The Ornery American Forums

General Category => General Comments => Topic started by: Greg Davidson on October 27, 2018, 10:58:29 PM

Title: Why can't Republicans denounce the ideology of right-wing terrorists?
Post by: Greg Davidson on October 27, 2018, 10:58:29 PM
Conservatives often claim that they don't hear Muslims properly condemn the ideology of hatred that inspires acts of terrorism by Islamic extremists. That includes a number of those who post here on Ornery. Well, the grotesque events of this week provide an opportunity to test the sincerity of those condemnations: 

Wednesday - A shooter attempts to get into a black church, when that fails he goes into a Kroeger's and executes two African Americans but tells a white guy "whites don't shoot whites"

Friday - The largest number of simultaneous political assassination attempts in American history, with the targets being those identified by the President, Fox News, and the right-wing media as enemies of the people

Saturday - Pittsburgh shooter, echoing the narrative from the President, Fox News, and the right-wing media about Jews bringing in "hostile invaders to dwell among us?", kills 11 Americans at a Synagogue.

Under President Trump, the US government-supported Radio Marti put out a program five months ago attacking George Soros as  “multimillionaire Jew” and “the architect of the financial collapse of 2008.”  Soros was one of the targets of Friday's assassination attempts


So, any condemnations of this ideology from Republicans?

 
Title: Re: Why can't Republicans denounce the ideology of right-wing terrorists?
Post by: Crunch on October 27, 2018, 11:23:54 PM
You spend too much time on Daily Kos and MSNBC.
Title: Re: Why can't Republicans denounce the ideology of right-wing terrorists?
Post by: TheDeamon on October 28, 2018, 12:12:05 AM
I've been largely tuned out, and as this forum is basically the only lens through which I'm getting most (recent) news, I'm in the dark on this. Probably prefer to remain that way.

1st Issue: Really Weird for White Supremacists specifically, who are allegedly aligned "with the political right" to go out on shooting sprees just weeks before an election where it is very possible that the Democrats will at least take control of the House of Representatives, if not the Senate as well. This kind of activity isn't likely to help bolster the numbers in favor of Republicans.

Unless of course the people pulling the strings for those groups have agendas that lie elsewhere.... (That and well, general prosperity works against their recruitment efforts, embittered persons are far easier to recruit for such groups than people who are happy with how things are going in their life. So getting the Republicans out of control suits their interests at this point.)

So these "Right Wing Wackos" coming out of the woodwork just before the election is really bizarre and counter-productive to serving the interests of Republicans, Conservatives and Libertarians. I'm not going to claim a conspiracy exists, I can see grounds for the genuinely insane believing they "were helping" with what they did. I can also see people acting autonomously to serve their own particular agendas and "guiding" others to help further it. I highly doubt there is any kind of diabolical mastermind scripting what just happened though.

That said, the persons involved certainly need psychological help, and should spend plenty of time locked away from the rest of society at large. Their behavior is unacceptable at any time, in any place, and a civil society should not tolerate it.
Title: Re: Why can't Republicans denounce the ideology of right-wing terrorists?
Post by: Greg Davidson on October 28, 2018, 01:25:45 AM
Islamic terrorists sometimes commit attacks at times that are not politically convenient for their causes. But those who complain about the lack of condemnation from other Muslims do not believe that excuses their behavior. Why should America's Republicans be held to a lower standard?
Title: Re: Why can't Republicans denounce the ideology of right-wing terrorists?
Post by: Grant on October 28, 2018, 07:44:19 AM
 ::)
Title: Re: Why can't Republicans denounce the ideology of right-wing terrorists?
Post by: cherrypoptart on October 28, 2018, 08:43:28 AM
What is the ideology and can the ideology be separated from acts of violence?

In other words, maybe the ideology doesn't need to be condemned, only the acts of violence do.

But I'm not sure exactly what the ideology is. Maybe it needs to be condemned too. Did he have some sort of anti-Israel ideology like BDS meaning Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions? Could being for BDS lead some people to violence?
Title: Re: Why can't Republicans denounce the ideology of right-wing terrorists?
Post by: Grant on October 28, 2018, 09:28:45 AM
Conservatives often claim that they don't hear Muslims properly condemn the ideology of hatred that inspires acts of terrorism by Islamic extremists. That includes a number of those who post here on Ornery. Well, the grotesque events of this week provide an opportunity to test the sincerity of those condemnations: 

So, any condemnations of this ideology from Republicans?

So much to break down here.  I'll start with this.  Here we have a real problem.  Politically motivated violence and it's growth in America.  I've written on this before, and I'm of the opinion that this is a serious problem with potential serious results, unlike, say, 5000 Hondurans trying to get to the US, or petulant NFL players, or how full of it any particular Senator is. 

Let's look at how this problem is approached by Greg:

1. Conservatives condemn Y not condemning action X
2. Do Conservatives condemn action x when conducted by Conservatives?
3. Have Republicans condemned action x when conducted by Conservatives?

Right away, we can see that the subject of the post is not on the condemnation of the ideologies that lead to terrorism.  The question asked is "Are conservatives and republicans hypocrites"?  You could have just said that, Greg, and saved space.  And instead of leaving the question un-answered, waiting for some defense, you could have straight up made the accusation instead of letting it hang over the discussion.  It's clever rhetoric though.  Perfectly in-bounds.  But really, you could have just come out and accused Republicans of being hypocrites, because we all know that's what is happening here.

Where to go from there?  So much to break down...

Let's start with condemning the "ideology of hatred" that leads to terrorist actions.  This is to differentiate between condemning politically motivated violence itself, and condemning whatever motivated it.  You could argue that these latest wackos were motivated by President Trump, or Alex Jones, or Henry Ford, or Louis Farrakhan if you'd like.  But Greg, you have not specified what you believe is the exact "ideology of hatred" you would like conservatives to condemn.  Is it Trump's condemnation of "globalists", which some people have accused of being a dog whistle for jews?  A sane person could probably differentiate, but sane people are not usually moved to political violence by political rhetoric. 

So until we know exactly which "ideology of hatred" we are talking about, we don't know exactly the standards you feel we should be judging Republicans on. 

I do know that several Republicans and Democrats have often denounced political violence itself, and have asked for toning down political rhetoric that motivates wackos to commit political violence.  Often this takes the form of trying to score political points.  Is the problem 1)political violence, 2)rhetoric that creates it, or 3)conservatives/liberals who use such rhetoric?  How is the question/problem presented?  What is the focus? 

Next:

Quote
Friday - The largest number of simultaneous political assassination attempts in American history, with the targets being those identified by the President, Fox News, and the right-wing media as enemies of the people

Let's be honest.  An assassin that mails out fake bombs is a pretty poor assassin.  I'd be tempted to not even call him an assassin, or what he attempted to do as assassination attempts.  Labeling it as assassination attempts is the only thing that may be as pathetic as mailing fake bombs IF you were actually trying to assassinate anybody.  It's possible that this person was so *censored*ing crazy that he actually believed that fake bombs could kill people.  It's also possible that some people are so *censored*ing stupid that they believe that fake bombs constitutes an assassination attempt. 

This is not to say that it's ok to make bomb threats, send powdered sugar through the mail, or whatever.  It's wrong.  It's a crime.  It's a threat.  It's politically motivated threatened violence.  People who do it should go to prison.  I wouldn't mind if we executed them publicly.  It's not to say that this is a sign of a bigger problem, and that political violence needs to be condemned and  But as assassination attempts go, this one is off the scale in bad planning. 

Quote
Saturday - Pittsburgh shooter, echoing the narrative from the President, Fox News, and the right-wing media about Jews bringing in "hostile invaders to dwell among us?", kills 11 Americans at a Synagogue.

OK.  I think we have a better idea now of what you believe "hateful ideology" is.  The narrative from Cheetoh Jesus and the right-wing media about Jews bringing in hostile invaders.  I'm unaware of this narrative, but I probably don't watch as much right-wing media as you do.  Nevertheless, the first counter should be that making a statement X, does not equate to making statement Y.  Saying Jews are bringing in hostile invaders is not the same as saying "go shoot Jews".  We've all been there.  We all know that normal people don't shoot up synagogues because of what Fox News or T-Rex Trump says. 

Nevertheless, I think it's valid that the growth in political violence can be traced to the growth in hostile political rhetoric.  It's a systemic problem.  Conservatives sometimes do it, and so do Liberals.  There is plenty of blame to go around.  Personally, I don't think that it will end until the people that generally make such hostile political rhetoric are ignored.  That's why I don't watch a lot of cable news or pay much mind to people on forums who couch either Republicans or Liberals as the primary problem in America.  That's at least something of a solution, rather than throwing blame around constantly, or accusing each other of being hypocrites. 

Quote
Under President Trump, the US government-supported Radio Marti put out a program five months ago attacking George Soros as  “multimillionaire Jew” and “the architect of the financial collapse of 2008.”  Soros was one of the targets of Friday's assassination attempts

I'm at the point that I believe that you either do not know what an actual assassination attempt is, or that you are deliberately misleading.  One requires an attempt at re-education.  The other demands ostracism. 

I havn't listened to Radio Marti.  I believe that George Soros is indeed a multimillionaire jew, though I do not believe that either he, or the Rothschilds, or the Gnomes of Zurich, are the architects behind the financial collapse of 2008.  I thought Barny Frank was, or maybe the Fed Reserve, or whatever else you'd like to pick.  As far as I know, nobody has tried to assassinate any of them. 

Antisemitism is a real problem in America.  It's pervasive, and it needs to be addressed, as do all kinds of racism and sexism.  I'm not sure if Radio Marti, or condemning Radio Marti, is part of the solution, though I really don't even know what Radio Marti is.  Antisemitism seems to draw a great deal of conspiracy theorists and wackos.  Conspiracy theorists and wackos are going to be drawn to something, always.  I think we can condemn crazy speech, but condemning political violence is first and foremost the most important. 

Quote
So, any condemnations of this ideology from Republicans?

Well, Greg.  Since you're so fixated on this, I will condemn whatever it is that you are talking about. Blank check.  Go ahead. 

I hereby condemn whomever attempts to frame a particular person, or particular groups of persons, as the source of a problem. 
I hereby condemn whomever attempts to otherize or call into question the underlying morality of any particular person or groups of persons
I hereby condemn political rhetoric that attempts to frame those of different ideologies as underlying source of a problem.

