demographic with a straight face. It isn't; it's just a marketing buzzword, but we eat it up, attack it or embrace it to suit our needs.

So it's not that I'm espousing a centrist view on whatever topic. But yeah, f*** political labels and the way they dumb down our national discussion of nearly anything.

Outstanding points. My dick is hard from reading this.

Originally posted by Surtur
How dare I point out the truth to you, a leftist cuck, I won't make the mistake again.

https://i.imgur.com/Uxh4IeS.jpg

You're trying very hard lol.

How do you define terrorism Bash? Lay it out for us. Give us your special snowflake definition of terrorism.

It's not enough to simply compare death counts, you have to compare the scale of the problems. Sure the alt-right has a larger death count, however the frequency with which Antifa employs the use of terrorist tactics to attempt to obstruct speakers is noticeably more commonplace than whatever terroristic behavior comes out of the alt-right.

Originally posted by Emperordmb
It's not enough to simply compare death counts, you have to compare the scale of the problems. Sure the alt-right has a larger death count, however the frequency with which Antifa employs the use of terrorist tactics to attempt to obstruct speakers is noticeably more commonplace than whatever terroristic behavior comes out of the alt-right. Aren't the alt-right the only side with a 'death count'...? I've heard stories of Antifa attacking people but I don't recall the equivalent of mowing down peaceful protesters with a car as in Charlottesville. And I honestly think the scale of the Antifa problem is exaggerated by online personalities.

Stopping speakers, even silly edge lords like Shapiro is stupid imo, if they're invited to an event, let them speak. But are we really going to compare that with murder? SMH.

I'm not saying that the two are equivalent I'm saying one happens at greater frequency.

Originally posted by Emperordmb
It's not enough to simply compare death counts, you have to compare the scale of the problems. Sure the alt-right has a larger death count, however the frequency with which Antifa employs the use of terrorist tactics to attempt to obstruct speakers is noticeably more commonplace than whatever terroristic behavior comes out of the alt-right.

There is also the normalization of Antifa. Neo nazis are bad, but Antifa..well, they're just fighting fascists, I swear!

600 grand for security for a Ben Shapiro speech. A year and a half earlier he spoke at the same place and it didn't cost any security money. What changed?

Originally posted by Emperordmb
I'm not saying that the two are equivalent I'm saying one happens at greater frequency.

Fair enough, my bad there. Mean that with sincerity. Seemed for a second you were equalizing both like Surtur has done and continues to do.

Originally posted by Robtard
Stopping speakers, even silly edge lords like Shapiro is stupid imo, if they're invited to an event, let them speak. But are we really going to compare that with murder? SMH.

Nobody compared it to murder, but Rob you have to admit murder is not necessarily needed to commit an act of terror.

The keyword is terror. They want to SCARE you into thinking like they do. They have said they use fear as a weapon. These people are terrorists Rob.

Originally posted by Robtard
Fair enough, my bad there. Mean that with sincerity. Seemed for a second you were equalizing both like Surtur has done and continues to do.

When did I say it's as bad as murder? I said they are frickin terrorists.

Originally posted by Surtur
Nobody compared it to murder, but Rob you have to admit murder is not necessarily needed to commit an act of terror.

The keyword is terror. They want to SCARE you into thinking like they do. They have said they use fear as a weapon. These people are terrorists Rob.
Originally posted by Surtur
When did I say it's as bad as murder? I said they are frickin terrorists.

Your entire exchange on the last page was you trying to equalize Antifa with outright murderers. You did the same in the Charlotsville thread (where this started for you)

Yes, Antifa are labeled "terrorist", but not all terrorist are equal. Some terrorist throw mean words and water-balloons, other's punch you in the face, other's mow you down with a car and others bring buildings down.

Originally posted by Robtard
Your entire exchange on the last page was you trying to equalize Antifa with outright murderers. You did the same in the Charlotsville thread (where this started for you)

Yes, Antifa are labeled "terrorist", but not all terrorist are equal. Some terrorist throw mean words and water-balloons, other's punch you in the face, other's mow you down with a car and others bring buildings down.

Lol nobody said all terrorists are equal. But they are terrorists. At least you acknowledged that.

Do you believe the worst thing Antifa has done is hurl mean words and water balloons? Serious question.

Originally posted by cdtm
This is pretty much what I was trying to say.

If you want to go under the R or the D label, have at it. It's the "No enemies on our side" philosophy I can't stand, even if that enemy tramples on a fundamental key issue.

I mean, sure, no one wants their side to look bad. But taking a principled stance isn't bad, imo. It shows you actually give a crap about the things you claim to care about when it hurts the other team.

Selective outrage just looks like you care more about image then substance.



That last line is particularly poignant. While many wouldn't admit it, they do. And you and I do too. We all do it; there are just varying levels of self-awareness about it. But it's a hard tendency to overcome.

Originally posted by BackFire
Outstanding points. My dick is hard from reading this.

Happy to help. I hope you'll think of me the next time you're playing some pocket pool.

awecreep

Originally posted by Surtur
Again, No: there is no superior side here.
substantiate that claim. Or do I need to explain how the burden of proof works?

