
Moderators: Elvis, DrVolin, Jeff
justdrew wrote: If these fucks want a civil war, they're going to get one hell of a surprise if they think no one's going to be shooting back.
8bitagent wrote:justdrew wrote: If these fucks want a civil war, they're going to get one hell of a surprise if they think no one's going to be shooting back.
Hehe, a war built on goofy fake conspiracy memes:p
Well, then again now that I think of it...many wars have been fought over false tales(religion)
monster wrote:Your comment is a perfect example of how they've got us divided and conquered. Americans, as a group, are incapable of acting as one.
Sounder wrote:Thanks stefano
The folk here that promote divisiveness are just as wacked as the White Power types.
But I will admit to an exchange with a white power type many years ago. He started talking his shit and I responded that he and his buddies should all move to Idaho and declare war on the rest of us, then he could see for himself how well fags, niggers and ninnies could fight. Anyway I like the guy and he respected me, maybe cause I said it to his face.
OMH posted an article awhile back where it was suggested that the left may do better trying to understand the right rather than antagonizing them.
People that employ divisiveness as a tactic are not to be trusted.
That's you AD, transparent as glass. I saw this from the first week I was here three years ago, and you never do a thing to change my mind.
American Dream wrote:the [...] fascism [...]that plagues[...]Constitutionalist/Oath Keeper-type circles.
stefano wrote:American Dream wrote:the [...] fascism [...]that plagues[...]Constitutionalist/Oath Keeper-type circles.
What? What do you think 'Constitutionalist' means? Fascism is the opposite of Constitutionalism. The dangerous idea held so dear by Nixon, Bush and Obama, the idea that the Oath Keepers and Ron Paul supporters are fighting, is that "it's not illegal if the President does it". Mussolini ha siempre ragione. Is that really the political philosophy you want to be defending? Because that's what you're doing.
(excerpted)
Slight parenthesis: your lazy use of the word 'fascism' to describe people whose views you don't like, even though the word cannot possibly apply to them if words are to have any meaning at all and you know better, is the mirror of the right-authoritarians' use of 'socialism' to attack the current administration. And so it goes.
American Dream wrote:stefano-
I think it is quite valid to mention Fascism in the same breath as Oath Keepers. See for example my second post on this thread. Here is a direct link to the article concerned: “Oath Keepers” Are Now Promoting Themselves To White Nationalists
Even though there is some kind of overlap between Right Wing Libertarians/Constitutionalists etc. and declared fascist/white supremacist types, it is certainly not accurate to consider them as part of one great undifferentiated mass.
In fact, I can support Right Wing Libertarians on a lot of personal liberty issues. None of us should want a surveillance society, arbitrary detentions, denial of freedom of speech, that sort of thing. So I think we need to look out for false dichotomies here.
The credibility of saying this is greatly reduced by posting a cartoon portraying a person as a pig.
Searcher08 wrote:So 'someone' posted joining instructions on a Skinhead board. Does that mean they support them? Who says? I posted on the JREF forum about the LooseChange forum. Does that mean I support JREF? NO!
And using one post on Shitfront as a basis for an argument?
FEEBLE
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 167 guests