Search:

it's partly why i didn't read the entire thread. I just read the second post and responded to it. Then we started talking about climate change?

it's partly why i didn't read the entire thread. I just read the second post and responded to it. Then we started talking about climate change?

Here's an example of how I'd respond in your fashion:

[I]The media and the left aren't that bad. Pedophiles are bad and they're the real evil here. They're people like Epstein and they're the scum of the earth bc they ruin children.[/I]

Now, this has nothing to do with the left, or the right arguments, but I can peddle that in response to each one of your posts. Let me tell you, it doesn't feel great.

Here's an example of how I'd respond in your fashion:

The media and the left aren't that bad. Pedophiles are bad and they're the real evil here. They're people like Epstein and they're the scum of the earth bc they ruin children.

Now, this has nothing to do with the left, or the right arguments, but I can peddle that in response to each one of your posts. Let me tell you, it doesn't feel great.

[QUOTE=BananaCucho;875598]Galeon, we are attacking your argument, not your character. We are asking you to stay focused on the argument instead of changing the argument into something else time and time again. Your response every time about anything is "yeah well the left is worse because of these reasons" when that has nothing to do with the original argument.[/QUOTE]

^^

Originally Posted by BananaCucho

Galeon, we are attacking your argument, not your character. We are asking you to stay focused on the argument instead of changing the argument into something else time and time again. Your response every time about anything is "yeah well the left is worse because of these reasons" when that has nothing to do with the original argument.

^^

You did it again Ganelon. I'm out.

You did it again Ganelon. I'm out.

[QUOTE=oops_ur_dead;875056]I envy you in that you haven't read the entire thread, of which about half was devoted to countering the argument that the Confederacy was bad because it was a racist state founded on slavery with the argument of "well the Union did bad things too", in absolute earnest.[/QUOTE]

I can just fall back to "climate change is not a reason against right wing nazi-ism.

I also might bow out of this thread. I don't want to have to keep typing nazi.

Originally Posted by oops_ur_dead

I envy you in that you haven't read the entire thread, of which about half was devoted to countering the argument that the Confederacy was bad because it was a racist state founded on slavery with the argument of "well the Union did bad things too", in absolute earnest.

I can just fall back to "climate change is not a reason against right wing nazi-ism.

I also might bow out of this thread. I don't want to have to keep typing nazi.

Silly example, but illustrates the point:

Imagine me Voss, as a right wing politician. I go and do some cool speech that gets televised and that gets people to vote for me. Next this self proclaimed nazi, called Noss, does this crazy evil stunt, and gets in front of a camera and says "Woo nazi-ism! Woo Voss! Voss 2020". If I don't denounce this person, I'm implicitly allowing support of this group to be part of the non nazis that support me. Ergo, Nazis are now part of my right wing coalition.

A moral Voss politician should denounce this, to put some distance. Then, when some reporter asks why Voss is or isn't a nazi due to his supporter's affiliation, Voss can say "nono, I don't stand for that and I denounced it back on March 3, 2016". or something.

A more concrete example would be that Unite the Right Rally. If you're going to a rally, and there are people waving nazi flags, you should leave, and denounce that rally.

What the left does or doesn't do badly has [B]nothing[/B] to do with this percept that the right has. I'll say it again. It's fallacious reasoning.

Silly example, but illustrates the point:

Imagine me Voss, as a right wing politician. I go and do some cool speech that gets televised and that gets people to vote for me. Next this self proclaimed nazi, called Noss, does this crazy evil stunt, and gets in front of a camera and says "Woo nazi-ism! Woo Voss! Voss 2020". If I don't denounce this person, I'm implicitly allowing support of this group to be part of the non nazis that support me. Ergo, Nazis are now part of my right wing coalition.

A moral Voss politician should denounce this, to put some distance. Then, when some reporter asks why Voss is or isn't a nazi due to his supporter's affiliation, Voss can say "nono, I don't stand for that and I denounced it back on March 3, 2016". or something.