There ya go, Greg.  You have just one conservative republican.  I'm sure I'm the only one in the universe who condemns this.  You should look and prove me right.
Title: Re: Why can't Republicans denounce the ideology of right-wing terrorists?
Post by: Crunch on October 28, 2018, 09:28:59 AM
::)

QFT
Title: Re: Why can't Republicans denounce the ideology of right-wing terrorists?
Post by: Grant on October 28, 2018, 09:37:10 AM
Conservatives often claim that they don't hear Muslims properly condemn the ideology of hatred that inspires acts of terrorism by Islamic extremists. That includes a number of those who post here on Ornery. Well, the grotesque events of this week provide an opportunity to test the sincerity of those condemnations: 

Oh yeah.  Forgot about this.  Condemning ideology that inspires "acts of terrorism". 

I'm sure you've all read my writing on the definition of terrorism.  About how we seriously need to reign it back.  About how "terrorism" is being used as one of those pieces of political rhetoric that drives people nuts. 

I will simply reiterate my belief that a lone wacko, or several lone wackos, should not be considered terrorists.  A terrorist, IMO, is a member of a terrorist organization.  It implies a greater level of threat than simply lone wackos. 

Lone wackos are certainly a problem, and the rhetoric that can incite them.  But the threat presented by lone wackos pales in comparison to the threat that a serious terrorist organization can present.  Ask Bautista or Diem or Nicholas II.  Ask the Israelis.  Ask the West Germans. 
Title: Re: Why can't Republicans denounce the ideology of right-wing terrorists?
Post by: TheDeamon on October 28, 2018, 09:46:35 AM
Islamic terrorists sometimes commit attacks at times that are not politically convenient for their causes. But those who complain about the lack of condemnation from other Muslims do not believe that excuses their behavior. Why should America's Republicans be held to a lower standard?

As Cherry asked, what is it exactly we're supposed to be condemning?

There are lots of things I'm more than happy to say I will not support people who advocate(or actually go about) doing _____ things.

However, there are a lot of other things where much more nuance is needed in the "how and why" of how it is approached unless you want to open the door wide open for an authoritarian and/or totalitarian government.
Title: Re: Why can't Republicans denounce the ideology of right-wing terrorists?
Post by: Crunch on October 28, 2018, 10:34:32 AM
What are you supposed to be condemning? Nothing. Trump, Pence, all the way down have condemned political violence. Consistently and in the strongest possible terms. You can see these denunciations Greg claims he wants on Twitter, news broadcasts, and other media. We’ve all seen them. So it’s not denouncing that he wants, that’s been done.

What this is about is confessing. In North Korea it’s called “saenghwal ch’onghwa”. What’s really being demanded here is that you stand up in front of everyone and confess, then beg forgiveness. That you’re not guilty of the crimes he’s accused you of is completely irrelevant, confessesing to them is what matters.

You must confess and abase yourself begging for forgiveness. If you do a sufficiently humiliating job of it, you may be allowed to go home. A few will have to go to a camp as a lesson for others.
Title: Re: Why can't Republicans denounce the ideology of right-wing terrorists?
Post by: TheDeamon on October 28, 2018, 12:29:47 PM
I don't think that's what he's aiming for. He's more likely to be taking a "deplatforming" approach and wants us to condemn the people he's decided were likely to have played a role in instigating the violence,  unknowingly or otherwise.

Reasonable man standards evidently now are supposed to hold a speaker accountable for the acts of insane listeners.
Title: Re: Why can't Republicans denounce the ideology of right-wing terrorists?
Post by: Crunch on October 28, 2018, 01:58:19 PM
That’s very much part of it. But I point to the exit question, “So, any condemnations of this ideology from Republicans?”

The condemnation is so pervasive that it’s impossible he missed it. Of course he wants dissenting idea suppressed but he also wants us and Republicans to confess that the ideas that led to his beliefs that it drives these acts were violations. Those to be held accountable are the one being sent to metaphorical camps via deplatforming. But first, we need to confess to the crimes so the punishment will be just and fair.

It’s classic totalitarianism.
Title: Re: Why can't Republicans denounce the ideology of right-wing terrorists?
Post by: TheDrake on October 28, 2018, 03:26:54 PM
Sinn Fein had many troubles. They could condemn the acts of the IRA until they turned blue, but as long as they advocated the same goals and expressed sympathy for the ideals, no condemnation would have been good enough. Democrats have a problem with Antifa. When they condemn a speaker and call for opposition, it won't be good enough for some that they condemn violent acts. Likewise with Republicans and white nationalists.
Title: Re: Why can't Republicans denounce the ideology of right-wing terrorists?
Post by: Grant on October 28, 2018, 03:43:04 PM
Sinn Fein had many troubles. They could condemn the acts of the IRA until they turned blue, but as long as they advocated the same goals and expressed sympathy for the ideals, no condemnation would have been good enough. Democrats have a problem with Antifa. When they condemn a speaker and call for opposition, it won't be good enough for some that they condemn violent acts. Likewise with Republicans and white nationalists.

I'm uncertain if you are stating that the condemnation of violent actors, or violent organizations, by individuals and organizations that share the same policy goals, but in a non-violent manner, will simply never be good enough in the eyes of the those opposed, or if they are prima facie, not good enough period. 
Title: Re: Why can't Republicans denounce the ideology of right-wing terrorists?
Post by: TheDrake on October 28, 2018, 05:53:22 PM
In the eyes of those opposed. They wouldn't be satisfied unless they repudiated opposition itself.
Title: Re: Why can't Republicans denounce the ideology of right-wing terrorists?
Post by: TheDeamon on October 28, 2018, 07:01:44 PM
In the eyes of those opposed. They wouldn't be satisfied unless they repudiated opposition itself.

I have to admit to some small hypocrisy on that count. But 100% agreed on that one, both ironically and unironically.
Title: Re: Why can't Republicans denounce the ideology of right-wing terrorists?
Post by: Greg Davidson on October 29, 2018, 12:55:02 AM
Quote
It's a systemic problem.  Conservatives sometimes do it, and so do Liberals.  There is plenty of blame to go around.

But do they? Can you name a Democratic President who has incited crowds to see the press as the enemy of the people? Or to urge crowds to lock up political opponents? We have Fox News promoting anti-Semitic conspiracies like George Soros running the State Department (Soros figures like Emmanuel Goldstein in Orwell's 1984, a designated hate figure on the right even though his political contributions are small relative to those of conservatives such as Sheldon Adelson or the Koch Brothers). After the bombings (are you sure they were fake?), any decent human being as President would have called those who had been targeted for assassination, and would not be campaigning the next day, and would not be attacking one of the intended victims in his speeches (as a matter of fact, any decent human being would not justify continuing to campaign by lying that the Stock Market opened the day after 9/11, as President Trump has done).

The claim of "both sides do it the same, so it doesn't matter" is false. There's no President who has acted like this in our lifetimes  in the United States.   

Grant, I was all willing to give you kudos for condemning specific inciting bigotry and hatred resulting in attempted and completed murders in your underlined text, but as I read it, you just can't do it.
Title: Re: Why can't Republicans denounce the ideology of right-wing terrorists?
Post by: Fenring on October 29, 2018, 01:12:53 AM
Greg, don't you think there's a potential conflict of interest at play here? And as I say this I recognize that a conflict of interest doesn't negate that there may be principles at stake that don't care about interests. But anyhow: when you compare these conservative things to the idea of Muslims being expected to condemn Muslims violence/hate/terrorism, I don't think these map on to each other cleanly. For a Muslim who claims to be all about peace, one would think that a Muslim preaching and acting out violence would be anathema to them; that such a person is antagonistic to their religion's belief. So objectively one would think that the peaceful Muslims wouldn't see terrorists as being intelligibly "on their side" in any meaningful way, and therefore would have no stake in protecting or apologizing for them. Now of course, there are potential repercussions to a Muslim breaking ranks, and so if anything we'd expect a lack of denouncing to perhaps be explained away by fear rather than disagreement (if we take their peaceful claims at face value).

In the case of conservatives, on the other hand, it hardly seem equivalent to ask a conservative to denounce someone (or agents) that actually do sort of fight for their beliefs, or at least nominally accept similar political principles, but that happen to be bad actors. If Trump, for instance, will fight for political things that appeal to conservatives, even if he's hateful in other ways it remains that denouncing him basically results in fighting against their material interests in some way. Anything that helps "the other side" is more hateful than the bad actor himself in most cases; by speaking the truth (assuming they agree with you on the bad things) harms their political position. This shouldn't be the case with a religious people who are asked to denounce people who actually harm their religion and destroy its credibility. I guess you could argue that Trump harms conservatism and destroys its credibility too, and yet the way the American system works you're stuck with the leads you've got and it's largely more important that your party is in power than that a decent guy is representing it. Fight against the guy and you're sorting of fighting against the party too. And so again we're not likely to see people agree to argue against their own interests, even if in principle you're right and the conservatives even agree with you to an extent. That's one of the many reasons why I think a party system is largely harmful to government; people vote through selfish interest rather than heart-felt honest reflection. And it's not like this is some kind of surprise, either; Plato as much as said this would obviously happen.

I know you're sort of ironically calling BS on the "why don't Muslims reject extremism" line, maybe more so than really expecting conservative support on this issue; but maybe the real issue here is conflicts of interest more so than whether people agree that Trump is dumb. I think you'd get more support proposing that people are forced to vote for their interests rather than their principles, and that the partisan atmosphere is responsible for this. Wouldn't part of the solution be to find things in common with conservatives, rather than to call our hypocrisy? (even if you're 100% accurate in your accusations)
Title: Re: Why can't Republicans denounce the ideology of right-wing terrorists?
Post by: TheDrake on October 29, 2018, 06:47:38 AM
I hate trump and what he's doing. But I also see maxine waters putting fuel on the fire. And outside of the politicians who are more polished and under control, I can't count how many have expressed a wish to see trump die. That includes entertainers, activists, rank and file.
Title: Re: Why can't Republicans denounce the ideology of right-wing terrorists?
Post by: Crunch on October 29, 2018, 08:14:43 AM
Quote
It's a systemic problem.  Conservatives sometimes do it, and so do Liberals.  There is plenty of blame to go around.

But do they? Can you name a Democratic President who has incited crowds to see the press as the enemy of the people? Or to urge crowds to lock up political opponents?
Obama did ”War on Fox News” (http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2009/10/white_house_reveals_tactics_in.html).  “We’re going to treat them the way we would an opponent,” Anita Dunn, the communications director, told The New York Times.


We have Fox News promoting anti-Semitic conspiracies like George Soros running the State Department (Soros figures like Emmanuel Goldstein in Orwell's 1984, a designated hate figure on the right even though his political contributions are small relative to those of conservatives such as Sheldon Adelson or the Koch Brothers). After the bombings (are you sure they were fake?), any decent human being as President would have called those who had been targeted for assassination, and would not be campaigning the next day, and would not be attacking one of the intended victims in his speeches (as a matter of fact, any decent human being would not justify continuing to campaign by lying that the Stock Market opened the day after 9/11, as President Trump has done).
See, you still wage that war.


