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

The spergout: https://twitter.com/atheist_cvnt/status/1191157832546041856?s=20

Additional reading: https://www.autism.org.uk/about/behaviour/meltdowns.aspx

uh oh, he got caught saying the secret things out loud.

but never mind all that, here comes the deflection brigade to inform us on the dangers if antifa. personal attacks, strawman arguments, and memes will also be served.

Originally posted by Bashar Teg
uh oh, he got caught saying the secret things out loud.

but never mind all that, here comes the deflection brigade to inform us on the dangers if antifa. personal attacks, strawman arguments, and memes will also be served.
Funny thing is that he was still too much of a pussy to just say 'ni**ers'.

Originally posted by Bashar Teg
uh oh, he got caught saying the secret things out loud.

but never mind all that, here comes the deflection brigade to inform us on the dangers if antifa. personal attacks, strawman arguments, and memes will also be served.

You know you'd really think you'd learn not to self trigger and open up these threads to derailment. It amuses me how you just can't help yourself, that's gotta be some sort of mental illness.

*WHOOOOOOOOOOOOOSH*

look who wasted no time validating my prediction, as usual.

If you wanna celebrate pretend wins and further derail the thread because you just lack self control I will allow it. Hope Artificial Glory doesn't mind

Anyways, moving on from the self triggering of Bash, I'll be nice and try to salvage the thread(I'm so magnanimous):

Why was there a link to meltdowns in autistic people in the OP? Does Richard Spencer have autism?

oh goody the babyman is going to allow everyone to talk about the topic now. thank you, babyman. what a special special boy

Yeah I'm gonna allow you to save face, stop embarrassing yourself, and comment on the topic(and only the topic). Which is what you should have done from the beginning.

Originally posted by Bashar Teg
*WHOOOOOOOOOOOOOSH*

look who wasted no time validating my prediction, as usual.
This is retarded

>Bashar not so subtly insults Surtur
>Surtur respons
>Bashar: OMG HE SAID SOMETHING BACK NOT ABOUT RICHARD SPENCER, HE RESPONDED TO ME INSULTING HIM! HAHAHAHA I WAS RIGHT HE'S TRYING TO DERAIL THE TOPIC TO DEFEND RICHARD SPENCER! IT'S NOT AS IF RESPONDING TO PEOPLE INSULTING YOU IS A NORMAL THING TO DO!

On topic, that audio was ****ing hilarious. Dude sounds like a ****ing super villain lmfao.

Richard Spencer is not our guy, and I'm happy to see him publicly embarrassed like that and his position further discredited.

Originally posted by Emperordmb
This is retarded

>Bashar not so subtly insults Surtur
>Surtur respons
>Bashar: OMG HE SAID SOMETHING BACK NOT ABOUT RICHARD SPENCER, HE RESPONDED TO ME INSULTING HIM! HAHAHAHA I WAS RIGHT HE'S TRYING TO DERAIL THE TOPIC TO DEFEND RICHARD SPENCER! IT'S NOT AS IF RESPONDING TO PEOPLE INSULTING YOU IS A NORMAL THING TO DO!

Bingo. I feel bad for his pals who then are forced to defend this.

Originally posted by Emperordmb
On topic, that audio was ****ing hilarious. Dude sounds like a ****ing super villain lmfao.

Richard Spencer is not our guy, and I'm happy to see him publicly embarrassed like that and his position further discredited.

"Not your guy? Psshhhh there is practically no difference between him and Jordan Peterson!"-educated leftist

I would bang.

Originally posted by Surtur
"Not your guy? Psshhhh there is practically no difference between him and Jordan Peterson!"-educated leftist
Well don't you know? According to the alternative influence network report, Jordan Peterson had a friendly interview with Carl Benjamin AKA Sargon of Akkad, who debated against Richard Spencer and argued against Spencer's ideas while laughing in his face.

Therefore Jordan Peterson and Richard Spencer believe the same things.

Originally posted by Adam_PoE
I would bang.

Did nazi that coming

https://media1.tenor.com/images/9dce6926d8bcb5440a05aed97c7aca2a/tenor.gif

Originally posted by Adam_PoE
I would bang.
Was not expecting that response in this thread at all.

Laughed at Alt-Right hero Richard Spencer melting down, laughed that shitboy Milo Yiannopoulos is the one who shared it. Seems they've had a falling out, three years later.

Yeah, they can both go f*ck themselves once Adam is done with them. There's no more denying what a piece of shit Spencer is.

White nationalists are racists, what a twist!

Originally posted by NemeBro
White nationalists are racists, what a twist!

https://i.imgur.com/PP5uR32.jpg

Originally posted by Eternal Idol
Yeah, they can both go f*ck themselves once Adam is done with them. There's no more denying what a piece of shit Spencer is.
Who was denying that before...?