Originally posted by Robtard
Fair enough, my bad there. Mean that with sincerity. Seemed for a second you were equalizing both like Surtur has done and continues to do.
I'm not equalizing murder with vandalism and non-lethal violent action, the alt-right has a higher kill-count but I'm saying that given Antifa's greater propensity for largescale political violence and mobbing in general it's not fair to compare the two along only one metric. Due to antifa's largescale political violence political speech on college campuses has become noticeably more obstructed due to concerns of violent mobs for even relatively moderate speakers like Ben Shapiro who aren't even advocating for racism or fascism, which has lead to these events being obstructed through either violent destruction, the heckler's veto, the onus placed upon organizations to raise an inordinate amount of money for security, etc.

One certainly has a higher killcount, but the other has a higher incidence of politically motivated violence and fear tactics as well as a wider spread effect in obstructing political dialogue.

I don't think it's fair to declare one side as far and away worse than the other based on analysis of a single variable.

DMB, that's only because Antifa, being less extreme than the groups you're comparing them to has more support/power. That's not a reflection of how good/bad the organizations are.

I don't really think a movement largely composite of far-lefties like communists, socialists, and anarchists is really less extreme or holds moral high ground over the alt-right tbh.

Originally posted by Emperordmb
I don't really think a movement largely composite of far-lefties like communists, socialists, and anarchists is really less extreme or holds moral high ground over the alt-right tbh. Eh, they still haven't killed people. And they aren't racist, at least. So on those two facts alone, they hold at least a small high ground. But I'd agree that both factions are representative of extreme ideologies that aren't at all compatible with liberal democracy. In that sense, they both should be condemned, but the severity of what they have done should be kept in mind.

Originally posted by Bashar Teg
maybe you'll get lucky, and this current whacko who's planting bombs in texas will turn out to be a leftist. fingers crossed. First two targets were black dudes and the third was a mexican woman.

It's not looking good for us alt-bros

i guess that means it will be labeled another "false flag", as per the standard coping tactic. also stay tuned for grieving parents accused of being coached actors. brace yourself for the same recycled conspiracy vomit.

Originally posted by lazybones
Eh, they still haven't killed people. And they aren't racist, at least. So on those two facts alone, they hold at least a small high ground. But I'd agree that both factions are representative of extreme ideologies that aren't at all compatible with liberal democracy. In that sense, they both should be condemned, but the severity of what they have done should be kept in mind.
If they believe the opinion of a white person means less than that of a minority then yeah they're racists. If they use a phrase like "Your a white male!" as an insult or point of dismissal then yeah they're racists.

Originally posted by Digi
Good to see you agree, in part at least. I feel like you whiffed pretty hard on acknowledging the "attacks ideas, not people" part of my post. But at this point I'll take what I can get on this board. I would love to avoid personal attacks, however, as you have stated numerous times over the years I am an elitist and, to be honest, few people put forward well thought out ideas, the research is usually poor or the idea basic and simplistic. You are one of the few people this is not true of and has always been the case. When you start to point out flaws the Adhomininem bullshit starts and then I will always respond in kind because I have always enjoyed pouring petrol on a fire. Some people also propagate such foul and disgusting ideas it's difficult to separate the person from the idea. Bash and Rob touched on this earlier.

Originally posted by Robtard
Fair enough, my bad there. Mean that with sincerity. Seemed for a second you were equalizing both like Surtur has done and continues to do.

Why apologize? His point is still ****ing stupid. "To be fair, Anti-Fa silences speakers more often than Neo-Nazis murder people." Who ****ing cares? One group shouts people down, and the other group kills people.

What is the Diff between Anti-fa and Neo-Nazis?

Both are Leftist Fascists.

Originally posted by Digi
Can't really speak to anti-semitism. But more generally, I do have an issue with political groupings as a whole, how imprecise they are, and how they promote attacks on individuals and/or the group itself instead of ideas.

I mean, think about the umbrella that is "liberal" or "conservative." Think about how many different demographics fall under each. Should a Texas rancher and Wall Street business mogul be described using the same terminology? Should an anti-war protesting hippie and a middle class urban school teacher? And could you craft a policy platform to please them both? Possibly, but only if they both idealize the party affiliation over their actual interests. Hundreds of examples like that could be found.

I'm of the debate philosophy that you pull zero punches, but separate argument from individual and attack only the idea. But when it comes to identity politics specifically, it's hard to find anyone who doesn't conflate certain ideas with their self-image. So an attack on the former is an attack on the latter. Cue rants and rage, and watch as it spirals and compounds on itself.

It's like trying to use the term millenial unironically to describe anything. By most definitions, it includes kids waiting to have their first legal drink, and early 30-somethings who could easily be on their 10th job, 3rd kid, 2nd mortgage, etc. Tell me that sh*t is one demographic with a straight face. It isn't; it's just a marketing buzzword, but we eat it up, attack it or embrace it to suit our needs.

So it's not that I'm espousing a centrist view on whatever topic. But yeah, f*** political labels and the way they dumb down our national discussion of nearly anything. wrong. anyone who disagrees with me is a leftist and a member of hillary clinton's inner circle

So many Gays are Fascists these days.

Such a sad thing for a people that are trying to change the meaning of a word that just means Happy.

And every body knows that leftists are NEVER HAPPY!