The claim of "both sides do it the same, so it doesn't matter" is false. There's no President who has acted like this in our lifetimes  in the United States.   
Now that I’ve definitively proven that the prior president acted exactly like this and that you followed your orders to continue the attack, I look forward to you ignoring it and pretending your claims are true.  :o

Grant, I was all willing to give you kudos for condemning specific inciting bigotry and hatred resulting in attempted and completed murders in your underlined text, but as I read it, you just can't do it.
What did I tell you guys? He doesn’t want you to condemn anything. He wants you to confess.
Title: Re: Why can't Republicans denounce the ideology of right-wing terrorists?
Post by: TheDrake on October 29, 2018, 08:52:47 AM
Exactly like what? HE didn't use rhetoric like enemy, he used opposition. HE didn't say anything, he said it through his press secretary. HE didn't talk about fox news in a pseudo campaign rally that fox news reporters were covering. HE didn't tweet about fox news being fake.

So if you're going to use a word like "exactly" I'm going to call you on that one. It's like saying that chamber music is exactly like death metal because they are both music.
Title: Re: Why can't Republicans denounce the ideology of right-wing terrorists?
Post by: Seriati on October 29, 2018, 09:44:25 AM
Conservatives often claim that they don't hear Muslims properly condemn the ideology of hatred that inspires acts of terrorism by Islamic extremists.

"Conservative" is not a religion.  Religions require adoption of a collective belief, Islam more than most. 

The fact that someone self identifies as liberal or conservative doesn't make anyone else responsible for them or their actions. 

To be clear.  I condemn anti-semitism and racism and white nationalism.  People who hold to those abhorent beliefs have no party, because there is no American polity that approves of their desires in sufficient numbers to give them a party.  I don't particularly care which party they self identify with, and for the record, all of the open racists I have known in my life have been Democrats.  The fact is there is no policy of the "conservative" movement that you can point to that is anti-semitic or racist, or you already would. 

So call it out.  What policy or view are you asking to be condemned?  Racism, 99% of the country does.  Anti-Semitism, vast majority does (though there's a divide on whether open hatred of Israel that exists in the D party is legitimately anti-semitism or just anti-country (completely divorced from who happens to control that country)).

Quote
Wednesday - A shooter attempts to get into a black church, when that fails he goes into a Kroeger's and executes two African Americans but tells a white guy "whites don't shoot whites"

Racists have no party, are morons and are contemptible.  Ones who would kill black people are crazy on top of that.  Now what top three racist positions are you asking us to reject?

Quote
Friday - The largest number of simultaneous political assassination attempts in American history, with the targets being those identified by the President, Fox News, and the right-wing media as enemies of the people

Mail bombers, and apparently mail fake bombers, are contemptible.  Now what are the policy positions of mail bombers that you want us to condemn?  They seem to often be anarchists rather than "conservatives" but I'm willing to listen.

Quote
Saturday - Pittsburgh shooter, echoing the narrative from the President, Fox News, and the right-wing media about Jews bringing in "hostile invaders to dwell among us?", kills 11 Americans at a Synagogue.

Anti-semites are repugnant and should be condemned by all.  Now what positions are they advocating that you think are in the "conservative" platform (keeping in mind that the conservatives tend to be rock solid on support of Israel and believe the Jews to be the chosen people of their god).

Quote
Under President Trump, the US government-supported Radio Marti put out a program five months ago attacking George Soros as  “multimillionaire Jew” and “the architect of the financial collapse of 2008.”  Soros was one of the targets of Friday's assassination attempts

Anti-Oligarchs?  Lol, have you retracted every condemnation of the Kochs you ever wrote?  I think the fact that we have election finance laws that prevent "anyone" from contributing more than $10k dollar to a campaign, yet these - men - manage to contribute hundreds of millions a bit shocking.  In any event, Soros is in a special category as - to my knowledge - he's the only one in the club that has been actively accused by other countries of fomenting rebellions.  I see no reason to believe the leopard has changed his spots in his interactions with this country.

In any event, have you repudiated the 1% movement?  It's the fundamental philosophy behind anti-oligarchism.

Quote
So, any condemnations of this ideology from Republicans?

Well yes literally they all condemned them. 

Or do you mean, did the Republicans condemn their legitimate positions on things like immigration?  Or that the press should report the facts rather than spin everything to support a particular political position (oh my god, can you even imagine how the left would react if the shoe was on the other foot)? 

Be specific, which ideology are you asking be condemned, because the prime motivator behind each of this attack is not an accepted part of any major political group's ideology.  Implying otherwise, is pretty much just a self serving lie.
Title: Re: Why can't Republicans denounce the ideology of right-wing terrorists?
Post by: D.W. on October 29, 2018, 09:48:41 AM
Quote
As Cherry asked, what is it exactly we're supposed to be condemning
This is why I expect Greg asked the question as he did rather than make an accusation for others to refute of hypocrisy. 
This is how people SHOULD respond to acts of political violence that is being claimed to represent a larger group.  It IS absurd that the whole group must now accept blame for their “crazies”.  To ask that larger group to denounce the fringe wack jobs is a political move designed to smear the larger group.  Stop doing it…  Greg made his point.  Try to learn the lesson moving forward.
Title: Re: Why can't Republicans denounce the ideology of right-wing terrorists?
Post by: rightleft22 on October 29, 2018, 10:10:25 AM
Quote
Why can't Republicans denounce the ideology of right-wing terrorists?

Because it would require everyone to face their shadow and take responsibility for it. Not going to happen.
Its easier to project and maintain the Us verses Them, the scary Other, which is more useful tool to exploit.
Title: Re: Why can't Republicans denounce the ideology of right-wing terrorists?
Post by: Seriati on October 29, 2018, 10:14:00 AM
But do they? Can you name a Democratic President who has incited crowds to see the press as the enemy of the people?

As Cherry pointed out, Obama certainly labelled Fox News as fake.  But I'd also refresh your memory that the Clinton's were incredibly fond of claiming that it was a "vast right wing conspiracy" to make them look bad as new stories came out.  It wasn't nearly as express, but it's certainly the ideological pre-cursor of undermining the legitimacy of press stories, which Trump has taken further to undermine the press itself.  But honestly, Trump has far more cause with the press that has literally engaged in an unprecedented, in modern times, level of bias against him, including burying stories and publishing rumor.

Quote
Or to urge crowds to lock up political opponents?

You'll have to refresh me on this one.  Far as I know Trump has never urged a crowd to lock up his political opponents.  Are you deliberately misconstruing a call to apply the law evenly to Clinton and lock her up?  That would be prosecutors, not a crowd, doing so.  Or did I miss a call somewhere to have a crowd grab someone illegally and detain them?

Quote
We have Fox News promoting anti-Semitic conspiracies like George Soros running the State Department (Soros figures like Emmanuel Goldstein in Orwell's 1984, a designated hate figure on the right even though his political contributions are small relative to those of conservatives such as Sheldon Adelson or the Koch Brothers).

It's grossly misleading to call Anti-Soros activism anit-Semitic.  I don't think anyone cares about his religion, they care about his massive funding of bad policies and poorer candidates.   I'm not an expert on how much exactly each of them has contributed relative to each other (and I wonder how you are), can you break it down, Soros has been incredibly active in political influencing groups that aren't directly reported as campaign contributions.

Quote
After the bombings (are you sure they were fake?), any decent human being as President would have called those who had been targeted for assassination, and would not be campaigning the next day,

I assume that he didn't call them, is that a claim that someone made?

Given that the media and the left immediately started campaigning on the issue, why would you expect the President to stop?  This kind of event has every indication of causing major voting impact in a manner that really isn't warranted.  It's the same kind of effect as an October surprise with a temporary change in voting patterns.  Not campaigning now would rob those who need to consider the real issues that are facing our country and the real arguments on the "October" issues more than emotional and hasty reactions from hearing about the other side and being reminded about it.

Honestly, you really think it's reasonable to have a rule of thumb that "one side" has to back out of campaigning two weeks before an election? 

If these had been anti-fa crazies would you be on here calling for the left to stay off the campaign trail?  No, you'd be on here claiming that it was Trump's fault for creating a climate of hate and calling for him to stay home.

Quote
The claim of "both sides do it the same, so it doesn't matter" is false.

I agree, the left is overwhelmingly at fault for the level of increased hate in the last two years, for stoking the fires and for encouraging their base to take it a personal level.

Quote
There's no President who has acted like this in our lifetimes  in the United States.

I agree with this too.  I'll go further, there are no major Republicans that have acted like this before, the same can not be said of the Democrats.

In other news, remember how you called out voters in Alabama and insist they vote for Doug Jones against their own voting interests, because its the right thing to do.  And in fact they put him in place, which almost cost them on issues they do care about?  Are you going to call out the DNC in NJ whose doubled down and doubled down again on supporting Menendez - the claims against are more proven, and also include sex with underage girls - well really prostitutes - not to mention corruption and bribery?  The ads they are running now are overwhelmingly calls to real politic - vote him in to stop Trump.
Title: Re: Why can't Republicans denounce the ideology of right-wing terrorists?
Post by: Seriati on October 29, 2018, 10:16:22 AM
Quote
Why can't Republicans denounce the ideology of right-wing terrorists?

Because it would require everyone to face their shadow and take responsibility for it. Not going to happen.
Its easier to project and maintain the Us verses Them, the scary Other, which is more useful tool to exploit.

Honestly, RL if you can find a conservative terrorist organization I'd be happy to condemn them.  Labeling people "right wing" when they have nothing in common with the people on the right doesn't give me an incentive to "own them" then condemn them.
Title: Re: Why can't Republicans denounce the ideology of right-wing terrorists?
Post by: TheDeamon on October 29, 2018, 10:58:24 AM
Exactly like what? HE didn't use rhetoric like enemy, he used opposition. HE didn't say anything, he said it through his press secretary. HE didn't talk about fox news in a pseudo campaign rally that fox news reporters were covering. HE didn't tweet about fox news being fake.

So if you're going to use a word like "exactly" I'm going to call you on that one. It's like saying that chamber music is exactly like death metal because they are both music.

Uh, Obama straight up said "Fox News isn't actually news." (In fairness, he was more alluding to their afternoon/Prime Time lineups which were largely opinion segments.) At least I have clear recall of that soundbite being him.
Title: Re: Why can't Republicans denounce the ideology of right-wing terrorists?
Post by: rightleft22 on October 29, 2018, 11:49:47 AM
I actually don't like the uses of the label 'terrorist' when it comes to extreme ideology (left or right)
My comment was intended for both sides not being able to acknowledge or take steps to illuminate their blind spots.
It doesn't serve their immediate needs to do so.