I didn't even know who the f**k this guy was until this thread.

Thanks for the info.

Originally posted by Emperordmb
Who was denying that before...?
I'm sure I've come across a few posters, either here or a boxing message board I frequent, defending Spencer. The discussions typically devolved into comparing and contrasting alt-right white supremacists and Antifa.

I am worried about Jews controlling the media and Hollywood. I would be worried if Mormons did the same. Or Catholics.

No one particular demographic should be in control of all that power.


And why is it that google is not helpful when I try to look up this answer? Why am I pushed to add sites with spurious clams about Jews controlling 96% of the world's media instead of something like TheHill breaking down the facts? Is this topic so taboo that we can't talk about it?

Originally posted by Eternal Idol
I'm sure I've come across a few posters, either here or a boxing message board I frequent, defending Spencer. The discussions typically devolved into comparing and contrasting alt-right white supremacists and Antifa.

Bingo

Lmao, this guy sounds like Lex Luthor's racist cousin. What a child. What grown man even speaks like that.

It's unforunate that so many of these alt-right/neo nazis use Trump as a banner to rally under but its hardly surprising with the rhetoric he uses. He doesn't care, which is pretty disgusting.

Originally posted by Eternal Idol
I'm sure I've come across a few posters, either here or a boxing message board I frequent, defending Spencer. The discussions typically devolved into comparing and contrasting alt-right white supremacists and Antifa.
Is what you described really a defense of Spencer? Or a defense of the right as a whole by saying the left also has its baggage?

Personally, I avoid getting snared in the trap of getting mistaken for defending Spencer due to defending the right as a whole by clarifying that Spencer doesn't represent my views or values so I feel no need to justify my right-wingerness to lefties.

Originally posted by Eternal Idol
I'm sure I've come across a few posters, either here or a boxing message board I frequent, defending Spencer. The discussions typically devolved into comparing and contrasting alt-right white supremacists and Antifa.

Yeah, either this is from your boxing forum or it was some dumb shit posting by a guy like Kurk. Nobody on this forum is legitimately defending Richard Spencer

Originally posted by Emperordmb
Is what you described really a defense of Spencer? Or a defense of the right as a whole by saying the left also has its baggage?

Personally, I avoid getting snared in the trap of getting mistaken for defending Spencer due to defending the right as a whole by clarifying that Spencer doesn't represent my views or values so I feel no need to justify my right-wingerness to lefties.

Yeah, defending Richard Spencer would be...defending Richard Spencer. As in, Richard Spencer himself says or does a thing and somebody attempts to defend what he said or did. Some discussion on antifa vs alt right is no more a defense of Spencer than it is a defense of antifa(it also does not make one look somehow morally superior to be defending Antifa)

This is just so over the top bad. What a ridiculous, hateful man.



This is the stuff of conspiracy theories. I mean, it's easier to believe he's a plant meant to make the opposition look bad, then that anyone is such a loony toon horrible human being.

Spencer is your average Trumper, he just happened to get caught with the microphone on.

Originally posted by Emperordmb
Personally, I avoid getting snared in the trap of getting mistaken for defending Spencer due to defending the right as a whole by clarifying that Spencer doesn't represent my views or values so I feel no need to justify my right-wingerness to lefties.

That is not much of a defense if you vote the same. It is like all of the Republicans who denounce Trump, but then vote for all his policies.

Originally posted by Surtur
Did nazi that coming

https://media1.tenor.com/images/9dce6926d8bcb5440a05aed97c7aca2a/tenor.gif

Originally posted by Eternal Idol
Was not expecting that response in this thread at all.

Spencer has gay face. He can get a taste of this Scandinavian greatness.

Originally posted by Robtard
Spencer is your average Trumper, he just happened to get caught with the microphone on.

Swing and a miss.

Apparently I didn't miss...

Actually no...you certainly missed.

Your feelings seem to have taken a hit...

Lol you're having an off day, must be Thursday.

No one wants to touch my very much on topic post? Just like all the media except the racists?


lol


I wonder why?

WHAT are you trying to imply? Trying to say we're all being controlled by jews?

Ha ha! Ha ha ha! Laughable! Laughable! Ha ha ha! This isn't nervous laughter.

https://i.imgur.com/Q3m1ncx.gif

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hs36jf87QCA

That punch would make Captain America and Indiana Jones very proud. They hates Nazis.

Originally posted by Bashar Teg
https://i.imgur.com/Q3m1ncx.gif

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hs36jf87QCA

You actually believed him??

Originally posted by Robtard
That punch would make Captain America and Indiana Jones very proud. They hates Nazis.

and he was kind enough not to place it where he could crack his head open or bust his ear. just hushed the nazi up like a true gentleman.