A more concrete example would be that Unite the Right Rally. If you're going to a rally, and there are people waving nazi flags, you should leave, and denounce that rally.

What the left does or doesn't do badly has nothing to do with this percept that the right has. I'll say it again. It's fallacious reasoning.

[QUOTE=Ganelon;875028]You can’t criticize people who have nothing to do with Nazism if the mainstream left is very radicalized.[/QUOTE]

Yes I can. Why wouldn't I be able to?

So, I haven't seen reasonings support of the fact that right wingers have nothing to do with Nazi-ism. In this thread, I [I]have[/I] seen evidence of the contrary.

That aside, this thread is about right wing conservatism, not why right wing tactics are ok given that we "allow" left wing folks to get away with bad things. It's hard to talk about one without talking about the other, sure. But you can't justify bad things because the other side is doing bad things. Which you are [B]clearly[/B] doing here.

Originally Posted by Ganelon

You can’t criticize people who have nothing to do with Nazism if the mainstream left is very radicalized.

Yes I can. Why wouldn't I be able to?

So, I haven't seen reasonings support of the fact that right wingers have nothing to do with Nazi-ism. In this thread, I have seen evidence of the contrary.

That aside, this thread is about right wing conservatism, not why right wing tactics are ok given that we "allow" left wing folks to get away with bad things. It's hard to talk about one without talking about the other, sure. But you can't justify bad things because the other side is doing bad things. Which you are clearly doing here.

[QUOTE=Ganelon;875027]My point is that radicalization, while it exists on both sides, is worse on the left.[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=Ganelon;869353]Anyways this is a bit of a rant but my question is:
What do you feel about the idea that right-wing liberalism has nothing to do with conservatism?
[B]A second question is, why is the media trying to paint right wingers as immoral nazis?[/B][/QUOTE]

so the answer to "why is the media painting right wingers as nazis" is "radicalizations are on both sides and the left is worse"? That's not an answer, thats fallacious distracting.

It seems like your responses are more suited to a separate thread where you post the statement: "Left wing radicalizations are worse than right radicalizations for reasons x, y, z". One of those reasons being climate change or something. Another reason could be that rioting is better than nazi-ism.

That is not what you asked, and you did nothing to disprove my answer, nor agreed with it. I think my reasoning is spot on.

Originally Posted by Ganelon

My point is that radicalization, while it exists on both sides, is worse on the left.

Originally Posted by Ganelon

Anyways this is a bit of a rant but my question is:
What do you feel about the idea that right-wing liberalism has nothing to do with conservatism?
A second question is, why is the media trying to paint right wingers as immoral nazis?

so the answer to "why is the media painting right wingers as nazis" is "radicalizations are on both sides and the left is worse"? That's not an answer, thats fallacious distracting.

It seems like your responses are more suited to a separate thread where you post the statement: "Left wing radicalizations are worse than right radicalizations for reasons x, y, z". One of those reasons being climate change or something. Another reason could be that rioting is better than nazi-ism.

That is not what you asked, and you did nothing to disprove my answer, nor agreed with it. I think my reasoning is spot on.

[QUOTE=oops_ur_dead;874744]Have you ever heard of lynching?[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=oops_ur_dead;874711]Honestly, it also looks like you have no idea what your own points are. Look at how like 5 pages back you pointed out that the Jim Crow laws were actually evidence that the Confederacy was racist, now suddenly you're using it against the north?[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=BananaCucho;874945]You asked this:



The response you got to your question is this:



This has nothing to do with radicals on the left. You were given an answer, you can address the point or you can try to distract by pointing out flaws on the left.

But pointing out flaws on the left doesn't change the fact that nazis and right wingers are conflated because they are "cousins", as you put it.[/QUOTE]

Just to reiterate, (though it's unneeded, since Banana already did a good job here) :


Mag, you "countered?" my post about my take on why nazi-ism is being associated to conservatism by talking about climate change. [B]what??[/B]

I would not expect these types of logic jumps on mafia site. If these logic jumps have been prevalent throughout this thread, props to the people diligently responding to theses posts.