I don't see this changing anytime soon. At least not until the shadow slaps us/them in the face and kicks us/them in the balls. At least historically that what usually happens... and then we go to sleep again, repeat. 
Title: Re: Why can't Republicans denounce the ideology of right-wing terrorists?
Post by: TheDrake on October 29, 2018, 11:59:59 AM
Uh, Obama straight up said "Fox News isn't actually news." (In fairness, he was more alluding to their afternoon/Prime Time lineups which were largely opinion segments.) At least I have clear recall of that soundbite being him.

And you don't see the difference between that and calling them enemies? Or praising a congressman that assaulted a reporter? "any guy who can do a body slam ... he's my guy"? Or reveling in a crowd chanting "CNN Sucks"?
Title: Re: Why can't Republicans denounce the ideology of right-wing terrorists?
Post by: Seriati on October 29, 2018, 12:01:15 PM
But rightleft22 my response was to point out that racism and anti-semitism are not my "blind spots" nor are they the "blindspots" of conservatives generally.  I'm asking that if you want to make a charge you make it specifically and not backpedal into generalities that assume the truth of the charge you are trying to make.
Title: Re: Why can't Republicans denounce the ideology of right-wing terrorists?
Post by: TheDeamon on October 29, 2018, 12:08:19 PM
I actually don't like the uses of the label 'terrorist' when it comes to extreme ideology (left or right)
My comment was intended for both sides not being able to acknowledge or take steps to illuminate their blind spots.
It doesn't serve their immediate needs to do so.

I don't see this changing anytime soon. At least not until the shadow slaps us/them in the face and kicks us/them in the balls. At least historically that what usually happens... and then we go to sleep again, repeat.

Most of us in here are aware of those "blind spots" to  varying degrees, which isn't to say we don't fall into them from time to time, but I'd like to think we're more aware than most.

That said, "the masses" remain largely oblivious, and they're likely going to continue doing what you're complaining about for a long time to come. At least until something comes along and forces them to wake up to what they're doing. That said, the methods of doing so("waking them up") are wildly variable, and the favored methods by many actors are actually wildly ineffective, and usually only serves to make that "blind spot" problem worse for everybody involved.
Title: Re: Why can't Republicans denounce the ideology of right-wing terrorists?
Post by: Pete at Home on October 29, 2018, 12:25:09 PM
Conservatives often claim that they don't hear Muslims properly condemn the ideology of hatred that inspires acts of terrorism by Islamic extremists.

Could you please quote that?  Because that sort of fuzzy attribution seems to be the trick by which you lead us down the garden path to claiming that believing that Soros was the architect of ecomonic collapse is a "terrorist ideology."  I have no idea if Soros caused the economic collapse, but one should be able to discuss that question without being linked to an attempted murder.

To emphasize the bleeding obvious, Terrorism is an act, not a fracking ideology.

John Brown committed terrorism and there was nothing wrong with his ideology.
Title: Re: Why can't Republicans denounce the ideology of right-wing terrorists?
Post by: TheDrake on October 29, 2018, 12:39:37 PM
Somewhat dated, but relevant.

Quote
The Sun’s leading article a week ago (17 November) began: “Here is a simple way for Muslims to denounce the monsters of IS: march through London in massive numbers with placards saying ‘not in our name.’”

It argued that Muslims had “done too little in public to express solidarity with the victims in Paris and the civilised, tolerant democracies in which they live and which IS want to destroy.”

A day later, the Muslim Council of Britain (MCB) took out an advert in the national press, backed by 300 affiliate organisations, which “unreservedly” condemned the Paris attacks.

link (https://www.theguardian.com/media/greenslade/2015/nov/24/why-its-wrong-to-demand-that-muslims-condemn-isis)

So, yeah, a lot of people have demanded that Muslim groups march around to prove they are not "the bad ones". Of course, the really far right organizations don't bother, because they already think all Muslims are irredeemably evil.
Title: Re: Why can't Republicans denounce the ideology of right-wing terrorists?
Post by: rightleft22 on October 29, 2018, 12:40:50 PM
Quote
But rightleft22 my response was to point out that racism and anti-semitism are not my "blind spots" nor are they the "blindspots" of conservatives generally

The thing with blind spots is that one does not see them. For me the above statement indicates blind spots exist because we all have them and that as TheDeamon noted we all fall into at times.

I never thought I was racist however I've done and said racists things. Sure most came from place of ignorance however I'm not sure that qualification matters to those on the receiving end.  I like to think that I did better when I learned better.

The statement - Because it would require everyone to face their shadow and take responsibility for it - did not imply that anyone on this forums blind spot was racism or extreme Ideology.

Question is antisemitism racism? if so what why is it  added as a separate category as in "racism and antisemitism"?
Title: Re: Why can't Republicans denounce the ideology of right-wing terrorists?
Post by: D.W. on October 29, 2018, 01:13:52 PM
It's always a tricky one when heritage AND religion are intertwined.  I think even people belonging to that group are going to have differing views on who can and cannot rightfully claim that title. 

What hope do those on the outside have for making the differentiation?  My impression leans more towards racial lines than religious when it comes to antisemitism.  Though I've not actually looked into the topic much.
Title: Re: Why can't Republicans denounce the ideology of right-wing terrorists?
Post by: Crunch on October 29, 2018, 01:41:24 PM
Uh, Obama straight up said "Fox News isn't actually news." (In fairness, he was more alluding to their afternoon/Prime Time lineups which were largely opinion segments.) At least I have clear recall of that soundbite being him.

And you don't see the difference between that and calling them enemies? Or praising a congressman that assaulted a reporter? "any guy who can do a body slam ... he's my guy"? Or reveling in a crowd chanting "CNN Sucks"?

Your argument is about splitting hairs and rests upon the idea that the spokesperson for Obama is not really representativeness Obama. Trump called them An enemy, Obama says they’re an opponent and then used the DOJ on the media (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2013_articles_about_the_Department_of_Justice_investigations_of_reporters). So no, there’s no real material difference between what they said no matter how much you want to pretend there is but there’s actually quite a gap between what they do about it - Obama acted to use the force of government. Big difference I’d say.

Enjoying the CNN sucks chant? So what? CNN has long since left journalism behind them and engaged in activism against Trump. CNN long ago went in the tank for the left and Trump should enjoy their discomfort over being exposed as a propaganda machine instead of a news source.

As for the body slam thing, you need to stop relying on these propaganda outlets to tell you what hat to think. That was a joke, one made at the congressman’s expense in the same way guys give each other a hard time. If you look at the entire thing in context, you’ll see that it’s just like the joke about Russia and Hillary’s emails.
Title: Re: Why can't Republicans denounce the ideology of right-wing terrorists?
Post by: Seriati on October 29, 2018, 01:46:53 PM
Quote
But rightleft22 my response was to point out that racism and anti-semitism are not my "blind spots" nor are they the "blindspots" of conservatives generally

The thing with blind spots is that one does not see them. For me the above statement indicates blind spots exist because we all have them and that as TheDeamon noted we all fall into at times.

I see, so the "proof" that I don't have racist and anti-semitic blind spots is that I don't believe I do?  That's literal kafkatrapping nonsense.

How about, you demonstrate where a position I am taking is done for racist and/or anti-semitic reasons, which is how a legitimate case would be made.

My point is that you've misidentified someone else's blindspots.  Which is itself a soft form of abuse.
Title: Re: Why can't Republicans denounce the ideology of right-wing terrorists?
Post by: rightleft22 on October 29, 2018, 03:04:15 PM
Yeah its a catch 22  you don't know what you don't know and only you know what you know about your true intentions, motivations and fears and only if your constantly checking in them will you notice when you come up short.

Quote
How about, you demonstrate where a position I am taking is done for racist and/or anti-semitic reasons,
I don't think I have ever tried to make a case to indicate your position our you yourself are racist...  I might have suggested in the past that I thought some of your positions were hypocritical. (I am aware that many of my own arguments have been hypocritical. Its one of the reasons I post. )

I don't always agree with your positions and do sometimes think that your over identified with the GOP cause which only means that you can be counted on to defend petty much most of what the party is doing but that doesn't make you racist or necessarily blind to that.

We are living in a time of history where, IMO, we are regressing and becoming more likely to lock in our view point with out being open to learning. Thus IMO neither "side" will flat out denounce ideology that my go to far. Instead it is most likely they will excuse it and water it down so that its acceptable to them.  The evangelicals are a good example as is the current trend on the far extremes to create conspiracy theories. Fox and other media sources handling of the mail bomb story and arguing false flag conspiracy is another example (which I predicted).

 
It is my prejudice that I think the extreme far right (in general not you personal - I don't consider you extreme far right) is more likely to engage in conspiracy theory to avoid looking more closely at their ideology - or maybe just better at it. 
Title: Re: Why can't Republicans denounce the ideology of right-wing terrorists?
Post by: Crunch on October 29, 2018, 03:55:26 PM
It is my prejudice that I think the extreme far right (in general not you personal - I don't consider you extreme far right) is more likely to engage in conspiracy theory to avoid looking more closely at their ideology - or maybe just better at it.

I think it's at least as likely - Russian collusion, Kavanaugh ran a rape gang, the "vast right wing conspiracy" after the Clinton's, etc. The left's conspiracy theories are covered and treated as real rather than being dismissed as conspiracy theory so it may appear that the right is more engaged in such theories.
Title: Re: Why can't Republicans denounce the ideology of right-wing terrorists?
Post by: TheDeamon on October 29, 2018, 04:41:42 PM
It is my prejudice that I think the extreme far right (in general not you personal - I don't consider you extreme far right) is more likely to engage in conspiracy theory to avoid looking more closely at their ideology - or maybe just better at it.

For how I'd prefer to define the right wing several people in here, myself included, probably run into that side of the spectrum.

Of course, that places most of the racists and a lot of the tin-foil hat crowd "to the left" of us. I say this because a lot of posters on here seem to slant libertarian to various degrees, although they may more broadly belong on the Conservative or Moderate end of the spectrum.

In reality the only thing "more right wing than a Libertarian" is an Anarchist(or Anarco-Capitalist as one member of this forum pegged it).

