Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

If anyone is guilty of inciting a riot it would be the anti-nazi campaigners that brought people into the town for the specific purpose of causing a disturbance. Like him or not, Ole King Cobb brought people into the town with the purpose of settling them there, not to riot.

In regards the dna, it would be interesting to get a professional break down of the results. 14% seems too high unless the markers they are using are present in everyone but it's not a subject I'm familiar with.

cadbren wrote:
If anyone is guilty of inciting a riot it would be the anti-nazi campaigners that brought people into the town for the specific purpose of causing a disturbance. Like him or not, Ole King Cobb brought people into the town with the purpose of settling them there, not to riot.

In regards the dna, it would be interesting to get a professional break down of the results. 14% seems too high unless the markers they are using are present in everyone but it's not a subject I'm familiar with.

Protesting maybe at a push, I admit i'm not 100% informed on US law there, however i'd bet a lot of the anti-nazi's came of their own choice rather than being asked. As opposed to Cobbs statement of "I'm going to bring my friends and they're bigger and harder than you", pretty much saying "let me have it my way or you're going to have bad people that clearly don't mind consequences doing bad things to you".

If Cobb actually said that then he's an idiot. Well, actually he is an idiot, so maybe that's to be expected.
The bit I've seen of it showed local Lakota indians parading around a swastika flag they supposedly captured from the nazis. This is the same tribe though that's trying to charge the USA with genocide because its people are being unduly influenced by american culture and are turning away from the tribe's customs. They'll be best of buds in no time, I'm sure of it.

If the towns culture has always been non-nazi, then they have every right to ban and keep these people out of their town.

The nazis have no right to be there and make their presence known if it changes the culture of a place...

 d-usa wrote:
If the towns culture has always been non-nazi, then they have every right to ban and keep these people out of their town.

The nazis have no right to be there and make their presence known if it changes the culture of a place...

Be you referencing the thread I think you are referencing? Lets not bring that back up...

 motyak wrote:

 d-usa wrote:
If the towns culture has always been non-nazi, then they have every right to ban and keep these people out of their town.

The nazis have no right to be there and make their presence known if it changes the culture of a place...

Be you referencing the thread I think you are referencing? Lets not bring that back up...

Which thread be this?

 master of ordinance wrote:

 motyak wrote:

 d-usa wrote:
If the towns culture has always been non-nazi, then they have every right to ban and keep these people out of their town.

The nazis have no right to be there and make their presence known if it changes the culture of a place...

Be you referencing the thread I think you are referencing? Lets not bring that back up...

Which thread be this?

A homosexuality thread from a while back (if I'm reading d-usa's reference correctly) which had several "interesting" (with a real emphasis on those quotation marks) points raised, among them that a town should be allowed to refuse an individual the right to create a gay bar in a small country town which had a large percentage of the population that didn't want it. Cadbren argued in support of this if memory serves, and d-usa is referencing that, if my guess is correct, and pointing out the similarities between the situations.

But that's quite OT for this thread, sorry.

 d-usa wrote:
If the towns culture has always been non-nazi, then they have every right to ban and keep these people out of their town.

The nazis have no right to be there and make their presence known if it changes the culture of a place...

I agree, but did the "town" have a culture or was it made up of people who'd moved there over the years because it was cheap living and who kept to themselves? Certainly the people who showed up to defend the locals were not of the same culture as the locals being that they were local Indian tribes and anti-racists from Bismark or similar.

The town was never large, but at its height it had 10x the current population suggesting that the original population abandonned it leaving it to whoever could be bothered to live there.
With improved transportation and vastly improved communications, these little towns should be repopulated, particularly with property values being so cheap. It's a good way for people to start over. If the original settlers could do it with the resources of the 19th and early 20th century, then 21st century people can do it too.

I don't have a problem if a distinct group wants to set up camp in the middle of nowhere to build a cultural community. The locals of Leith don't seem to care about the town, the place is a wreck, allowed to rot away. If another group can put life back into the place then good on them. I don't believe Cobb is that person though, he's too ego driven and this venture seems to be more about him than starting an actual community. He's all flags, controversy and talk back shows.

Culture isn't static, and is highly amorphous.