Originally posted by lazybones
Eh, they still haven't killed people. And they aren't racist, at least. So on those two facts alone, they hold at least a small high ground. But I'd agree that both factions are representative of extreme ideologies that aren't at all compatible with liberal democracy. In that sense, they both should be condemned, but the severity of what they have done should be kept in mind.

And the problem is little weasels whine whenever they are brought up here lol. Anytime they are mentioned it is assumed the person is saying "they are 100% equal to murderous nazis".

It's bullshit. These people are terrorists. There is no debate there whatsoever.

If people wanna debate where on the scale of terrorism they fit? That is fine. But throwing little hissy fits whenever they are brought up? That's bullshit. And weasels here have tried to paint it as if the worst thing these people do is throw smoke bombs.

Not that you specifically did it, but people were legit seeming to argue with labeling these people terrorists. Let that sink in; violence is being used for political purposes. It's not terrorism though, because nazis. Antifa hasn't killed anyone. Oh sure, they've bashed people over the skull with metal bike locks, wine bottles, chucked bricks at peoples heads. But they aren't murderous nazis, so shhh. Granted if a brick had connected with someones head...well, I guess we just need to wait until the day they finally do kill someone before we can talk about them.

Originally posted by Adam_PoE
Why apologize? His point is still ****ing stupid. "To be fair, Anti-Fa silences speakers more often than Neo-Nazis murder people." Who ****ing cares? One group shouts people down, and the other group kills people.

but their fee-fees get hurt. that's just as bad as mass murder when you stop thinking about it

Originally posted by Emperordmb
I'm not equalizing murder with vandalism and non-lethal violent action, the alt-right has a higher kill-count but I'm saying that given Antifa's greater propensity for largescale political violence and mobbing in general it's not fair to compare the two along only one metric. Due to antifa's largescale political violence political speech on college campuses has become noticeably more obstructed due to concerns of violent mobs for even relatively moderate speakers like Ben Shapiro who aren't even advocating for racism or fascism, which has lead to these events being obstructed through either violent destruction, the heckler's veto, the onus placed upon organizations to raise an inordinate amount of money for security, etc.

One certainly has a higher killcount, but the other has a higher incidence of politically motivated violence and fear tactics as well as a wider spread effect in obstructing political dialogue.

I don't think it's fair to declare one side as far and away worse than the other based on analysis of a single variable.

I have not once seen anyone on this forum say "vandalism and murder are equally bad". This "equalization" thing is brought up anytime anyone mentions Antifa. It truly does seem like some would prefer these things not be mentioned until they rack up an actual body count.

This mystifies me to no end. We see violence used. We see members saying fear is a tactic they also use. That's terrorism and I'm curious why people think if you ignore terrorists they will go away. I'm curious why they think if you ignore them they will not eventually up their game.

Originally posted by Bashar Teg
but their fee-fees get hurt. that's just as bad as mass murder when you stop thinking about it

Why is it anytime anything negative about Antifa is pointed out you automatically assume it is being said they are 100% equal to murderous neo nazis?

The bar we set should not be "they aren't murderous nazis". Are they terrorists, yes or no?

Yeah the "equalization" thing is a strawman because I'm not comparing an act of murder to an act of violence or vandalism. I'm comparing a few acts of murder to much more frequent and mob acts of obstruction violence and vandalism that have a heavier impact on the overall culture and political dialogue.

Originally posted by Adam_PoE
Why apologize? His point is still ****ing stupid. "To be fair, Anti-Fa silences speakers more often than Neo-Nazis murder people." Who ****ing cares? One group shouts people down, and the other group kills people.

Because I accused him of another greater stupidity which he didn't commit, which is Surt's baby.

Originally posted by Emperordmb
Yeah the "equalization" thing is a strawman because I'm not comparing an act of murder to an act of violence or vandalism. I'm comparing a few acts of murder to much more frequent and mob acts of obstruction violence and vandalism that have a heavier impact on the overall culture and political dialogue.

Bingo. It's never just about one lone act with Antifa. If they continue to get dismissed because they aren't as bad as murderous nazis...they're just gonna get more brazen.

And I can all but guarantee you if tomorrow Antifa straight up murdered someone it would be deflected by saying they haven't killed as many people as nazis have.

Originally posted by Surtur
Bingo. It's never just about one lone act with Antifa. If they continue to get dismissed because they aren't as bad as murderous nazis...they're just gonna get more brazen.

And I can all but guarantee you if tomorrow Antifa straight up murdered someone it would be deflected by saying they haven't killed as many people as nazis have.

So a pretend scenario to top off the actual deflection and equalization tactics you've used. Big winner.

Originally posted by Robtard
So a pretend scenario to top off the actual deflection and equalization tactics you've used. Big winner.

But I never said murder was equal to what Antifa has done. It doesn't mean they aren't terrorists.

As for my hypothetical, it's just an opinion. Do you deny you would pull that tactic?

You've tried since the Charlotsville incident/thread to equalize the Alt-Right (Nazis) with Antifa, sport.

Watch me not play along with your little pretend games. Watch and seethe.

Originally posted by Robtard
You've tried since the Charlotsville incident/thread to equalize the Alt-Right (Nazis) with Antifa, sport.