Racial supremacy agendas, National Socialist agenda items, and so on? They have no place on a spectrum running from "the center" of American Politics if it runs through Libertarianism in a straight line. That only happens if you turn around and start heading off in a different direction.
Title: Re: Why can't Republicans denounce the ideology of right-wing terrorists?
Post by: rightleft22 on October 29, 2018, 04:55:56 PM
Quote
The left's conspiracy theories are covered and treated as real

I guess its in the eye of the beholder. In the coverage I watched concerning Kavanaugh I never heard the one about the Russian rape gang.
With regards to Russian collusion I've been able to identify News from opinion, speculation and editorial. pretty sure

I suspect that if you were to go far enough to the right and far enough to the left you end up in the same place :0 

Title: Re: Why can't Republicans denounce the ideology of right-wing terrorists?
Post by: TheDeamon on October 29, 2018, 06:14:02 PM
Yes and no. Libertarians inevitably end up in a kind of weirdly ordered state of Anarchy. Even socialists eventually default to a quasi state of Anarchy.

Arguably Marxism should end up there as well, although it typically becomes "a means to an end." Which Stalinism exemplifies, you overthrow a "Capitalist regime" by devolving things into a state of Anarchy and use that period of chaos ("The Revolution"--a construct from Marx as I understand it) to impose Communistic Order upon the masses.

I guess the Nazis would be a Socialist variant of a Stalinist.
Title: Re: Why can't Republicans denounce the ideology of right-wing terrorists?
Post by: TheDrake on October 29, 2018, 06:48:31 PM
The libertarians themselves demand more than one-dimensional politics. To call them on the far right wing is to ignore social policy. The American Right usually identifies as anti-abortion, in favor of drug prohibition, pro LGBT rights, and maybe most importantly favor isolationist foreign policy.

Oh and this too from lp.org:

Quote
Libertarians do not support classifying undocumented immigrants as criminals. Our current immigration system is an embarrassment. People who would like to follow the legal procedures are unable to because these procedures are so complex and expensive and lengthy. If Americans want immigrants to enter through legal channels, we need to make those channels fair, reasonable, and accessible.

But a lot of libertarians do enjoy themselves some conspiracy theories.
Title: Re: Why can't Republicans denounce the ideology of right-wing terrorists?
Post by: TheDeamon on October 30, 2018, 01:41:38 AM
Don't confuse the Libertarian Party with Libertarianism, yes the two overlap to a large degree, but they are not one and the same.

Much like the Republican Party doesn't define Conservativism, or how the Democratic Party doesn't define Liberalism, no matter how much both parties wish they could.
Title: Re: Why can't Republicans denounce the ideology of right-wing terrorists?
Post by: TheDrake on October 30, 2018, 07:23:55 AM
Quote
As for the body slam thing, you need to stop relying on these propaganda outlets to tell you what hat to think. That was a joke, one made at the congressman’s expense in the same way guys give each other a hard time. If you look at the entire thing in context, you’ll see that it’s just like the joke about Russia and Hillary’s emails.

Wasn't it also a joke at the victim's expense? Trump consistently projects the idea here and elsewhere that:

1. On some level at least, the victim deserves violence.
2. The violent act is somewhere on the level of jaywalking.

"If you see somebody getting ready to throw a tomato, knock the crap out of them."
"Maybe he should've been roughed up,"
“Like when you guys put somebody in the car and you’re protecting their head, you know, the way you put your hand over it. Like, don’t hit their head, and they’ve just killed somebody. I said, you can take the hand away, O.K.?.”
 "He's walking out with big high-fives, smiling, laughing," Trump said. "I'd like to punch him in the face, I'll tell you."
"Try not to hurt him. If you do, I'll defend you in court. Don't worry about it."

You're right, it is very different from obtaining a subpoena, overseen by a judge, to search some records regarding a national security matter.

Do you think Trump would be kidding around about a body slam if it had been done to a veteran? What if a Democrat candidate had body slammed a MAGA wearing Trump supporter? He clearly couldn't care less if a reporter or a criminal suspect or a protester (against him) is acted against in a violent way.

As far as the CNN sucks chant, I'm just pointing out that Obama didn't lead a Fox Sucks chant or nod approvingly during one. He stated flat out that he thought they sucked (with a level of appropriate indirection), but he didn't whip his base into a frenzy and then wink and nod when a Fox reporter got thrown to the ground by a member of the Democratic party.
Title: Re: Why can't Republicans denounce the ideology of right-wing terrorists?
Post by: rightleft22 on October 30, 2018, 12:26:01 PM
Quote
As for the body slam thing, you need to stop relying on these propaganda outlets to tell you what hat to think. That was a joke

It was a joke but it wasn't at the congressmen expense. I've seen the clip and there is no way history is going to side with you on that one. 
Title: Re: Why can't Republicans denounce the ideology of right-wing terrorists?
Post by: Seriati on October 30, 2018, 04:04:34 PM
In other news, remember how you called out voters in Alabama and insist they vote for Doug Jones against their own voting interests, because its the right thing to do.  And in fact they put him in place, which almost cost them on issues they do care about?  Are you going to call out the DNC in NJ whose doubled down and doubled down again on supporting Menendez - the claims against are more proven, and also include sex with underage girls - well really prostitutes - not to mention corruption and bribery?  The ads they are running now are overwhelmingly calls to real politic - vote him in to stop Trump.

Talk about timely, https://www.wsj.com/articles/choke-on-bob-menendez-1540853570 (https://www.wsj.com/articles/choke-on-bob-menendez-1540853570)
Title: Re: Why can't Republicans denounce the ideology of right-wing terrorists?
Post by: Seriati on October 30, 2018, 04:16:46 PM
Yeah its a catch 22

It's not a catch 22, it's a KafkaTrap.  A catch 22 is a problem where no matter which path you take it's a failure, a dilemma.  A KafkaTrap, on the other hand, is an absurd charge that takes denial of the charge as proof of it.

It's a morally bankrupt style of pretend argument. 

Quote
you don't know what you don't know and only you know what you know about your true intentions, motivations and fears and only if your constantly checking in them will you notice when you come up short.

I know what my motivations are.  If you live such an unexamined life that you have taken a position and only later realized that it was for racist reasons of which you were unaware that's on you, not on me.

I'm fully aware that some decisions have a different statistical impact, I'm fully aware that some principals justify such impacts and others do not.

So be specific and lay out your case for where there is racism in a position, or anti-Semitism.  Not being able to do that, does not mean I, or anyone else has a "blindspot," it means you're making a false claim where you've assumed your conclusion.

Quote
We are living in a time of history where, IMO, we are regressing and becoming more likely to lock in our view point with out being open to learning.

My default view, is that if you don't know the other side's position well enough to understand why they are right (not just that they believe it, but well enough to understand the truth they see), you don't really understand a position well enough and shouldn't be making an argument.  The great debates are not about right and wrong, they are about better and worse.

Quote
Thus IMO neither "side" will flat out denounce ideology that my go to far.

Really?  Give me an example of the ideology on my "side" that "goes to far" and that I'm unwilling to "denounce."  So far the examples are pretty nonsensical or ones that have in fact been denounced.

Quote
The evangelicals are a good example as is the current trend on the far extremes to create conspiracy theories.

So which "evangelicals" are falling for what "conspiracy theories"? 

Quote
Fox and other media sources handling of the mail bomb story and arguing false flag conspiracy is another example (which I predicted).

Do you have an example of "arguing"?  Honestly, there was very limited speculation, the only people that I've seen "arguing" the point are random commenters on message boards.

Quote
It is my prejudice that I think the extreme far right (in general not you personal - I don't consider you extreme far right) is more likely to engage in conspiracy theory to avoid looking more closely at their ideology - or maybe just better at it.

Well I think you are grossly exaggerating.  A more accurate description is that conspiracy theorists don't examine their ideology.  Not clear to me that they are overwhelming on the right.
Title: Re: Why can't Republicans denounce the ideology of right-wing terrorists?
Post by: Crunch on October 30, 2018, 06:36:02 PM
Quote
As for the body slam thing, you need to stop relying on these propaganda outlets to tell you what hat to think. That was a joke

It was a joke but it wasn't at the congressmen expense. I've seen the clip and there is no way history is going to side with you on that one.

Really? Hillary Clinton just made a joke about how all black people look alike.  You gonna call her a racist?
Title: Re: Why can't Republicans denounce the ideology of right-wing terrorists?
Post by: velcro on November 01, 2018, 01:08:25 PM

Quote
Or to urge crowds to lock up political opponents?

You'll have to refresh me on this one.  Far as I know Trump has never urged a crowd to lock up his political opponents.  Are you deliberately misconstruing a call to apply the law evenly to Clinton and lock her up?  That would be prosecutors, not a crowd, doing so.  Or did I miss a call somewhere to have a crowd grab someone illegally and detain them?

As you know perfectly well, he is not urging the crowd to lock Clinton up.  He is egging on the crowd to encourage him to lock her up, and reveling in it.

You are claiming that locking someone up -not investigate, not have a grand jury, not even arrest and release for bail, but locking them up- is "applying the law evenly"?

Really?  Do you honestly, truly believe that the person responsible for law enforcement in the country, advocating for a private citizen to be locked up without trial, is just fine dandy in a democracy?

Oh, and in the debates, I believe he did flat out threaten to jail her if he won.  Fortunately, he did not keep that promise, but your claim that the chant is innocent is proven false.

I find it absolutely unfathomable that someone of your intelligence honestly interprets reality in this way.

Quote
Quote
We have Fox News promoting anti-Semitic conspiracies like George Soros running the State Department (Soros figures like Emmanuel Goldstein in Orwell's 1984, a designated hate figure on the right even though his political contributions are small relative to those of conservatives such as Sheldon Adelson or the Koch Brothers).

It's grossly misleading to call Anti-Soros activism anit-Semitic. 

If you actually studied the history of anti-Semitism, you would not say so.  If you read any of the dozens of experts in the history of anti-Semitism,  you would find that they vehemently disagree with your views.

Sources provided on request, but I am sure you can do your own research.
Title: Re: Why can't Republicans denounce the ideology of right-wing terrorists?
Post by: Fenring on November 01, 2018, 01:14:42 PM
Really?  Do you honestly, truly believe that the person responsible for law enforcement in the country, advocating for a private citizen to be locked up without trial, is just fine dandy in a democracy?

Source on Trump calling for this?

Quote
Quote
It's grossly misleading to call Anti-Soros activism anit-Semitic. 

If you actually studied the history of anti-Semitism, you would not say so.  If you read any of the dozens of experts in the history of anti-Semitism,  you would find that they vehemently disagree with your views.

What in the world does this even mean? If you're going to make such a striking-sounding pronouncement about such a thing, you could at least spell out what your point is.
Title: Re: Why can't Republicans denounce the ideology of right-wing terrorists?
Post by: TheDrake on November 01, 2018, 01:21:37 PM
There are some people who oppose Soros without being anti-Semitic. There are a significant minority who do so because of his faith or ethnicity. Just like everyone who opposes the Koch brothers isn't doing so because they are old white males, but some are.
Title: Re: Why can't Republicans denounce the ideology of right-wing terrorists?
Post by: rightleft22 on November 01, 2018, 01:37:26 PM
Quote
As for the body slam thing, you need to stop relying on these propaganda outlets to tell you what to think. That was a joke

It was a joke but it wasn't at the congressmen expense. I've seen the clip and there is no way history is going to side with you on that one.

