Meh. You still have a country. And Bernie is the most popular politician in the US now and a serious contender next time around, or somebody like him. There's a chance people may approach politics differently after Trump. He was the burn it all down and start over candidate. If you can use this opportunity the right way, I'd say you're ahead of where you were with corporate Hillary. Just need to survive the next 3.5 years. Silver lining and all that.
-
Features
Is political violence ok when it is from the Left?
- Thread starter Derec
- Start date
Meh. You still have a country. And Bernie is the most popular politician in the US now and a serious contender next time around, or somebody like him. There's a chance people may approach politics differently after Trump. He was the burn it all down and start over candidate. If you can use this opportunity the right way, I'd say you're ahead of where you were with corporate Hillary. Just need to survive the next 3.5 years. Silver lining and all that.
This was Black Bloc, not Antifa.
J842P
Veteran Member
The irony here is that fascists have historically used faked anarchist/communist violence to gain power.
RavenSky
The Doctor's Wife
love love love how that town responded to the neo-nazi's
Tuba player was great, too!
I completely agree that this is the best way to deal with scum like them... don't get mad, get sarcastic!
J842P
Veteran Member
Nope. I meet these types in the Bay Area all the time. The lot of them seem to have very little strategic or historical awareness, and it strikes me mostly as a virtue-signaling circle-jerk. This is what happens ever since the academy went to shit. These are a bunch of ignorant kids being led by the pseudo-intellectuals that pass as academics these days in the Humanities.
J842P
Veteran Member
Blac-bloc is a style of dress worn by Antifa and other similar groups. It's not like there are solid demarcations here anyway.
untermensche
Contributor
What's clear is the OP is full of shit.
This violence has been condemned by the left.
Unlike the white supremacist and Nazi violence the president will not condemn.
This violence has been condemned by the left.
Unlike the white supremacist and Nazi violence the president will not condemn.
Jason Harvestdancer
Contributor
The SPLC, which has a vested interest in making the numbers of hate groups as large as possible, especially white nationalism, puts their numbers at less than 10,000 nationwide. In a country of approximately 300 million people, that makes them 0.0033 % of the total public, hardly enough to be anyone's base of support.
During the election, two people came forward to speak for that demographic. One of them expressed support for Trump (but didn't go all the way to an endorsement) and one of them expressed support for Hillary (but didn't go all the way to an endorsement).
ronburgundy
Contributor
To clarify, by "they are his base" I didn't mean they are the totality of his base, but that they are within his base and among his most committed supporters, and have been committed to the GOP for most of the last half century.
Also, I didn't say they are the only people who voted for Trump. I said without their votes (and there are millions of them), he would not have won. Given that he only won 3 key states by a combined 100,000 votes, he wouldn't have won if white nationalists didn't vote for him. And that wasn't a fluke, he deliberately courted their votes and appealed to whites who share large parts of white nationalists' assumptions and ideology (which a sizable % of the GOP base, including many of those who also have "other reasons" to vote GOP).
That's a rather low bar.
That is just the kind of miscalculation among leftists that got us Trump. First, we won't be "ahead" but decades behind where we'd be had Hillary been elected. It will take decades to regain the ground lost in the next 3.5 years. The next president cannot just wave a wand an undue the worldwide damage Trump is and will do to political relations with both our allies and foes, the environment, 4 years of lost scientific research, etc.. For example, the new President (only if he has a Dem Congress) will only have funds to support the research that would have been done otherwise during their term, plus a tiny bit more. It would take 2 decades of a Dem President and Congress to make up for 4 lost years (And yes, basic research is getting fucked by Trump. It is not simply # of dollars that matter, but how the $ is used. His appointments and the details of the funding bills he is passing are a direct attack on quality basic research).
Second, Bernie has no chance. The polls you are referring to are nothing but "likability" polls that have no bearing on whether people would vote for him. Most people "liked" Bernie in 2015-2016 and yet only a small minority wanted him as President. Also, those likability ratings are driven mostly by groups of people that often don't vote like Millennials and Blacks.