Originally Posted by oops_ur_dead

Have you ever heard of lynching?

Originally Posted by oops_ur_dead

Honestly, it also looks like you have no idea what your own points are. Look at how like 5 pages back you pointed out that the Jim Crow laws were actually evidence that the Confederacy was racist, now suddenly you're using it against the north?

Originally Posted by BananaCucho

You asked this:



The response you got to your question is this:



This has nothing to do with radicals on the left. You were given an answer, you can address the point or you can try to distract by pointing out flaws on the left.

But pointing out flaws on the left doesn't change the fact that nazis and right wingers are conflated because they are "cousins", as you put it.

Just to reiterate, (though it's unneeded, since Banana already did a good job here) :


Mag, you "countered?" my post about my take on why nazi-ism is being associated to conservatism by talking about climate change. what??

I would not expect these types of logic jumps on mafia site. If these logic jumps have been prevalent throughout this thread, props to the people diligently responding to theses posts.

[QUOTE=Voss;874749]Because they don't do NEARLY enough to distance themselves from it.[/QUOTE]

Err, going to be a bit more clear here.

Because American conservatives don't do nearly enough to distance themselves from Nazis that go to and support right-wing rallies.

Originally Posted by Voss

Because they don't do NEARLY enough to distance themselves from it.

Err, going to be a bit more clear here.

Because American conservatives don't do nearly enough to distance themselves from Nazis that go to and support right-wing rallies.

[QUOTE=Ganelon;869353]Anyways this is a bit of a rant but my question is:
What do you feel about the idea that right-wing liberalism has nothing to do with conservatism?
A second question is, [B]why is the media trying to paint right wingers as immoral nazis?[/B][/QUOTE]

Because they don't do NEARLY enough to distance themselves from it.

Originally Posted by Ganelon

Anyways this is a bit of a rant but my question is:
What do you feel about the idea that right-wing liberalism has nothing to do with conservatism?
A second question is, why is the media trying to paint right wingers as immoral nazis?

Because they don't do NEARLY enough to distance themselves from it.

[QUOTE=oops_ur_dead;874744]Have you ever heard of lynching?[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=oops_ur_dead;874711]Honestly, it also looks like you have no idea what your own points are. Look at how like 5 pages back you pointed out that the Jim Crow laws were actually evidence that the Confederacy was racist, now suddenly you're using it against the north?[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=Ganelon;874745]Those weren’t institutionalized. I can point you to pogroms in Russia against the Jews; doesn’t mean that the Russian Empire was fascist. Fascism did not even exist back then. Lynching is an indicator of cultural attitudes, though even the the term ‘lynching’ brings to mind images of vigilanteism. Those were by no means advocated by the state.[/QUOTE]

This looks like a contradiction to me. I haven't read the majority of posts in this thread, but I don't need to to point that out. Looks like oops also already did.

Also, who cares if they're institutional or not, the point still stands.

Originally Posted by oops_ur_dead

Have you ever heard of lynching?

Originally Posted by oops_ur_dead

Honestly, it also looks like you have no idea what your own points are. Look at how like 5 pages back you pointed out that the Jim Crow laws were actually evidence that the Confederacy was racist, now suddenly you're using it against the north?

Originally Posted by Ganelon

Those weren’t institutionalized. I can point you to pogroms in Russia against the Jews; doesn’t mean that the Russian Empire was fascist. Fascism did not even exist back then. Lynching is an indicator of cultural attitudes, though even the the term ‘lynching’ brings to mind images of vigilanteism. Those were by no means advocated by the state.

This looks like a contradiction to me. I haven't read the majority of posts in this thread, but I don't need to to point that out. Looks like oops also already did.

Also, who cares if they're institutional or not, the point still stands.