Really? Hillary Clinton just made a joke about how all black people look alike.  You gonna call her a racist?

So I argue that the body slam statement was not a joke and you counter the argument about a Clinton statement

If I say yes Clinton statement was a Joke then Trumps statement can be a joke and your right
If I say no Clinton statement was a not Joke then Trump statement was not a joke

WTF

I am so sick and tired this type of counter argument - its not even a argument
YES we are all hypocrites so we should just let what ever happens happens and shut up. Only those with out sin can throw stones

Clinton isn't in power. I personal think She is stupid and should never have run.  I don't give a crap about what she says or did in the past and anything she says or did in the past does not make what Trump is doing right or wrong.
Title: Re: Why can't Republicans denounce the ideology of right-wing terrorists?
Post by: rightleft22 on November 01, 2018, 01:38:46 PM
Quote
Really?  Do you honestly, truly believe that the person responsible for law enforcement in the country, advocating for a private citizen to be locked up without trial, is just fine dandy in a democracy?

Source on Trump calling for this?

I'm assuming your rejecting the "without trial" part of the statement.
Title: Re: Why can't Republicans denounce the ideology of right-wing terrorists?
Post by: Pete at Home on November 01, 2018, 04:26:44 PM

Quote
Or to urge crowds to lock up political opponents?

You'll have to refresh me on this one.  Far as I know Trump has never urged a crowd to lock up his political opponents.  Are you deliberately misconstruing a call to apply the law evenly to Clinton and lock her up?  That would be prosecutors, not a crowd, doing so.  Or did I miss a call somewhere to have a crowd grab someone illegally and detain them?

As you know perfectly well, he is not urging the crowd to lock Clinton up.  He is egging on the crowd to encourage him to lock her up, and reveling in it.

You are claiming that locking someone up -not investigate, not have a grand jury, not even arrest and release for bail, but locking them up- is "applying the law evenly"?

Really?  Do you honestly, truly believe that the person responsible for law enforcement in the country, advocating for a private citizen to be locked up without trial, is just fine dandy in a democracy?

Oh, and in the debates, I believe he did flat out threaten to jail her if he won.  Fortunately, he did not keep that promise, but your claim that the chant is innocent is proven false.

I find it absolutely unfathomable that someone of your intelligence honestly interprets reality in this way.

Quote
Quote
We have Fox News promoting anti-Semitic conspiracies like George Soros running the State Department (Soros figures like Emmanuel Goldstein in Orwell's 1984, a designated hate figure on the right even though his political contributions are small relative to those of conservatives such as Sheldon Adelson or the Koch Brothers).

It's grossly misleading to call Anti-Soros activism anit-Semitic. 

If you actually studied the history of anti-Semitism, you would not say so.  If you read any of the dozens of experts in the history of anti-Semitism,  you would find that they vehemently disagree with your views.

Sources provided on request, but I am sure you can do your own research.

Regardless of what your sources say, Jewishness should not give a free out of jail card to currency manipulation and other  crimes of the wealthy against the pour. Most people even know that Soros is Jewish. I didn’t know until this discussion.  To attribute any sort of concern about his financial doings with “anti-Semitism quote seems like it cheap thought proof defense trick.
Title: Re: Why can't Republicans denounce the ideology of right-wing terrorists?
Post by: velcro on November 02, 2018, 07:49:01 AM
First, the issue of locking up Clinton without trial:

Quote
“It’s just awfully good that someone with the temperament of Donald Trump is not in charge of the law in our country,” Mrs. Clinton observed.

“Because,” Mr. Trump replied “you’d be in jail.”

Earlier, Trump had said he would appoint a special prosecutor, but this time, he said she would be in jail. Not on trial, in jail.
(Cue excuses that "what he meant was" something he didn't say.)

From this source (https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/358772-timeline-trump-calls-for-clinton-to-be-investigated):

Quote
June 2, 2016

As Trump was closing in on the GOP nomination, he intensified his attacks on Clinton, who also appeared poised to take the Democratic nomination.

Trump called for Clinton to be jailed during a campaign rally in San Jose, Calif., calling her "guilty as hell."

“Hillary Clinton has to go to jail. She has to go to jail. I said that,” he said.

Quote
Attorney General Jeff Sessions has taken a VERY weak position on Hillary Clinton crimes (where are E-mails & DNC server) & Intel leakers!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) July 25, 2017

[Not a call to jail her, just a statement of guilt without trial]

Again, I am dumbfounded that anyone honestly thinks that "lock her up" is anything but reprehensible when coming from the President.

Title: Re: Why can't Republicans denounce the ideology of right-wing terrorists?
Post by: velcro on November 02, 2018, 08:10:02 AM
Quote
It's grossly misleading to call Anti-Soros activism anit-Semitic. 

Absolutely true.

Do you know what is even more grossly misleading?

Characterizing false statements about Soros (he controls the State Department, he paid protesters, he is funding the caravan) that closely hew to centuries old anti-Semitic tropes as "anti-Soros activism".  That's like calling burning a cross on someone's lawn "anti-affirmative action activism"

It is kind of like blackface.  If you know anything about the history of racism, you know that blackface was used to diminish and belittle African Americans.

If you know anything about anti-Semitism, then you know the stereotype of the rich Jew, pulling all the strings, trying to control the world.  Anti-Semitic websites are filled with this reference, so when Trump and Fox bring it up, anti-Semites hear the dog whistle and know they have a friend.

Source (https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2018/10/24/conspiracy-theories-about-soros-arent-just-false-theyre-anti-semitic/?utm_term=.74cbea09471c)
Quote
The far right has ecstatically embraced the spectacle of elected political figures such as Trump and Gaetz theorizing about Soros. After Trump’s Soros tweet about Kavanaugh, the neo-Nazi website the Daily Stormer echoed and surpassed Trump’s assertion that anti-Kavanaugh dissent was a nefarious, paid-for plot.

“It is impossible to deny that subversive anti-American Jews were the primary force involved in a sinister plot to destroy Kavanaugh,” Lee Rogers wrote on the site a couple of days later. “These Jews do not represent the interest of America. They represent the interest of their diabolical and evil race first and foremost.”

In response to an Oct. 19 Trump speech in Missoula, Mont., in which Trump again suggested that protesters were paid by “Soros or somebody,” a commenter on anonymous message board 4chan exulted, “TRUMP NAMED THE IMMIGRATION JEW.” (“Naming the Jew” is an anti-Semitic term that refers to pointing out purported nefarious Jewish influence on world events.)

Source (https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/oct/24/george-soros-antisemitism-bomb-attacks)
Quote
Matthew Lyons, a researcher and the author of several books on rightwing populism and far-right ideology, said that commonly circulated narratives about George Soros resonate with a long history of antisemitic myths and stereotypes.

“One of the central antisemitic themes for a thousand years, at least, has been the notion that Jews represent this evil, super-powerful group that operates behind the scenes,” Lyons said.

“Often, anti-Jewish conspiracy theories don’t explicitly talk about Jews or ‘the Jews’ as a group. There’s some kind of code word or symbol that’s used in place.”

Encoding Soros as a “globalist” ties in with much older ways of talking about Jews in Europe. “For centuries,” Lyons said, “Jews were characterized in Christian-dominated Europe as a people that didn’t have a country. They were the ‘wandering Jew’. They were seen as visitors or interlopers in other people’s countries and so they were international in that sense.”

Source (https://www.wptv.com/newsy/do-george-soros-conspiracy-theories-promote-antisemitism)

Quote
Aryeh Tuchman studies extremism at the Anti-Defamation League, a nonprofit that fights against anti-Semitism and other forms of discrimination. He says there's an important distinction between correctly stating that Soros is an extremely influential progressive donor and claiming without evidence that he sways national events for perverse purposes.

"There is a fringe element of hardcore anti-Semites who have for many years characterized George Soros as the rich Jew who is manipulating world events, controlling the banks, Hollywood, other organizations, potentially even governments around the world for his own nefarious purposes. That is hardcore anti-Semitism," Tuchman said.

Tuchman admits that a person who tweets a Soros conspiracy theory may not mean to promote anti-Semitism. But even then, Tuchman says, these theories could give ammunition to those disseminating the old and dangerous anti-Semitic idea that a group of powerful Jews work behind-the-scenes to manipulate global events.

"Any politician or any public figure who uses anti-Soros conspiracy theories, even if they are not overly anti-Semitic, creates that effect of laying the groundwork for the dissemination of actual anti-Semitism into a population that may not have had a vulnerability to it before," Tuchman said.

He added: "What people need to understand is the history of the anti-Semitic stereotype and the danger that anti-Semitism has posed to Jews, you know, for hundreds of years, and to recognize that disseminating even non-anti-Semitic conspiracy theories about Soros is potentially reinforcing the anti-Semitic ideas about George Soros."

Is everyone who spreads lies about Soros and anti-Semite?  No.  Do they help spread anti-Semitism, willingly or unwillingly?  There is no doubt.

Trump has been told about this fact.  He has not stopped doing it.
Title: Re: Why can't Republicans denounce the ideology of right-wing terrorists?
Post by: TheDeamon on November 02, 2018, 09:22:26 AM
Whether or not Soros is actively doing anything is rather moot. Soros has had his fingers in helping fund, or other "bootstrap" numerous left-aligned Activist groups over MANY decades. Dating all the way back to Saul Olinsky and Caesar Chavez, IIRC. Not that I'm going to begrudge Chavez, from the interviews I've seen of the (long-since dead) man, I like him, as well as the "Real history" involving him, rather than the caricature both sides have turned him into.... Kinda like MLK being turned into something all indications are he was not.

Yes, it is one thing to level baseless and false accusations without any evidence. (The very embodiment of baseless)

It is another to claim Soros is a man who has a proven track record of having his proverbial "finger in the pie" of a LOT of pies, and the intended purpose of most of those pies isn't particularly upstanding or good from the viewpoint of anyone who respects and values the Constitution of the United States of America and the egalitarian principles it represents.

He may not be calling the shots anymore, but he sure as hell played a very significant role in creating the proverbial battlefield on which the current political realm is fighting on--particularly in the United States.
Title: Re: Why can't Republicans denounce the ideology of right-wing terrorists?
Post by: velcro on November 04, 2018, 12:18:50 PM
TheDeamon-

Case in point - your post is not anti-Semitic, in my view. (I'd like to see some factual backup for the statement about him being anti-egalitarian, but that is another topic).