Bernie's likability is below 50% among whites from ages 35-55. And the alt-left that like him still won't vote for him as a Dem, unless he gets the Dems to pass a Marxist platform that is as mindlessly radical as they are (they have an all-or-nothing infant mentality), which would guarantee a loss in the general. Pence would beat Bernie in 2020. The Dems only hope is that many on the left who didn't vote for Hillary will vote for a moderate Dem (hopefully more personally likable than Hillary), with a moderate platform that still operates largely within a capitalist framework.
Jason Harvestdancer
Contributor
That assumes that the less than 10,000 Nationwide is confined to those three states, which it isn't. That also ignores the division in the KKK leadership in which two people who appear to be leaders in that organization delivered support for different candidates, one for Hillary and one for Trump.
Elixir
Made in America
A lot of wand-waving, even in the form of a ton of executive orders rescinding Cheato's executive orders, would go a long way toward restoring the US image on the international level. Environmental and scientific damage will be harder to remediate, but again, a lot of what Cheato has done can be un-done pretty quickly and easily. The damage that Cheato's actions cause is another story.
untermensche
Contributor
When you condemn white supremacists AND those opposed to white supremacists you really haven't condemned anything.
"I am opposed to Nazi's and to anyone who says bad things about Nazi's."
Wait, this is from the guy who can be counted on to blame every single muslim terrorist attack anywhere in the world on someone other than the people who did it?
When did you come up with this rule that after an attack one is only allowed to talk about the person who did it?
Jason Harvestdancer
Contributor
As has been pointed out, while a large number of people oppose Nazis and fascists, a small group of violent shitheads are Antifa. The two groups are not the same, one is a very small subset of the other. Condemning Antifa is nothing like condemning the majority that opposes fascism.
He condemned the violent shitheads on both sides, and you say he condemned the majority that aren't violent shitheads. Try again.
LordKiran
Veteran Member
The problem was that he wouldn't mention them by name and his condemnation was incredibly tepid for him, underlying his base reluctance to call out people who support him.
Weak actions for a weak man.
ronburgundy
Contributor
The SPLC makes fine-grained but not politically meaningful distinctions between "white nationalists", "white supremacists", "racist skinheads", the KKK, "Neo-Nazi's" and many other white racists groups that share largely the same views and policy positions in any way relevant to this discussion. There are over 100 formal KKK chapters in the US and about 500 identifiable organized groups that fall into these various sub-categories.
In addition, estimates of people that belong to such groups are based upon where there is evidence of an association to a particular group. That guarantees an under-estimate of people who hold such views by a factor of somewhere between 10 and 100.
It not only excludes people who personal identify with a group but are careful not to do so in any public fashion, but also excludes the vast majority of people with such views who do not affiliate it with any formal organization that specialized in promoting such views.
And as I explain in more detail below, it is an undeniable fact, one which Breitbart itself openly acknowledged, that its fanbase and the entire alt-right movement is rooted in the "intellectual arguments" of historical white supremacists and the originator of the term is an unabashed white supremacist. Their numbers alone are in the millions, regardless of whether they formerly belong to a recognized white supremacist group (beyond Breitbart itself).
Utter nonsense. A white nationalists was one of Trump's pledged delegates in the CA primary.
Trump had a Q&A with his fanboys on Reddit forum called The_Donald which regular hosts discussions where most subscribers are white nationalists that endorse ideas like calling Black Lives Matter protests as "chimp outs", the evils race mixing, Nazis' high IQs, and the excessive Jewish influence in America.
Trump's appointee to the DHS's "immigration" sector, Julie Kirchner, was an 8 year Exec Direction of Federation for American Immigration Reform. That organization is one the most powerful anti-immigrant lobbying groups with strong ties to the GOP, and was founded by a bigot who ranted about the doom of the "Latin onslaught" and that "One of my prime concerns is about the decline of folks who look like you and me.” "For European-American society and culture to persist requires a European-American majority, and a clear one at that.”
