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.

Albatross wrote:Your lunch money. Hand it over.

I would, but I don't think that you're going spend it on lunch.

DAMN! You're always one step ahead!

To be fair, i took a lot of flak in primary school because i was hugely different.

I moved up to secondary and it got worse, so i moved school and developed have a really cutting tomgue and the ability to laugh at people when they hit me, yeah scary when the runt you punched full force laughs at you.

I also had the better you than me policy so i rarely helped others out cos when i did always turned out worse for me.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bullying, yep, I was bully'd pretty badly when I was younger, first day of grade seven, had the crap kicked out of me by a grade 9 student, then spent the next two years hiding in the library each break so he wouldn't get me, although he delighted in throwing his elbow in my face as we passed in the corridoor, when he left year 10 I though I was free, so i ventured into the yard again only to become the victim of more bully's constant name calling and shoving but not too bad like the last guy, until i snapped and lashed out to make them stop....bad idea, now i was the skinny crying kid that they got a reaction from! so it just went on and on until i left grade ten, although in my break between schools i was attacked by a gang of youths in a local store and damaged some bones in my face and jaw and eye sockets, not much luck hey? al because I was skinny and quiet and kept to myself, now i've learnt the secret is self confidence! yes that's right! get some now! I looked at the people doing this and the people they didn't mess with so I took it apon myself to re create my life, I shaved my head (tough guys have shaved heads) I grew a beard (tough guys have beards) I worked out and drank protein shakes every day (tough guys are buff) and then i started doing martial arts (tough guys...anyway) so in the end I went from a skinny quiet kid with a boy band haircut, to someone who had confidence and looked like they knew how to handle themselves and in reality I probably did, but deep down i was still the kid who doesn't like confrontation and was sick of being picked on, some people just need to bully someone to feel whole, they need the rush of being 'better' than someone, I saw one of my tormentors years after, and when he saw me all i said to him was "I do believe I owe you a beating from when we went to school?" and smiled, the look on his face was priceless! he ended up working at my work for a few years but was always super friendly towards me, so is bullying a kids thing? or do we each have our own methods for getting to the light at the end of the bullying tunnel? and how do we stop it? is it getting worse for the youth of today? I( was lucky but i keep hearing about the poor kids/adults who take their own life because of someone else and no one should feel that helpless, if I had children who were being bullied I wouldn't hesitate to push the envelope and confront the bully's and the parents until it was resolved. if I could i'd become an advocate for anti bullying behavior I don't think it has a place in todays society, it was a hell of a decade for me and I wouldn't wish it apon anyone, I do have to say though that I wouldn't be who I was and as strong if I didn't have to fight my way through the pain it caused, but it still isn't good, fun or right.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Almost my story, but....it started in Jr. High School with the same group of bullies all the way untill 11th grade. These guys hung around in a big group of about 30 skin heads and picked on just about everyone they saw. I was there pet project because they could get away with murder as the Principals and Councilers at my schools were well worthless. So in 10th grade or so these guys corner me in the locker room after PE and stat pushing me and this other kid around. Well this upset me as the other kid was about 5 ft, 86 lbs soaking wet and was cornered in the shower in a 5 on 1 situation. I choose the biggest strongest guy in the group, grabbing him by his neck and back of the pants and ran him down the locker dials about 10 ft and throw him face first into the tiled wall with a loud bloody crack. I turned around and looked at these 4 guys, their jaws dropped to the floor and said "Ok he is done...Who is next?" I can tell you this, they ran faster than I have ever seen anyone run in my life out of the locker room. This now lone bully (Eric) was on the ground nose busted up and back in pain looked up at me and said that I would pay for what I did. 2-weeks later (Eric and his buddies who were in my auto-shop class started in on me and again I get angry (tossing my desk across the room awaking the sleeping teacher who looked like a ghost). I said yet again "I said stop it!" The Teacher did not care that these guys were teasing me and 4 other people in class that day he sent me to the priciples office. After school at the bike rack I was ambushed by Eric and his buddies from behind (was pushed over the bike rack and was stomped by the 5 guys). Latter that night I saw Eric at the local pizza place playing a video game alone (evil smile) I then jumped him from behind and gave him the beating of his life in the store, I then dodged out the back door as the police arrived. I procceded to hunt down every bully in that group on my terms 1 on 1 and beat them harshly. After all that was over no one wanted to mess with me again. I meet Eric at my 20th reunion the guy liked anarexic, balding and saw me at my best all 6ft 2, 215lb finest decked out in my Army uniform, me being in the armed forces for a long time. He ran out of the hotel just as fast as I remember 20 yrs ago and I just smiled and everyone there clapped.