Anyone who believes the point of this whole thing is to peacefully settle the area will also certainly be interested in some cheap beach front property I have in Malibu for sale.

 motyak wrote:

A homosexuality thread from a while back (if I'm reading d-usa's reference correctly) which had several "interesting" (with a real emphasis on those quotation marks) points raised, among them that a town should be allowed to refuse an individual the right to create a gay bar in a small country town which had a large percentage of the population that didn't want it. Cadbren argued in support of this if memory serves, and d-usa is referencing that, if my guess is correct, and pointing out the similarities between the situations.

But that's quite OT for this thread, sorry.

It's a different situation though. In that one, a stable town decided they wanted to keep an undesirable business from setting up (re-establishing?). In this case a small group of people in a dying town are scared that they could be swamped by newcomers with incompatible political views.
Looking at the decline of Leith, the place was probably on its last generation of inhabitants anyway. If anything, interest in the town may help it revive as people see the cheap property available there and presummably in nearby towns.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Ahtman wrote:
Culture isn't static, and is highly amorphous.

Anyone who believes the point of this whole thing is to peacefully settle the area will also certainly be interested in some cheap beach front property I have in Malibu for sale.

Culture changes certainly, but what is often being described as "culture change" is actually one group replacing another or coming to dominate another.

A culture naturally changing as the population explores new ideas, comes up with better ways of doing things or from influence from neighbouring cultures is quite different from mass immigration imposing a new culture on an area through sheer physical presence. In that case the culture of the area hasn't changed, the population has been replaced.

The native americans didn't change their culture to one where english was spoken and european style clothing was worn, they were replaced by europeans who spoke english and wore european style clothing. Indians that were left either adopted the new way and were absorbed into the new culture or they were relagated to peripheral zones where they still partially assimilated due to being surrouned by the new culture and people. It is this latter process that the Lakota are protesting about in their genocide case against the US government.

A less harsh example is the replacing of traditional ethnic identities in the British Isles with a broadly English one. In that instance the mass of the people survive but they are taught to regard the new culture as theirs and to drop the old one. It's been so effective that even ethnic nationalists from those areas tend to use English medium to express their ideas and are little different culturally from an English person.
If someone willingly goes to a foreign place and is prepared to adopt the new ways (assuming they're accepted in), then that's different from being forced to change their culture through threat of violence or loss of political control.

cadbren wrote:

 d-usa wrote:
If the towns culture has always been non-nazi, then they have every right to ban and keep these people out of their town.

The nazis have no right to be there and make their presence known if it changes the culture of a place...

I agree, but did the "town" have a culture or was it made up of people who'd moved there over the years because it was cheap living and who kept to themselves? Certainly the people who showed up to defend the locals were not of the same culture as the locals being that they were local Indian tribes and anti-racists from Bismark or similar.

The town was never large, but at its height it had 10x the current population suggesting that the original population abandonned it leaving it to whoever could be bothered to live there.
With improved transportation and vastly improved communications, these little towns should be repopulated, particularly with property values being so cheap. It's a good way for people to start over. If the original settlers could do it with the resources of the 19th and early 20th century, then 21st century people can do it too.

I don't have a problem if a distinct group wants to set up camp in the middle of nowhere to build a cultural community. The locals of Leith don't seem to care about the town, the place is a wreck, allowed to rot away. If another group can put life back into the place then good on them. I don't believe Cobb is that person though, he's too ego driven and this venture seems to be more about him than starting an actual community. He's all flags, controversy and talk back shows.

As a guy who lives in a small town of 600, it's kind of unfair to say these people don't care about this town and are letting it rot away. These towns usually have almost nonexistant budgets. They can barely keep the basic utilities running, let alone clean up urban blight or any other number of problems that larger towns struggle with. After all, where are they going to get the money to do anything from? Because that tiny population isn't going to rake in much taxes.

Traffic Cops...

Linndale, Ohio is a town of 159, it's about 2 city blocks wide. They have a mile of interstate that they patrol under "Home Rule" laws granted by Ohio's state constitution. If you're going over 60 mph in that zone, they'll pull you over and give you a ticket, which you had to take care of in Linndale. The number of traffic tickets they handed out paid for nearly 80% of the town's million dollar budget as well as for the entire police force...

While I never drive on that stretch of highway, I do occasionally hit up the chunk of main road that passes through their town, I dislike their eagerness to pull people over, but the little town has had some success with keeping itself going.