Watch me not play along with your little pretend games. Watch and seethe.

Never said murder was equivalent. And I say again: they are terrorists.

And nope, I know how you'd react, was just curious if you'd admit it.

Originally posted by Robtard
You've tried since the Charlotsville incident/thread to equalize the Alt-Right (Nazis) with Antifa, sport.

Watch me not play along with your little pretend games. Watch and seethe.

it got so bad that when i made a seperate thread about heather heyer (so we could actually maybe be allowed to discuss her murder sans-phaggotry) they immediately and dutifully derailed that thread. surt was late for the party but he did his duty. bashar remembers.

http://www.killermovies.com/forums/showthread.php?threadid=645069&pagenumber=1

Originally posted by Bashar Teg
it got so bad that when i made a seperate thread about heather heyer (so we could actually maybe be allowed to discuss her murder sans-phaggotry) they immediately and dutifully derailed that thread. surt was late for the party but he did his duty. bashar remembers.

http://www.killermovies.com/forums/showthread.php?threadid=645069&pagenumber=1

^Love seeing you triggered in that thread. And how even now it triggers you.

Btw are antifa terrorists? Yay or nay?

Hold up.... I seem to remember you were the one who did the original comparative there Surt. In the first thread, the one about Dreadlock girl, you cracked it with everyone because we did not agree that a near 300 pound Neo Nazi punching a girl less than a third of his size to the ground was good. You argued for several dozen pages that because she was Antifa it was alright.

The very next time I saw the comparative being made was when a Neo Nazi was trying to mow people down with his car, killing one woman. Now, neither person there had anything to do with Antifa, and yet the very first thing that gets mentined by you is Antifa. That time YOU made the comparative, and you pulled out out of nowhere for no reason other than to continue your grievance.

Now, I'm not going to go quote hunting through utterly ancient threads, I'm bedridden and sick and not up to that sort of thing anymore... but you get my point. I don't think anybody cares that you hate Antifa. What matters is that your hatred seems to spurn you into spinning absolute lies and exaggerations on top of legitimate wrongs they may do, and then you bring them up in places where mentioning them is completely unwanted, unwarranted and unneeded.

Originally posted by Surtur
blah blah triggered blah blah. And blah blah triggers blah blah.

same tired shtick, with nothing refuted (or even attempted). same old squirt.

Originally posted by Darkstorm Zero
Hold up.... I seem to remember you were the one who did the original comparative there Surt. In the first thread, the one about Dreadlock girl, you cracked it with everyone because we did not agree that a near 300 pound Neo Nazi punching a girl less than a third of his size to the ground was good. You argued for several dozen pages that because she was Antifa it was alright.

The very next time I saw the comparative being made was when a Neo Nazi was trying to mow people down with his car, killing one woman. Now, neither person there had anything to do with Antifa, and yet the very first thing that gets mentined by you is Antifa. That time YOU made the comparative, and you pulled out out of nowhere for no reason other than to continue your grievance.

Now, I'm not going to go quote hunting through utterly ancient threads, I'm bedridden and sick and not up to that sort of thing anymore... but you get my point. I don't think anybody cares that you hate Antifa. What matters is that your hatred seems to spurn you into spinning absolute lies and exaggerations on top of legitimate wrongs they may do, and then you bring them up in places where mentioning them is completely unwanted, unwarranted and unneeded.

whoops, didn't mean to flip the page on this gem

Originally posted by Darkstorm Zero
Hold up.... I seem to remember you were the one who did the original comparative there Surt. In the first thread, the one about Dreadlock girl, you cracked it with everyone because we did not agree that a near 300 pound Neo Nazi punching a girl less than a third of his size to the ground was good. You argued for several dozen pages that because she was Antifa it was alright.

The very next time I saw the comparative being made was when a Neo Nazi was trying to mow people down with his car, killing one woman. Now, neither person there had anything to do with Antifa, and yet the very first thing that gets mentined by you is Antifa. That time YOU made the comparative, and you pulled out out of nowhere for no reason other than to continue your grievance.

Now, I'm not going to go quote hunting through utterly ancient threads, I'm bedridden and sick and not up to that sort of thing anymore... but you get my point. I don't think anybody cares that you hate Antifa. What matters is that your hatred seems to spurn you into spinning absolute lies and exaggerations on top of legitimate wrongs they may do, and then you bring them up in places where mentioning them is completely unwanted, unwarranted and unneeded.

Yawn. This is bullshit, but you'll get a bingo from the usual suspects.

I stopped reading after your first lie. I didn't say because she was Antifa it was alright. It was specifically about the fact she had participated in violence.

Originally posted by Darkstorm Zero
Hold up.... I seem to remember you were the one who did the original comparative there Surt. In the first thread, the one about Dreadlock girl, you cracked it with everyone because we did not agree that a near 300 pound Neo Nazi punching a girl less than a third of his size to the ground was good. You argued for several dozen pages that because she was Antifa it was alright.

The very next time I saw the comparative being made was when a Neo Nazi was trying to mow people down with his car, killing one woman. Now, neither person there had anything to do with Antifa, and yet the very first thing that gets mentined by you is Antifa. That time YOU made the comparative, and you pulled out out of nowhere for no reason other than to continue your grievance.