Their annual conference is rant-fest circle jerk that includes extremist right-wing talk show host of the sort that are fanboys of the criminally racist Sherrif Joe. They were funded by the white supremacist "think tank" The Pioneer Fund whose long time director Rushton who often published his overtly racist pseudo-science promoting the genetic inferiority of blacks in the American Renaissance rag and spoke at their conference, which is a well known white supremacist organization that even describes itself as "race-realist".
Trump was fully on board with the "Obama is a Muslim" and birther nonsense that only white supremacists would dream up or care about (which includes the nutcase Alex Jones and his followers, who are almost all diehard fanboys of Trump).
Oh, and almost all who qualify or identify as "alt-right" fit into at least one of these white racist subgroups. By it's own admission Breitbart has admitted that the alt-right the comprises their fanbase are "mostly white, mostly male middle-American radicals, who are unapologetically embracing a new identity politics that prioritises the interests of their own demographic." AKA white nationalism.
The same article points out that the main difference between them and the type of skinheads on the street is merely that the alt-right is more "intellectual", turning to "thinkers" like Spengler, Menken, Evola, and Samuel Francis who (despite the article not noting it) are/were all undeniably white supremacists.
The "alt-right" meme took off from the website alternativeright.com blog founded by another undeniable overt white supremacist Richard Spencer in 2010, who was inspired by a speech given 2 years prior the to annual meeting of the HL Mencken Club (aka a room filled with white supremacists). This founder and hero of the alt-right organized a rally held in a Federal building in DC 2 weeks after Trump's election. After 11 hours of countless speakers praising Trump and speaking like they just rose to power, Spencer concluded with a speech filled with quotes directly from Nazi propaganda that he spoke in the original German talking about the “children of the sun,” as race of conquerors who under Trump, were “awakening to their own identity.” The crowd responded with Nazi saluted and "Heil".
Which of course means that Trumps main advisor for the last couple years, Steve Bannon, and all the voices on Breitbart are supporters of Spencer and this alt-right movement rooted in white supremacist pseudo-intellectualism, since they have explicitly and proudly declared their site to be "the platform for the alt-right" and proudly proclaimed their "dangerously bright" audience as being fueled by the who's who of white supremacist "intellectuals" of the last century.
Breitbart alone gets 10,000,000 visitors every month and is almost unwaveringly pro-Trump and was rabidly anti-hillary, so to pretend these racist shitbags are not a huge % of Trumps base and overwhelming more GOP than DEM requires the pinnacle of intellectual dishonestly (which is coincidentally another core attribute of the alt-right).
Bottom line is that without people who accept in large part white supremacist/nationalist assumptions and ideology, Trump and the GOP would have no chance of winning any election at the national, and very few at the State level. They all know this, and know that is partly a cause why and partly a product of the fact that the GOP consciously chose to court the votes of white racists with their "Southern Strategy", which is why and when one of the most blatant racists to a Congressional seat, Strom Thurmond, switched parties in 1965. Coicindentally, his heir to the most blatant racist prize goes to Jeff Sessions, Trumps best bud in the Senate.
ronburgundy
Contributor
See my above reply to your prior post for a dismantling of this nonsense.
For some time now I've suspected the Black Bloc is actually funded from the right.
In other words, he avoided saying anything bad about the alt-right, just lumped them with "all sides"..
repoman
Contributor
One of the main Alt-right guys, Jared Taylor, who spent time in Japan as a youth thinks that East Asians are the smartest on earth on an average basis. Many agree with him. So what this belief leads to is that they don't want to compete with smart East Asians and don't want to support dumber Sub-Saharan Africans. But it is a little more complex than that, theh play to the stereotype of Asians being uncreative docile drones who do well at tests and can withstand massive amounts of hours studying, whereas whites are more creative and independent.
The Asia for Asians, Africa for Africans, White Countries for everyone mantra has been hammered on for a long time on youtube and news website comments for a long time as an attempt to redpill.
The Asia for Asians, Africa for Africans, White Countries for everyone mantra has been hammered on for a long time on youtube and news website comments for a long time as an attempt to redpill.