As you said, he has a "proven track record". If anyone can find proof of something he controls behind the scenes, or anyone he secretly paid, let me know.

Once you start claiming (Fox) he controls major organizations, or other conspiracy theories about who he is secretly paying (Trump), then you are aligning with the well established anti-Semitic tropes.
Title: Re: Why can't Republicans denounce the ideology of right-wing terrorists?
Post by: cherrypoptart on November 04, 2018, 02:53:52 PM
Soros has his foundation online with his picture right on the front page.

https://www.opensocietyfoundations.org/

One could argue that nobody should be against all of that great stuff they are doing but it seems like it would be much harder to argue that he doesn't have his fingers in a whole bunch of pies.

Title: Re: Why can't Republicans denounce the ideology of right-wing terrorists?
Post by: Pete at Home on November 04, 2018, 04:26:55 PM
No Velcro. You are the one that introduced the question here of whether Soros’ manipulations were harmful. You can’t presuppose that it’s false in order to show the allegation anti Semitic.

I had no idea Soros was Jewish and have always viewed him like Murdock, a rich foreign immigrant who has used his influence and money to transform America. It’s reasonable and to be expected that anyone wielding power like that will please some parties and displease others.  I am very aware of the history of antisemitism, but to declare that certain otherwise questions are inherently racist and cannot or should not be considered or evaluated— that’s Book burning logic.  You don’t fight antisemitism by burning books in the town square. That’s another historical reference.

Any facile end run around honest discussion, demonizing to avoid examining fact... is a crime against the human mind and a crime against humanity.

1000 years of Christendom’s equivalent of Sharia forced Jews to go into banking, which left them more susceptible to mad accusations of currency manipulation, etc.  but today world banking is no longer associated generally with Jews. So your history lesson is out of date. Soros exists in a different historical context.  Today the biggest voice AGAINST the abuses of international banking is a Jew, Bernie Sanders, not a pack of antisemitism.
Title: Re: Why can't Republicans denounce the ideology of right-wing terrorists?
Post by: velcro on November 04, 2018, 07:43:03 PM
Pete,

My point is that there are criticisms of Soros that hew very, very closely to extremely well-established anti-Semitic tropes.  Those criticisms are not based on fact, but rather conspiracy theories, so they have no validity in and of themselves.

I can call a Jew a kyke without knowing it is an anti-Semitic term.  Does that make me immune from criticism, because of my ignorance?  What if people told me before what its provenance was, and I chose to ignore them?

You ignore my previous posts that say the same thing.  Criticizing Soros is not anti-Semitic.  Claiming without evidence that Soros is a money hungry, large-nosed person who secretly controls banks, Hollywood, funds anti-American activities and/or parts of the US government (oh, he's Jewish?  I had no idea!) is anti-Semitic.

Soros has his foundation online with his picture right on the front page.

https://www.opensocietyfoundations.org/

One could argue that nobody should be against all of that great stuff they are doing but it seems like it would be much harder to argue that he doesn't have his fingers in a whole bunch of pies.



Show me evidence he does "have his fingers in a whole bunch of other pies".  Until then, it is extraordinarily easy to argue that he does not, since all you have is conspiracy theories.
Title: Re: Why can't Republicans denounce the ideology of right-wing terrorists?
Post by: cherrypoptart on November 04, 2018, 09:29:03 PM
It's right there on that website.

"About George Soros

George Soros launched his philanthropic work in South Africa in 1979. Since then he has given over $32 billion to fund the Open Society Foundations, which work in over 100 countries around the world."

Would you like to know more?

"... He was one of the early prominent voices to criticize the war on drugs as “arguably more harmful than the drug problem itself,” and helped kick-start America’s medical marijuana movement. In the early 2000s, he became a vocal backer of same-sex marriage efforts. Though his causes evolved over time, they continued to hew closely to his ideals of an open society.

His giving has reached beyond his own foundations, supporting independent organizations such as Global Witness, the International Crisis Group, the European Council on Foreign Relations, and the Institute for New Economic Thinking.

Now in his 80s, Soros continues to take an active personal interest in the Open Society Foundations’ work, traveling widely to support their work and advocating for positive policy changes with world leaders both publicly and privately."

-----------------------------------------------------

Hardly a conspiracy theory when they brag about it.

Just looking into one thing about the European Council on Foreign Relations and apparently they are supportive of BDS against Israel so you could be anti-Soros because you support Israel and for that you get accused of being anti-Semitic. Fascinating.
Title: Re: Why can't Republicans denounce the ideology of right-wing terrorists?
Post by: Pete at Home on November 05, 2018, 12:59:30 AM
Pete,

My point is that there are criticisms of Soros that hew very, very closely to extremely well-established anti-Semitic tropes.  Those criticisms are not based on fact, but rather conspiracy theories, so they have no validity in and of themselves.

I appreciate your clarification.  I think you're wrong though because where the criticisms of Soros turn into full blown unfounded conspiracy theories, they depart from the anti-semitic model to resemble something more like the James-Bond-Blofeld/Spectre model.  Which while ludicrous, is not inherently antisemitic.  Blofeld is an obvious Jewish name and fits your dude in the shadows charicature, but you don't usually think "Jew" when you see the dude's hand stroking that long white-haired cat,

See The Guardian, https://www.theguardian.com/news/2018/jul/06/the-george-soros-philosophy-and-its-fatal-flaw

While a few of Soros' projects annoy me, he actually AFAIK deserves credit for helping to bring down the Iron Curtain.
Title: Re: Why can't Republicans denounce the ideology of right-wing terrorists?
Post by: velcro on November 05, 2018, 12:54:13 PM
Blofeld is an obvious Jewish name

Actually, it is not.  It is Polish, which often overlaps.

And the fictional Blofeld  (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ernst_Stavro_Blofeld)is definitively not Jewish.

Quote
Ian Fleming includes information about Blofeld's background in his novel Thunderball. According to the novel, Blofeld was born on 28 May 1908 (which is also Fleming's birthday) in Gdingen, Imperial Germany (now Gdynia, Poland); his father Ernst George Blofeld was Polish, and his mother Maria Stavro Michelopoulos was Greek, hence the well-known Greek name Stavro.[2] After World War I, Blofeld became a Polish national. As a young man, he was well-versed in the social science disciplines, but also in the natural science and technology disciplines. He first graduated from the University of Warsaw with a degree in Political History and Economics, and then from the Warsaw University of Technology with a degree in Engineering and Radionics. He was then hired by the Polish Ministry of Posts and Telegraphs and appointed to a sensitive communication position, which he used for buying and selling stocks at the Warsaw Stock Exchange.[3]

Foreseeing World War II, Blofeld made copies of top-secret wires and sold them for cash to Nazi Germany. Before the German invasion of Poland in 1939, he destroyed all records of his existence, then moved first to Sweden, then to Turkey, where he worked for Turkish Radio and began to set up his own private intelligence organisation. During the war, he sold information to both sides. After the defeat of Erwin Rommel, he decided to back the Allied war effort, and was awarded numerous medals by the Allied powers after the war's end. Blofeld then moved temporarily to South America before founding SPECTRE.

A real Blofeld says  (https://www.telegraph.co.uk/film/james-bond-spectre/real-blofeld-surname/)
Quote
The assumption that Blofeld is of German origin is one aspect of this tale I find irritating. Blofeld as a name is as English as tea and china, and the literal translation is “blue field”, a reference to the meadows where blue-flowering flax flourished. The Norfolk village of Blofield (its name now updated), is in the Domesday Book, and my family have been law‑abiding gentleman farmers in the county, at Hoveton, near Wroxham, since the 1680s.
Title: Re: Why can't Republicans denounce the ideology of right-wing terrorists?
Post by: velcro on November 05, 2018, 12:58:37 PM
Soros has his foundation online with his picture right on the front page.

https://www.opensocietyfoundations.org/

One could argue that nobody should be against all of that great stuff they are doing but it seems like it would be much harder to argue that he doesn't have his fingers in a whole bunch of pies.

Cherrypoptart has listed "all of that great stuff" that is on the website.  But "a whole bunch of other pies" clearly means things he is involved in that are not on the website.

Cherrypoptart has not listed any of the other pies, just the pies in plain view.

So, at the risk of repeating myself, it is easy to argue there are no "other pies", besides the ones in plain view, because nobody has shown any, outside of vague conspiracy theories about owning the State Department and paying protesters, etc.
Title: Re: Why can't Republicans denounce the ideology of right-wing terrorists?
Post by: velcro on November 05, 2018, 09:08:10 PM
where the criticisms of Soros turn into full blown unfounded conspiracy theories, they depart from the anti-semitic model to resemble something more like the James-Bond-Blofeld/Spectre model.  Which while ludicrous, is not inherently antisemitic.

Actually, quite the opposite.

Have you heard of the Protocols of the Elders of Zion?  It is the archetypical anti-Semitic conspiracy theory, first published in Russia in 1903, distributed by Henry Ford, taught by German school teachers in 1933, and still advocated by some groups today.

From Wikipedia:
Quote
The Protocols purports to document the minutes of a late-19th-century meeting attended by world Jewish leaders, the "Elders of Zion", who are conspiring to take over the world. The forgery places in the mouths of the Jewish leaders a variety of plans, most of which derive from older antisemitic canards. For example, the Protocols includes plans to subvert the morals of the non-Jewish world, plans for Jewish bankers to control the world's economies, plans for Jewish control of the press, and – ultimately – plans for the destruction of civilization.

So the crazy conspiracy theories about Soros fit quite well.  And take a look at Trump's last campaign ad.
Quote
Philanthropist investor George Soros, Federal Reserve head Janet Yellen and Goldman Sachs CEO Lloyd Blankfein, all of whom are Jewish, appear onscreen as Trump inveighs against “levers of power in Washington” and “global special interests” — both considered anti-Semitic dog-whistles.

Again, criticizing Soros, or Yellen or Blankfein is not anti-Semitic.  Spreading conspiracy theories that are historically anti-Semitic and aimed at Jews at best provides aid and comfort to anti-Semites.  And in the case of Donald Trump, he cannot claim ignorance.
Title: Re: Why can't Republicans denounce the ideology of right-wing terrorists?
Post by: velcro on November 05, 2018, 09:12:09 PM
Starting a thread about Soros.

And Blofeld is more likely English than Polish, but I found no evidence that it is Jewish.
Title: Re: Why can't Republicans denounce the ideology of right-wing terrorists?
Post by: Pete at Home on November 06, 2018, 02:33:39 AM
where the criticisms of Soros turn into full blown unfounded conspiracy theories, they depart from the anti-semitic model to resemble something more like the James-Bond-Blofeld/Spectre model.  Which while ludicrous, is not inherently antisemitic.

