Charlie Kirk shot at (shot?) in Utah

[Derec]

No he’s not making a good point. He was a racist, sexist goon,

That he may be, but that is not mutually exclusive with him making a good point on a particular issue.

More of your usual ignorant bleating about “racial preferences.”

Nothing "ignorant" about acknowledging that so-called "affirmative action" policies lowered the standards based on race, ethnicity as well as gender.
Take Harvard, where Joy Reid went.

Black, Hispanic and Indian students were admitted with significantly lower SAT scores than white and Asian ones.

Those preferences have always been, and continue to be, given to white men.

Bullshit.

 

[Derec]

This is where conservatives realize words can have different meanings in different contexts (much like how "humanism" can mean different things to different humanists, or Christianity can mean different things to different Christians). Oh wait, but they won't realize that.

When people wear the Antifa symbols *(that are almost identical to those used by the KPD "Antifaschistische Aktion") or "antifascist" slogans while assassinating people for having a different opinion, what meaning of "antifascism" do you think they may be operating under?

 

[GenesisNemesis]

This is where conservatives realize words can have different meanings in different contexts (much like how "humanism" can mean different things to different humanists, or Christianity can mean different things to different Christians). Oh wait, but they won't realize that.

When people wear the Antifa symbols *(that are almost identical to those used by the KPD "Antifaschistische Aktion") or "antifascist" slogans while assassinating people for having a different opinion, what meaning of "antifascism" do you think they may be operating under?

Symbols never ever change meaning over time.

 

[blastula]

I suppose congratulations are in order, this is the first time in decades inflammatory rhetoric inspired a nutjob who actually hit the target. Charlie Kirk wasn't a great choice, as he isn't an actual politician, but he is still a target. And the nutjob actually succeeded, unlike many of the others.

Call someone a Nazi often enough, someone might try to take them out. Once in a great while, they might even hit.

Nobody knows yet who the shooter is nor their motive nor inspiration. But even if it were all known, this would hardly be the only case to hit their target in decades. Having memory difficulties? It was only 3 months ago when probably the most successful assassination in the past 10 years in the US took place in Minnesota, committed by a known right-winger. Interesting that you didn't make such a haughty post then. Instead you just made your standard "both sides" whinge.

You're right, both sides have exploited and encouraged the division for a couple of decades. That's why it is so bad now.

Your memory lapse gives away your favored one side.

 

[GenesisNemesis]

Also there's literally no rule that says someone can't call themselves an anti-fascist and not consider themselves part of the KDP or whatever. You just made that up.

 

[Derec]

It's well within its effective range, but a bigger caliber would make it easier.

What Col. Sanders said. You should just STFU instead of parading your ignorance.

You disagree that, all things being equal, a bigger caliber makes long-distance shooting easier? Based on what exactly?

Remember - it was just a couple of years ago that you thought a .223 was the same as a .22

I did not. You keep misrepresenting what I wrote, because without such tactics, you have nothing. I was referring to the diameter, which is the same for both. The difference is the powder load, and thus the power.

The depth of your firearms expertise is already the stuff of legend around here.

Among the ignorant such as yourself.

 

[Elixir]

Bullshit.

No bullshit. I could have gotten in to Yale without even graduating high school. Why? Because back in 1800s my grandfather went there, then my father went there, then my older brother went there. Funny thing ... they/we are/were all white men. The invitation was open.

 

[Derec]

Also there's literally no rule that says someone can't call themselves an anti-fascist and not consider themselves part of the KDP or whatever. You just made that up.

I just elucidated the origin and history of the term. Even today, antifascism is strongly associated with far-left activism.

 

[Derec]

No bullshit. I could have gotten in to Yale without even graduating high school. Why? Because back in 1800s my grandfather went there, then my father went there, then my older brother went there. Funny thing ... they/we are/were all white men. The invitation was open.

Even if this was true (I am skeptical), that is preference based on legacy, not preference. My white ass would not enjoy it.
On the other hand, somebody as dimwitted as Sheila Jackson Lee got in solely based on her melanin.

 

[GenesisNemesis]

Also there's literally no rule that says someone can't call themselves an anti-fascist and not consider themselves part of the KDP or whatever. You just made that up.

I just elucidated the origin and history of the term. Even today, antifascism is strongly associated with far-left activism.

Yeah, far-left to you just means being against fascism.

 

[Derec]

Yeah, far-left to you just means being against fascism.