Now, I'm not going to go quote hunting through utterly ancient threads, I'm bedridden and sick and not up to that sort of thing anymore... but you get my point. I don't think anybody cares that you hate Antifa. What matters is that your hatred seems to spurn you into spinning absolute lies and exaggerations on top of legitimate wrongs they may do, and then you bring them up in places where mentioning them is completely unwanted, unwarranted and unneeded.

Bingo

Bingo

Bingo

#CalledIt

Originally posted by Surtur
Yawn. This is bullshit, but you'll get a bingo from the usual suspects.

I stopped reading after your first lie. I didn't say because she was Antifa it was alright. It was specifically about the fact she had participated in violence.

You didn't bring that up until later. But you originally justified it because she went there as a member of Antifa. Your words, not mine.

Oh, and good on you eliminating context to suit yourself, but if your going to snip posts, then you don't deserve to be on KMC, or any other discussion forum.

Originally posted by Darkstorm Zero
You didn't bring that up until later. But you originally justified it because she went there as a member of Antifa. Your words, not mine.

Oh, and good on you eliminating context to suit yourself, but if your going to snip posts, then you don't deserve to be on KMC, or any other discussion forum.

She went there with the intention to do violence, posted about it, and did violence. She got hit while in the middle of a fight. You can see it in the clip.

And the "you don't deserve to be on KMC " is more nonsense. It's why I largely ignore you. Selective whining.

DZ's truthbomb sure did a number on you, sport. It's why you're dancing now.

Originally posted by Surtur
She went there with the intention to do violence, posted about it, and did violence.

And the "you don't deserve to be on KMC " is more nonsense. It's why I largely ignore you. Selective whining.

You could not prove she actually participated in violence at the time. Holding a bottle in her hand in the middle of a riot is not a crime in and of itself.

No, it's not. You missed several important points because "HUFF HUFF, He's not agreeing with me!" It's funny to watch, but it proves that even when Antifa isn't involved with a subject, you bring them up just to say "**** Antifa". Even when a person is killed.

Not to mention you didn't read the last paragraph.

Like I said, selective reading to suit your context just to suit yourself is classic Surter. But go back, read it. I dare you.

Originally posted by Robtard
DZ's truthbomb sure did a number on you, sport. It's why you're dancing now.

There is no need to dance. The clip of her getting hit showed her in the midst of a fight when it happened. That is how I found out about it.

Later on, we got more examples of her committing violence at the event.

Originally posted by Darkstorm Zero

But go back, read it. I dare you.

http://i.imgur.com/wUwB7sJ.jpeg

Originally posted by Darkstorm Zero
You could not prove she actually participated in violence at the time. Holding a bottle in her hand in the middle of a riot is not a crime in and of itself.

Lol wow. I couldn't prove it, but it was my opinion at the time she did. From the beginning.



Yes, it is nonsense. You were already peddling bullshit, no need to indulge it further.



But again: from the very beginning I thought she had participated in violence lol.

^ Bernard being a Bernard after he was challenged to go back and see for himself.

Originally posted by Darkstorm Zero
Hold up.... I seem to remember you were the one who did the original comparative there Surt. In the first thread, the one about Dreadlock girl, you cracked it with everyone because we did not agree that a near 300 pound Neo Nazi punching a girl less than a third of his size to the ground was good. You argued for several dozen pages that because she was Antifa it was alright.

The very next time I saw the comparative being made was when a Neo Nazi was trying to mow people down with his car, killing one woman. Now, neither person there had anything to do with Antifa, and yet the very first thing that gets mentined by you is Antifa. That time YOU made the comparative, and you pulled out out of nowhere for no reason other than to continue your grievance.

Now, I'm not going to go quote hunting through utterly ancient threads, I'm bedridden and sick and not up to that sort of thing anymore... but you get my point. I don't think anybody cares that you hate Antifa. What matters is that your hatred seems to spurn you into spinning absolute lies and exaggerations on top of legitimate wrongs they may do, and then you bring them up in places where mentioning them is completely unwanted, unwarranted and unneeded.
Wait, what confirmation do you have that the guy who punched the dread girl is a neo nazi?

Originally posted by Surtur
There is no need to dance. The clip of her getting hit showed her in the midst of a fight when it happened. That is how I found out about it.

Later on, we got more examples of her committing violence at the event.

Ja, because her squatting beside her bleeding boyfriends head is a crime now.... "She participated!" She was trying to keep her man from being mauled by a pack of Neo Nazis.

Originally posted by Surtur
Lol wow. I couldn't prove it, but it was my opinion at the time she did. From the beginning.

And?

Originally posted by Surtur
Yes, it is nonsense. You were already peddling bullshit, no need to indulge it further.

Except I wasn't. Nor does one completely separate point invalidate another completely separate point. If you cannot argue the complete point because your lazy then say so. Don't blame me when i'm not wrong in what I said. Perhaps then you should not have replied at all.

Originally posted by Surtur
But again: from the very beginning I thought she had participated in violence lol.

Which does not diminish my point at all.

Originally posted by darthgoober
Wait, what confirmation do you have that the guy who punched the dread girl is a neo nazi?