Actually, quite the opposite.

Have you heard of the Protocols of the Elders of Zion?  It is the archetypical anti-Semitic conspiracy theory, first published in Russia in 1903, distributed by Henry Ford, taught by German school teachers in 1933, and still advocated by some groups today.

Velcro, I have a master's degree in Rhetoric and Technical communications, and I did my thesis on political discourse (Hazlitt's Spirit of the Age). So obviously as someone to whom "never again" means "never again to anybody," I've read Protocols, seen Triumph of Will, read Will Shirer's rise and fall, visited Auschevitz and Birkenau frequently when my family lived in Poland.  Every time we went from Warsaw to Malbork castle or to Gdansk (formerly Danzig), I stopped and spent half a day at Auschevitz and Birkenau, reading the journals on display and speaking to locals who were children when the camps were active.  spent probably a solid 60,000 hours pondering the question of how the holocaust happened and how we can stop it from ever happening again to anyone.  My grandfather spent a good half of my mom's toddlerhood hanging out in one of Hitler's little camps after he was captured at the Battle of the Bulge.  And while I regretfully cannot find a single drop of Jewish blood in my genealogy, my ex wife had a Jewish grandparent so my own children would have gone to the camps had I lived in Nazi germany.  I also have a severely disabled son who the Nazis would have been put to death even before Kristalnacht.

I don't say this to get anyone to "respect my authoritee" (I'm more of a frack authority kind of guy if you haven't noticed.)  I do hope to convince you that I'm a gentile who has checked his privilege in this sensitive matter, that I approach this matter with particular humility and hunger for answers.

(((If we can get through this discussion without anyone becoming uncivil, then I'd love to debate Henry Ford I with you.  I regard him as a great man who was brainwashed by historical forces beyond his control) but nevertheless ended up doing far more good than harm in the world.)))

Quote
Quote
The Protocols purports to document the minutes of a late-19th-century meeting attended by world Jewish leaders, the "Elders of Zion", who are conspiring to take over the world. The forgery places in the mouths of the Jewish leaders a variety of plans, most of which derive from older antisemitic canards. For example, the Protocols includes plans to subvert the morals of the non-Jewish world, plans for Jewish bankers to control the world's economies, plans for Jewish control of the press, and – ultimately – plans for the destruction of civilization.

So the crazy conspiracy theories about Soros fit quite well.

1. The "crazy conspiracy theories" really don't fit Soros near enough as they fit Blofeld.  As you cited:

Quote
Foreseeing World War II, Blofeld made copies of top-secret wires and sold them for cash to Nazi Germany. Before the German invasion of Poland in 1939, he destroyed all records of his existence, then moved first to Sweden, then to Turkey, where he worked for Turkish Radio and began to set up his own private intelligence organisation. During the war, he sold information to both sides. After the defeat of Erwin Rommel, he decided to back the Allied war effort, and was awarded numerous medals by the Allied powers after the war's end. Blofeld then moved temporarily to South America before founding SPECTRE.

2. I regard John Birch literature as softcore antisemitism partially derivative from Protocols, and I only mention them in this paragraph because they evolved *after* the watershed Nuremberg trials.  [It's only at Nuremberg that (IMC&HO) continuing belief in Protocols became a "crazy conspiracy theory."] Bircher Protocol Revisionism narrows the focus to a handful of Jewish bankers who the birchers accuse of working with both sides. 

3. If Fleming didn't base Blofeld on Bircher revisionist screeds (which are not inherently or overtly antisemitic and can only be shown so in their rhetorical and historical context) then I submit that Fleming may have come across an earlier similar piece of revisionism in his postwar intelligence work or via his US intelligence contacts. (Fleming personally trained a shocking number of men and women who later became the CIA's first generation and John F Kennedy actually used the Bully Pulpit to promote Fleming work in a manner without precedent except for President Wilson's promotion of some white supremacist cinematic piece of crap).

4. I put "crazy conspiracy theories" in disagreement quotes because Protocols isn't "crazy" but an appallingly well-constructed blood libel.  The Tsar's intelligence services used espionage and state of the art sophistry to make Russia inhospitable to Jews.  They accomplished their objective.  Just as "Triumph of Will" represented a triumph of modern cinematic art as well as documenting a collapse of human will against Nazi brainwashing.  (look at the tears in the eye of the worker who speaks in the beginning of Hitler restoring the "dignity" of the german worker).

5. I don't say anything here to defend the Nazis or to praise antisemites but rather to know our enemy like Ender knew the buggers.  If we take "never again" seriously we need to stop throwing around the word Nazi like it's some dumb thing we made up in our nightmares, and recognize how so many intelligent and decent people like Ford were deceived.  And words like "hate" does not sum it up; if anything they dumb things down.

6. I used numbers on these points to help myself cover my arguments while reducing my word count.  Should I have taken them out before posting?  Do they come off as hostile or overly pedantic? Thank you and feedback welcome.
Title: Re: Why can't Republicans denounce the ideology of right-wing terrorists?
Post by: velcro on November 06, 2018, 12:36:13 PM
Pete,

Thanks for the thoughtful reply. No hostility or pedantry inferred. But I am curious, are you familiar with the meaning of triple parentheses?

I pointed out that the Protocols talks about world domination.  So world domination is an anti-Semitic trope.  I don't think you can deny that.

So "full blown unfounded conspiracy theories" of Soros controlling the State Department etc. do in fact hew closely to anti-Semitic tropes.  I don't see how that conclusion does not follow directly from the premises.

The theories also are Blofeldian, but that is a tangent you brought up, which does not affect my conclusion.
Title: Re: Why can't Republicans denounce the ideology of right-wing terrorists?
Post by: Fenring on November 06, 2018, 01:00:17 PM
I pointed out that the Protocols talks about world domination.  So world domination is an anti-Semitic trope.  I don't think you can deny that.

You are making this logical connection unironically?

Quote
So "full blown unfounded conspiracy theories" of Soros controlling the State Department etc. do in fact hew closely to anti-Semitic tropes.  I don't see how that conclusion does not follow directly from the premises.

 ::)

Title: Re: Why can't Republicans denounce the ideology of right-wing terrorists?
Post by: velcro on November 06, 2018, 10:06:00 PM
I pointed out that the Protocols talks about world domination.  So world domination is an anti-Semitic trope.  I don't think you can deny that.

You are making this logical connection unironically?

I'm not sure what part of that is not clear.

The Protocols are the boilerplate for much, if not most of anti-Semitism.  It alleges plans for world domination by Jews.  Do you deny that when you say a Jew, or a group of Jews, wants to dominate the world, it is following that model?

If I make fun of a very blonde woman by saying she is stupid, without any real evidence, I think it is fair to say that I am hewing closely to anti-blonde tropes, knowingly or not.  If you never heard that trope before, you would be doubtful.  But if you knew about the thousands of dumb blonde jokes, it would make perfect sense.
Title: Re: Why can't Republicans denounce the ideology of right-wing terrorists?
Post by: Fenring on November 06, 2018, 10:54:10 PM
I'm not sure what part of that is not clear.

The Protocols are the boilerplate for much, if not most of anti-Semitism.  It alleges plans for world domination by Jews.  Do you deny that when you say a Jew, or a group of Jews, wants to dominate the world, it is following that model?

That wasn't the argument you presented before; what you said before sounded like it was saying:

a) World domination is a Protocols trope
b) Therefore invoking a theme of world domination invokes the anti-Semitic trope.

That in itself is a ridiculous argument. Its current form seems to be that if you accuse a Jew of world domination *then* it invokes the anti-Semitic trope. That's not as ridiculous, but still runs afoul of plain common sense, which says that if a person born to Jewish parents actually is suing for world domination, it cannot be relevant to Jewish people as a whole to accuse that one person of it. Now you might be on to something if you suppose that anti-Semites actually do make this slippery slope and accuse all Jews for that which a few might do; then again that slippery slope seems to run in all directions, where "conservatives" are blamed for what the Westboro Baptist Church does and "liberals" are blamed for what Antifa does. So in that respect you'd be saying something correct but redundant.

But the "he's a Jew so you can't accuse him of seeking world domination" trope is tired. No, being a Jew (or anything else) isn't a deflector shield from being accused of things. To whatever extent some people may be actually fixated in the Jews, I agree that it's good to be on the lookout for this kind of mindset, but hate comes in all flavors.
Title: Re: Why can't Republicans denounce the ideology of right-wing terrorists?
Post by: velcro on November 07, 2018, 12:48:30 PM

 if you accuse a Jew of world domination *then* it invokes the anti-Semitic trope. That's not as ridiculous, but still runs afoul of plain common sense, which says that if a person born to Jewish parents actually is suing for world domination, it cannot be relevant to Jewish people as a whole to accuse that one person of it....

But the "he's a Jew so you can't accuse him of seeking world domination" trope is tired.

You almost have it.

If you accuse a Jew, without any basis whatsoever, of attempting world domination, then it invokes an anti-Semitic trope.

You are missing the bolded section. (I may have deemphasized this in the several iterations and dissections of my original statement, but from the beginning I was assuming the accusations were conspiracy theories without any basis)

If you accuse a blonde of being a stupid bimbo, and she is, you are ok.  But if you have no evidence, you are playing into stereotypes.

If you accuse (person of race X, color Y, creed Z etc.) of being (bigoted stereotype for that group) and they actually have that behavior, you are ok.
But if your accusation is just a conspiracy theory, then you are most definitely reinforcing that stereotype, or anti-X trope, or racism.

Maybe you don't think you are.  Maybe you are not aware of the stereotypes.  But the people who are already sold on the stereotypes see you repeat them, without any basis whatsoever, and their beliefs are reinforced.

And as a side note, the tropes are about Jews as a people, not just one or two.  They pick out one or two as examples to prove the rule.
Title: Re: Why can't Republicans denounce the ideology of right-wing terrorists?
Post by: Fenring on November 07, 2018, 12:53:56 PM
Maybe you don't think you are.  Maybe you are not aware of the stereotypes.  But the people who are already sold on the stereotypes see you repeat them, without any basis whatsoever, and their beliefs are reinforced.

If we're going to use the Ornery definition of "without any basis whatsoever" then pretty much any claim can fall under this category. Good luck getting people to agree on what claims do or don't have reasonable basis. And I don't fancy the type of argument that goes in the form of "Since *I* cannot see any clear basis for your accusation I'm going to assert that *you* are employing a hateful trope." That still doesn't follow, man.

Best case is you see repeated data points of someone 'happening' to malign people all of a similar race/group (or all significantly not part of a specific race/group) and then you can build a case that there's reason to believe this person is an "...ist."