Originally posted by dadudemon
I am worried about Jews controlling the media and Hollywood. I would be worried if Mormons did the same. Or Catholics.

No one particular demographic should be in control of all that power.


And why is it that google is not helpful when I try to look up this answer? Why am I pushed to add sites with spurious clams about Jews controlling 96% of the world's media instead of something like TheHill breaking down the facts? Is this topic so taboo that we can't talk about it?

To be fair, Jews readily admit they're overrepresented in Hollywood and the media. I mean, Joel Stein and Ben Stein come right out and admit it.


On the other hand, who ever talks about the Italians control of waste disposal and gas stations?


Yeah, there was The Soprano's, but I don't think people realize just how powerful organized crime really was, or the pies they had their fingers in:

rzzXTi9e_5Y




Or, what about the Saudi money out there? How many US companies are they invested in? How many university buildings have they bought?



I mean, I'll admit Jews are seriously overrepresented in some very lucrative fields, considering they make up only about 1% of the US population, but I also think they're overrepresented as the boogeyman of the top 1%, when the truth is there's a boatload of 1%ers in the US who aren't Jewish, and many 1%ers in Russia, India (I think India has more in the upper ranks then anyone), Saudi Arabia, etc etc..

Originally posted by cdtm
I mean, I'll admit Jews are seriously overrepresented in some very lucrative fields, considering they make up only about 1% of the US population, but I also think they're overrepresented as the boogeyman of the top 1%, when the truth is there's a boatload of 1%ers in the US who aren't Jewish, and many 1%ers in Russia, India (I think India has more in the upper ranks then anyone), Saudi Arabia, etc etc..

96% seems to be far more than just a bit over-represented. It speaks to a cultural push, within the demographic, to control Entertainment and Media. Which has the greatest amount of power in the US.

However...doesn't that also mean the Jews likely control the right-wing media outlets, too? I don't understand why this happened but my friend says it was part of the mass immigration back in the day and it was a profession/job that they could readily pick up and it became their thing similar to Waste Disposal and Casinos/Gambling for Italians. He means there is probably a perfectly reasonable, non-tin-foil hat explanation for the weirdly extreme overrepresentation.

SBN8L0CiWbQ

Originally posted by dadudemon
96% seems to be far more than just a bit over-represented. It speaks to a cultural push, within the demographic, to control Entertainment and Media. Which has the greatest amount of power in the US.

However...doesn't that also mean the Jews likely control the right-wing media outlets, too? I don't understand why this happened but my friend says it was part of the mass immigration back in the day and it was a profession/job that they could readily pick up and it became their thing similar to Waste Disposal and Casinos/Gambling for Italians. He means there is probably a perfectly reasonable, non-tin-foil hat explanation for the weirdly extreme overrepresentation.


Does it really, though?


Have as great a cultural power as we think? If it did, wouldn't there be no need for frothing at the mouth talking heads, or diversity initiatives, or sensitivity training?


If jews really did invest in media as a form of cultural control, Trumps election may have them thinking about a refund.

Originally posted by cdtm
Does it really, though?

Yes. All of these failed Trump investigations would hold no merit if they held no sway or power.

Originally posted by cdtm
Have as great a cultural power as we think? If it did, wouldn't there be no need for frothing at the mouth talking heads, or diversity initiatives, or sensitivity training.

Guess who is behind pushing the Politically Correct stuff for these last 3 decades?

Originally posted by cdtm
If jews really did invest in media as a form of cultural control, Trumps election may have them thinking about a refund.

The fact that that a warmongering, corporatist masquerading as a progressive who had the personality of a robot, won the popular vote, should be all the evidence you need that there is a power structure in place that is the strongest in the US.

How different would the election have been if 90%+ of the coverage was negative for Hilary like it was for Trump?

Your point about Jewish overrepresented right could be explained by Jews not being homogeneous on social issues.


Think Catholics who welcome same sex relationships, vs those who do not.


Alternatively, depending on a more cynical (And perhaps bigoted) explanation, CNN and Fox were never meant to represent a Jewish political view at all. The executives in charge simply cater to whatever sells, and an extreme left/right dynamic draws in the rubes.


Like professional wrestling and the hero/villain face/heel dynamics.

Originally posted by Adam_PoE
It is almost as if supporting people and policies that will perpetuate racism is itself racist.

who woulda though? :0

Voting for Trump doesn't mean you support his every policy.

Originally posted by Surtur
Voting for Trump doesn't mean you support his every policy.

If someone promised to fill your tank and crash your car, would you give him the keys?

Are you saying voting for someone means you agree with their every policy?

Originally posted by Surtur
Are you saying voting for someone means you agree with their every policy?

Answer my question, and you will have the answer to yours.