Because he was a convicted criminal with known white supremacy connections.

Originally posted by Robtard
^ Bernard being a Bernard after he was challenged to go back and see for himself.

I don't need to go back and see, Darkstorm Zero confirmed that for me with what he just said.

The comment about me being unable to prove right away she was involved doesn't change the fact from the beginning I thought she was involved in the violence. So yes, I said someone I thought from the beginning was involved in violence having violence done back to her was fair game.

Originally posted by Darkstorm Zero
Because he was a convicted criminal with known white supremacy connections.
What kind of connections?

Originally posted by Darkstorm Zero
Because he was a convicted criminal with known white supremacy connections.

uh oh. inconvenient fact. get ready for more schtick

go on. waste your time posting the evidence for them to ignore and 'pooh pooh'.

Originally posted by darthgoober
What kind of connections?

Um, he started 'Identity Evropa', a White Supremacist website. Is that enough or do you need further proof?

Originally posted by darthgoober
What kind of connections?

He was arrested for things like minor hate crimes, and was known as a friend among the Neo Nazi and KKK circles.


All that being said, I regret coming back into these debates... I simply do not have the energy for this sort of shit that I once did. My passion of it has dwindled in the face of..... other issues.

With that I shall bid thee good day.

Originally posted by Darkstorm Zero
Ja, because her squatting beside her beleeding boyfriends head is a crime now.... "She participated!" She was trying to keep her man from being mauled by a pack of Neo Nazis.



And?



Except I wasn't. Nor does one completely separate point invalidate another completely separate point. If you cannot argue the complete point because your lazy then say so. Don't blame me when i'm not wrong in what I said. Perhaps then you should not have replied at all.



Which does not diminish my point at all.

You lied. At the very least you were misleading. You were acting like I had no good reason to think violence being done back to her was fair game, when in fact from the beginning I thought she had participated.

So how does it not diminish your point? Yes, I hate Antifa. Yes, I thought a violent member of the group warranted violence in return. If you want to say I derailed a thread, okay?

DZ didn't lie, you're just doing flips because he nailed you to the wall with this:

Originally posted by Darkstorm Zero
Hold up.... I seem to remember you were the one who did the original comparative there Surt. In the first thread, the one about Dreadlock girl, you cracked it with everyone because we did not agree that a near 300 pound Neo Nazi punching a girl less than a third of his size to the ground was good. You argued for several dozen pages that because she was Antifa it was alright.

The very next time I saw the comparative being made was when a Neo Nazi was trying to mow people down with his car, killing one woman. Now, neither person there had anything to do with Antifa, and yet the very first thing that gets mentined by you is Antifa. That time YOU made the comparative, and you pulled out out of nowhere for no reason other than to continue your grievance.

Now, I'm not going to go quote hunting through utterly ancient threads, I'm bedridden and sick and not up to that sort of thing anymore... but you get my point. I don't think anybody cares that you hate Antifa. What matters is that your hatred seems to spurn you into spinning absolute lies and exaggerations on top of legitimate wrongs they may do, and then you bring them up in places where mentioning them is completely unwanted, unwarranted and unneeded.

Nope. He pretty much Flat Out Lied.

Nice to see that you still support such behavior.

Originally posted by Robtard
Um, he started 'Identity Evropa', a White Supremacist website. Is that enough or do you need further proof?
Well I would need to check look into it a little deeper, but it definitely has the potential. And I'm only saying that I'd need to look into it a little deeper because there's always the possibility of a group like neo nazis effectively taking over a web site. If it was started as a neo nazi website then yeah that'd definitely be enough.

Originally posted by Robtard
DZ didn't lie, you're just doing flips because he nailed you to the wall with this:

Umm, he says I said it was okay because she was Antifa. No, I thought it was okay because *I thought she had participated in the violence* with her fellow Antifa bros.

Originally posted by darthgoober
Well I would need to check look into it a little deeper, but it definitely has the potential. And I'm only saying that I'd need to look into it a little deeper because there's always the possibility of a group like neo nazis effectively taking over a web site. If it was started as a neo nazi website then yeah that'd definitely be enough.

Okay, he was also one of the key promoters/starters of the Charlotsville "Jews will not replace us!" Alt-Right rally. Do you need further proof, because I'm starting to feel unless I can show you a picture of him giving Himmler a hummer, you'll brush it aside.

Originally posted by Surtur
Umm, he says I said it was okay because she was Antifa. No, I thought it was okay because *I thought she had participated in the violence* with her fellow Antifa bros.

**** it, because you lie and misinterpret my words to suit yourself, I'm going to answer.

YOU COULD NOT PROVE IT AT THE TIME OF THE ARGUMENT, thus at the time your argument boiled down to her being an Antifa member was the entire justification, because it was the ONLY Justification you had.

Don't jerk people around and say "because later evidence proves things", when the argument was had, you had no leg to stand on. That was the important thing to remember, because that was when you were being irrational. And that was my point.

But you will ignore that just like you'll ignore the 2nd point, where you brought Antifa up out of f**king nowhere in a thread where a Neo Nazi mowed down and killed an innocent woman. You obviously give no shits about appropriate time and place considerations do you?

Originally posted by Flyattractor
Nope. He pretty much Flat Out Lied.