No, it doesn't. I have already explained how "antifascism" has been used by communists, and it is the same way it is used by Antifas.

 

[GenesisNemesis]

Another thing that's considered "far-left", wanting universal healthcare like many developed countries have. Another thing that's considered "far-left", respecting LBGTQ+ rights. Another thing that's considered "far-left", not wanting illegal immigrants to be deported to El Salvador and believing they have rights as human beings.

 

[bilby]

Never quite understood these types of comparisons to guns. If guns had the same level of regulations and controls that these other examples require then this argument might hold some water.

I am all for better regulation. I am, however, against banning certain categories of firearms based on things like how they look, or based on them having a similar name as a heavy gun firing big bullets that an idiot legislator once held.

And yet you obsess about that strawman, and talk about nothing else whenever the topic arises here. I too am against banning firearms based on their appearance, rather than their capabilities and technical specifications. But that doesn't matter much here, because nobody here is calling for such bans.

Indeed, the post to which you are allegedly responding talks only of guns requiring "the same level of regulations and controls that these other examples require", the examples in this instance being "Flying a plane" and "Medicines vaccines and surgeries".

You need a licence to fly a plane, or to practice medicine, or to manufacture medicines or vaccines; You also must comply with various regulatory and inspection regimes in order to use those licences.

Neither aircraft nor medicines are regulated based on their appearance, rather than their uses, capabilities, and potential for harm if misused.

Yet you brought up "banning certain categories of firearms based on things like how they look", rather than discuss the topic at hand; And you routinely do this, every time an effort is made to discuss any kind of licensing or regulation.

A cynical person might think you didn't want to have an honest discussion of gun regulation at all.

 

[Derec]

DC Cancels ‘Red Hood’ Comic Book Series After Writer Shares Inflammatory Post Following Charlie Kirk Shooting

This writer looks like she's from central casting for "female woke campus radical".

 

[bilby]

Antifascism does not mean just opposition to fascism.

Of course it does.

It's a particular ideology associated with communism.

Was.

Past tense.

What our grandparents, or even our parents, might have understood by it in the context of political events eighty years ago is not relevant in any way to its plain and direct usage today.

 

[Derec]

Another thing that's considered "far-left", wanting universal healthcare like many developed countries have. Another thing that's considered "far-left", respecting LBGTQ+ rights. Another thing that's considered "far-left", not wanting illegal immigrants to be deported to El Salvador and believing they have rights as human beings.

None of these is "far left". Abolish police/prisons is far left. Vandalize construction vehicles and commit arson at construction company offices because you disagree with a police/fire training center being built is "far left". Occupying several city blocks for weeks because you are mad at a robber dying in a different state is "far left". Wanting to "seize the means of production" is far left. Saying that illegals should be deported in general is "far left".

 

[GenesisNemesis]

Antifascism does not mean just opposition to fascism.

Of course it does.

It's a particular ideology associated with communism.

Was.

Past tense.

What our grandparents, or even our parents, might have understood by it in the context of political events eighty years ago is not relevant in any way to its plain and direct usage today.

Didn't you know every single antifascist is secretly part of the KDP?

 

[Derec]

Of course it does.

No, it does not. It has been coopted.

Was.
Past tense.

Wrong. Modern Antifas are also far-left, and apt to call everybody who disagrees with them a "fascist'.

What our grandparents, or even our parents, might have understood by it in the context of political events eighty years ago is not relevant in any way to its plain and direct usage today.

I do not know if you have Antifas down under. But we have them here, and there is very much a continuity between the OGs and the modern incarnation.

 

[bilby]

This is not the first time I"ve read that the 2nd amendment was ratified to keep the slaves down.

Consider the source though: Truthout is hardly reliable.

Consider the historical reality though; slave revolts were certainly one of the threats the founding fathers needed to arm against, despite their disinclination to pay for a standing army.

The idea that there was a singular "THE reason" is absurd; The idea that keeping the slaves down was not A reason is equally absurd.

The US in 1789 needed militias primariliy to defend against slave revolts, the British Empire, and the Native Americans. They were also to be available to deploy against any novel and/or unanticipated threats.

That Truthout wants to focus on only one such threat is unsurprising, but doesn't make their analysis wrong, just incomplete.

 

[Derec]

Didn't you know every single antifascist is secretly part of the KDP?

Not part of KPD, but following a similar ideology. Far-left, and calling everybody they disagree with a "fascist".