No voting for someone doesn't mean you agree with their every policy. That is insanity. Anyone who tells you they agree with EVERY single thing the person they voted for is advocating is a liar.

And here's the thing though, you can support the same policy for different reasons. From what I understand, one of the main reasons the alt-right supports Trump is border security. The alt-right wants an ethnostate, they don't want more brown people coming to America, and to the actual endgame of the alt-right they'd need a lot more than just border control and decreased immigration in order to create an ethnostate.

That doesn't change the fact that border security or lower immigration rates can also be supported by people who don't want an ethnostate or gas chambers or slavery or whatever. Some people might be concerned about national security, others out of concern for job security, and others by the concern that too high a rate of immigration doesn't lend itself over to effective assimilation. Or conversely some might take that as a better alternative to "decriminalize illegal immigration, do jack shit to enforce border security, have healthcare for all paid for by the government, and extend that to illegal immigrants."

Also his administration seems to oppose affirmative action, which the alt-right (white identitarians) would absolutely favor since white supremacists obviously wouldn't like white people being discriminated against. That being said it isn't a uniquely white supremacist position to suggest white people shouldn't be discriminated against. There is actually a liberal and anti-racist case to be made against affirmative action.

And another reason is that culturally Trump is a figure of opposition to the left... which the alt-right would also support because they are in cultural opposition to the left. Again though the problem is that they aren't the only ones, and a lot of people who oppose the cultural left do so for different reasons than the alt-right. You have individualists who aren't fans of left-wing identity politics who would of course oppose the left culturally, and yet by the very same token also oppose the identity politics of the alt-right. You also have people who aren't really fans of what they would view as a repressive culture of censorship and intimidation, such as cancel culture.

The problem is Adam that the moral accusation implicit in your defense of Robtard's assertion makes two faulty assumptions.

The first of your false assumptions is that voting for one candidate over another is evidence that you agree with them on everything or all of their policies, which is patently absurd. It merely means you don't see a preferable alternative on the table. Now that I vote republican does that mean that I want weed to remain illegal? Back when I voted democrat did that mean I wanted abortion as a form of birth control to remain legal? Of course not.

The second and perhaps more egregious of your faulty assumptions, which I find even more perverse, is the idea that if somebody supports a candidate, that candidate inherently agrees with everything someone who supports them believes and that candidate is the full embodiment of the wet dreams of whoever supports them.

So let's hypothetically grant the first premise and use the example of a person who literally agrees with all of Trump's policy. It would still be ****ing absurd to suggest that person is morally equivalent to Richard Spencer whose ideal of a white ethnostate and slavery is so much more radical than the Trump administration's policy.

So here's a hypothetical left-wing variant of your logic. Elizabeth Warren wins the primary and it's down to her vs Trump. There's a hypothetical full on soviet style communist who fantasizes about murdering all the rich people and establishing a repressive state where all political dissenters are thrown into the Gulag and all business is state owned. Of course they're going to support Warren over Trump, they'd want the state to take over health insurance and impose a wealth tax, it's not the absolute orgasmic fulfillment of their most extreme ideals but it's closer to what they want than Trump. Now take my mother who is more moderate than Warren, but would absolutely vote for her over Trump even though she has serious concerns about the state eliminating private health insurance and taxpayer money funding abortion. By your logic, Elizabeth Warren is the moral equivalent of her most radical supporter, despite the fact that she's clearly a lot less extreme and less immoral in her views than this hypothetical soviet style communist. And also by your logic, my mom is the moral equivalent of Elizabeth Warren because she voted for her in a binary election cycle. Therefore by your logic my moderate left mother is the moral equivalent of this hypothetical communist lunatic who wants to slaughter all rich people and throw dissenters in the Gulag... which is absolutely ****ing ridiculous.


As is usual, you use dishonest reasoning and smear techniques to paint those who disagree with you in the most uncharitable light you can grasp for in order to smear their character.

Actions speak louder than words.

"I do not support an ethnostate," says the person who votes for the candidate who promises to implement an ethnostate.

He must just have "economic anxiety."

Yes Trump is promising to implement an ethnostate. That is a completely rational and sane take on his presidency (sarcasm)

I did not say he is. Try to follow the discussion.

Originally posted by Adam_PoE
Actions speak louder than words.

"I do not support an ethnostate," says the person who votes for the candidate who promises to implement an ethnostate.

He must just have "economic anxiety."

This is why I vote for people whose policies do not reflect that. I'd rather vote for lackluster policies from a candidate with a mix of good ones than one who is a moron.

No compromise.



This is why I didn't vote for Obama. Or Bush Jr. Or Hillary. Or Trump. No drug war, foreign-warmongering, police-state, corporatists.

Pretty much any Democrat or Republican is out.