Nice to see that you still support such behavior.

Where is the lie? Hows lefty BTW? Did you chop him off your wrist yet? Or do you still need that wanking hand?

Originally posted by Darkstorm Zero
He was arrested for things like minor hate crimes, and was known as a friend among the Neo Nazi and KKK circles.


All that being said, I regret coming back into these debates... I simply do not have the energy for this sort of shit that I once did. My passion of it has dwindled in the face of..... other issues.

With that I shall bid thee good day.
Minor hate crimes and being friends with neo nazis isn't really enough though. You can be a racist without being a nazi, it would depend on the nature of the crime. By the same token you can be a friend with nazis without actually being one, just as a Muslim can be friends with someone in ISIS without actually being an ISIS fighter.

Now don't get me wrong because depending on the specific circumstances he very well could be a neo nazi and there's certainly cause to suspect him of being such. And if what Rob said is accurate and he actually started a neo nazi website then that's more than enough, it's just that I'm always suspicious of claims that are supported by headlines without reading the content of the article.

Originally posted by Darkstorm Zero
Where is the lie? Hows lefty BTW? Did you chop him off your wrist yet? Or do you still need that wanking hand?

The Lie is there everytime You open your mouth to push you Leftist Fascist Comments.

Originally posted by darthgoober
Minor hate crimes and being friends with neo nazis isn't really enough though. You can be a racist without being a nazi, it would depend on the nature of the crime. By the same token you can be a friend with nazis without actually being one, just as a Muslim can be friends with someone in ISIS without actually being an ISIS fighter.

Now don't get me wrong because depending on the specific circumstances he very well could be a neo nazi and there's certainly cause to suspect him of being such. And if what Rob said is accurate and he actually started a neo nazi website then that's more than enough, it's just that I'm always suspicious of claims that are supported by headlines without reading the content of the article.

I always thought that if a guy supports the principals of the ideology, then he follows that ideology, IE if you follow and support the Nazi principals, then you are a Nazi. Or in this case a Neo Nazi.

But that's just my defining qualifier, may be different for you.

Originally posted by Flyattractor
The Lie is there everytime You open your mouth to push you Leftist Fascist Comments.




And of course, you have evidence of me even being left, never mind anything I've said being a lie.

Hows about you just shut up? You have had nothing useful to say since 2010.

So you admit to being a actual NAZI seeing as how the Left shares many of the same principals as the Actual Nazis then?

Gottchya..

Originally posted by Flyattractor
So you admit to being a actual NAZI seeing as how the Left shares many of the same principals as the Actual Nazis then?

Gottchya..



No I don't. I'm not a leftist, nor do I follow Nazism or it's principals.

Again, put down the bong and beer, keep lefty out of your panties, and try to think before posting.

Originally posted by Darkstorm Zero
I always thought that if a guy supports the principals of the ideology, then he follows that ideology, IE if you follow and support the Nazi principals, then you are a Nazi. Or in this case a Neo Nazi.

But that's just my defining qualifier, may be different for you.

"We are what we pretend to be, so we must be careful about what we pretend to be." -Kurt Vonnegut (Mother Night)

Which is something I've said in regards to some Trumpers here.

Originally posted by Darkstorm Zero
No I don't. I'm not a leftist, nor do I follow Nazism or it's principals.

Again, put down the bong and beer, keep lefty out of your panties, and try to think before posting.


Nah. You are a Nazi.

Originally posted by Flyattractor
Nah. You are a Nazi.

Nah. You are an idiot.

Originally posted by Darkstorm Zero
Nah. You are an idiot.

Whatever you say Fascist Lap Dog.

Originally posted by Darkstorm Zero
I always thought that if a guy supports the principals of the ideology, then he follows that ideology, IE if you follow and support the Nazi principals, then you are a Nazi. Or in this case a Neo Nazi.

But that's just my defining qualifier, may be different for you.
Do you hold Muslims to the same standard in regards to being members of ISIS? What about liberals and members of Antifa?

Originally posted by darthgoober
Do you hold Muslims to the same standard in regards to being members of ISIS? What about liberals and members of Antifa?

No, they don't follow the same principals. I've known many muslims who deride ISIS, because they believe that the faith is meant to be one of peace, not war.

I don't know much about Antifa as a group, I've always seen them as a sort of grassroots youth movement that are controlled by a small group of stupid retards who can't seem to understand the qualities of subtlety. Liberals in general don't take to the streets and cause civil disturbances. So no, they are separate.

Neo Nazis, and Nazis in general for that matter, are categorized almost overwhelmingly by their extreme violent action, and their bigoted views. This man committed violent actions, and has a bias for white supremacy. Him punching down dreadlock girl was not the only instance of violence from this guy.

Originally posted by Darkstorm Zero
No, they don't follow the same principals. I've known many muslims who deride ISIS, because they believe that the faith is meant to be one of peace, not war.
I'm not saying ALL muslims, I'm saying any that do believe the same core principles. Do you think that any Muslim who believes things like western society is evil and violence in adherence to the faith is ok should be considered and treated as members of ISIS?