I hope they have speed limits posted there, that's essentially highway robbery otherwise.

cadbren wrote:
I hope they have speed limits posted there, that's essentially highway robbery otherwise.

They do, they look just like the other ones that are put up the by city/state. If you're a local and you get pulled over in Linndale, that's your own damn fault because it's not like we don't know about their propensity for writing speeding tickets.

 Alfndrate wrote:
Traffic Cops...

Linndale, Ohio is a town of 159, it's about 2 city blocks wide. They have a mile of interstate that they patrol under "Home Rule" laws granted by Ohio's state constitution. If you're going over 60 mph in that zone, they'll pull you over and give you a ticket, which you had to take care of in Linndale. The number of traffic tickets they handed out paid for nearly 80% of the town's million dollar budget as well as for the entire police force...

While I never drive on that stretch of highway, I do occasionally hit up the chunk of main road that passes through their town, I dislike their eagerness to pull people over, but the little town has had some success with keeping itself going.

Sounds familiar:

http://newsok.com/valley-brook-police-activities-rake-in-the-cash-records-show/article/3900695

VALLEY BROOK — With a handful of strip clubs doing business in Valley Brook, it's no surprise that the city relies on the industry to fund its operations.

But the money doesn't come from sales tax — at least not the lion's share of it. The real money-maker in Valley Brook is the police department.

According to independent audits of Valley Brook's finances for fiscal years 2012 and 2013, the town derives roughly 80 percent of its revenue from police-related activities.

Last fiscal year, the town of 765 residents generated $909,877 in revenue, down by more than $200,000 from the previous year. Of that amount, the police department was responsible — through fines and forfeitures — for $727,654.

The year before, Valley Brook's police department helped rake in nearly $940,000 on its own.

For most cities and towns, sales tax collections are the main source of cash to fund governmental activities, but they account for only about 10 percent of revenue. Last fiscal year, Valley Brook collected $101,209 in sales tax, a figure that is $600,000 less than what police-related activities generated.

Valley Brook Police Chief Mike Stamp said the town's reliance on fines and other police-related activities for revenue is just the way it is in Valley Brook these days.

The town is located inside Oklahoma City limits, so it's very easy to not even be aware that you are in their jurisdiction unless you know the area.

Wanna know how big the town actually is: According to the United States Census Bureau, the town has a total area of 0.3 square miles (0.78 km2), all of it land.

Most of most cities is land...
In some cases all of some cities is land.

 purplefood wrote:
Most of most cities is land...
In some cases all of some cities is land.

Oklahoma City: According to the United States Census Bureau, the city has a total area of 621.2 square miles (1,609 km2), of which, 607.0 square miles (1,572 km2) of it is land and 14.2 square miles (37 km2) of it is water. The total area is 2.28 percent water.

We gotta know how much water there is so that we can keep an eye out for the water-yeti.

 d-usa wrote:

 purplefood wrote:
Most of most cities is land...
In some cases all of some cities is land.

Oklahoma City: According to the United States Census Bureau, the city has a total area of 621.2 square miles (1,609 km2), of which, 607.0 square miles (1,572 km2) of it is land and 14.2 square miles (37 km2) of it is water. The total area is 2.28 percent water.

We gotta know how much water there is so that we can keep an eye out for the water-yeti.

You have bunyips there too?

Looks like Cobb has been arrested for firearms offences though no formal charges yet.

http://www.wday.com/event/article/id/90104/

All that fuss over a town with just one black person? Cowards. They should go to New Orleans and try that crap there.

It's not much to add, but the picture of Dutton is telling.

http://www.duluthnewstribune.com/event/image/id/109556/headline/White%20supremacists%20arrested/

Looks like a pussy.

I'd have said central casting of Deliverance, but you're more succint, I guess.

 Mathieu Raymond wrote:
It's not much to add, but the picture of Dutton is telling.

http://www.duluthnewstribune.com/event/image/id/109556/headline/White%20supremacists%20arrested/

Isn't that precious, two "men" out taking their cow for a walk while displaying their substitutes for penises.

Yeah, we've got a smaller town in part of the metro here that's notorious for having a 10mph lower speed limit than all the surrounding areas and being patrolled by cops that are super quick to ticket any speeders.