Originally posted by Darkstorm Zero
I don't know much about Antifa as a group, I've always seen them as a sort of grassroots youth movement that are controlled by a small group of stupid retards who can't seem to understand the qualities of subtlety. Liberals in general don't take to the streets and cause civil disturbances. So no, they are separate.

Neo Nazis, and Nazis in general for that matter, are categorized almost overwhelmingly by their extreme violent action, and their bigoted views. This man committed violent actions, and has a bias for white supremacy. Him punching down dreadlock girl was not the only instance of violence from this guy.
See now you're talking about actions and activism not simply sharing/supporting the same basic ideology, that's different than what you said before. I fully agree that someone who actively participates in Nazism is a Nazi, but simply agreeing with them on a few issues(even if the issues are abhorrent) and being friends with a few isn't enough to actually classify them as Nazis. I know it might seem like a silly distinction to make but I believe it's an important one. Regardless of their shared propensity for villainous behavior after all, the Joker is not the Riddler and it's not right to use the Joker's actions as a means to make the Riddler seem worse or vice versa.

Yeah plus if we can affiliate the alt-right with the nazis, then can we affiliate the far left with Stalin and Mao?

Originally posted by Emperordmb
Yeah plus if we can affiliate the alt-right with the nazis, then can we affiliate the far left with Stalin and Mao?

Cept the Nazis labelled/re-branded themselves "Alt-Right"; it wasn't a label pushed on them. Did you forget?

Originally posted by Darkstorm Zero
**** it, because you lie and misinterpret my words to suit yourself, I'm going to answer.

YOU COULD NOT PROVE IT AT THE TIME OF THE ARGUMENT, thus at the time your argument boiled down to her being an Antifa member was the entire justification, because it was the ONLY Justification you had.

Don't jerk people around and say "because later evidence proves things", when the argument was had, you had no leg to stand on. That was the important thing to remember, because that was when you were being irrational. And that was my point.

But you will ignore that just like you'll ignore the 2nd point, where you brought Antifa up out of f**king nowhere in a thread where a Neo Nazi mowed down and killed an innocent woman. You obviously give no shits about appropriate time and place considerations do you?

I couldn't prove it, but it was my opinion she had. That is the point. Whether I could prove it or not, I was not advocating attacking innocent protesters or anything like that. Don't jerk people around? Don't spread bullshit.

Bottom line: I thought she was violent from the beginning. The fact later evidence came out to prove me correct is actually irrelevant.

If there was a group of Antifa just doing nothing but peacefully protesting and some people just came up and beat the shit out of them? That is not okay. Going to somewhere just to start shit and participating in violence? Not okay. And from the beginning that is what I thought, whether I could prove it or not.

Originally posted by Robtard
Cept the Nazis labelled/re-branded themselves "Alt-Right"; it wasn't a label pushed on them. Did you forget?
I'm not saying or suggesting that it didn't happen because I know full well that such a thing is possible, but when and how exactly did this official name change happen? Did a couple of core leaders of the neo nazis and KKK come out and make an announcement that they'd thereafter being calling themselves Alt Right or what?

Originally posted by darthgoober
I'm not saying or suggesting that it didn't happen because I know full well that such a thing is possible, but when and how exactly did this official name change happen? Did a couple of core leaders of the neo nazis and KKK come out and make an announcement that they'd thereafter being calling themselves Alt Right or what?

Here is the problem with "they labeled themselves it!". This was done, apparently, by Richard Spencer. He applied that label to himself and his definition was never "nazi".

But now instead of people self identifying as members of the "alt right" it is hurled as an insult. It's the p*ssies way out of calling someone a nazi.

Originally posted by Surtur
Here is the problem with "they labeled themselves it!". This was done, apparently, by Richard Spencer. He applied that label to himself and his definition was never "nazi".

But now instead of people self identifying as members of the "alt right" it is hurled as an insult. It's the p*ssies way out of calling someone a nazi.
Ah, yeah it doesn't surprise me, that guys's a freaking moron lol

Do you know how he did define it at the time?

Originally posted by darthgoober
Ah, yeah it doesn't surprise me, that guys's a freaking moron lol

Do you know how he did define it at the time?

A few months ago he did this long interview with Roaming Millenial which does show a lot of how he thinks. Essentially it was meant to merely be an alternative to mainstream Republicans, he feels that mainstream Republicans were not able to effectively counter the left and feels a better way to do this is identity politics.

I think the guy is racist don't get me wrong, but what is implied with the term when used as an insult is not what he meant with it(according to him). Plus like I said he applies the term to himself. People like Ben Shapiro have been labeled alt right though lol.

Originally posted by Surtur
Here is the problem with "they labeled themselves it!". This was done, apparently, by Richard Spencer. He applied that label to himself and his definition was never "nazi".

But now instead of people self identifying as members of the "alt right" it is hurled as an insult. It's the p*ssies way out of calling someone a nazi.

Yeah, covered that, White Supremacist relabeled and re-branded themselves as "Alt-Right" as the classic Neo-Nazi shtick isn't as appealing to potential angry White people. Take away the haircuts, polo shirts and khakis, they're still Nazis, sport.

Careful. Else it might look like you're trying to defend them again and your little buddy Spencer.

So again if you are going to associate all white supremacists with the Nazis can we associate all marxists with the Soviet Union and Maoist China?