If that's not what you're doing then I apologise, but it could certainly be taken that way.

I didn't mean it that way. I simply meant that when people ambush somebody and beat them, it's pretty much because they hate them. I don't mean to lend any credibility to their opinion, but I think they made their opinion pretty clear.

When it started, I fought back -- my dad is a Green beret, he taught me how to defend myself, and not to brag but I've never lost a fight that was one-on-one -- and that only made them come after me harder.

Yeah, that explains it then. A bully is most interested in somebody who will respond in a way that makes them feel justified in their cruelty. If you fight back, particularly if you have some success in fighting back, that's very appealing to them.

So basically his response to me getting attacked was to blame me and suspend me, and what that did was send a message to these kids that bullying me was acceptable.

Yeah, I can see how that would make you distrustful of basically everything. All I can tell you is that most people don't get mistreated in the way you're describing, and you should always seek to purge that poison from your outlook. It really reads in your posts that you have had your outlook conditioned by those bad experiences, and while it's understandable, it's also to your benefit to deny it any control over you today.

For example:

Because, when you get right down to it, human beings are gak.

It really doesn't help you much to spend too much time thinking like this. We all do it, but it still doesn't help. There's a lot of good going on, and it sounds like you would benefit from focusing your attention on the positives.

As grown ups, our stressed-out bullies become Republicans and attack gay people's right to marry, or attack the poor, or troll forums from anominity (if they're particularly cowardly).

Like I said, dude, don't let past experiences poison you. You came in here with a chip on your shoulder. It sounds like you have a very good reason for having it, but it's not our responsibility, nor really in our power, to know your life history. All we can see is a guy who shows up and starts calling everyone racist, etc. etc.

You think everyone is gak, but you never really gave this forum much of a chance to treat you otherwise. I know you persist in believing it's just me and dogma, but everyone was seeing how aggressive, insulting, irrational you were being. Given the backstory you provide, it's really a bit heartbreaking.

But, at the same time, I tried to take our disagreements to PM, precisely so you WOULDN'T get ganged up on. Somehow you managed to make it happen anyway. You're really locked into a pattern here, and you've got to break out of it. Just let go of all the hate. Real easy for me to say, not having to deal with it, but it's still the right answer.

Monster Rain wrote:

rubiksnoob wrote:I think the problem here is that G-Man is a nice guy and has a lot to contribute, but he's quite outspoken about his views/beliefs/etc. and can sometimes tick people off.

You can be outspoken about your beliefs. You, for example, have been on the opposite side of a few arguments from me and I don't think you're a bad guy. Quite the contrary, actually.

There's a difference between saying "I believe X" and saying "I believe X and everyone that doesn't is a Nazi, fascist slow that should be put to death."

I have never said anyone who doesn't believe what I believe is a fascist, a slow or should be put to death. You can't find a single example of me doing anything at all like that. You haven't quite come out and said that I have, but your implication is clear: You believe that I have, and thus that I am a bad guy, and thus that I deserve to have people like you jump down my throat every single time I post (which is pretty much exactly what you, Monster Rain, have done -- even in this thread!).

What I have said is that I believe that the American conservative movement is fascist, and thus that American movement conservatives are fascists. As a movement conservative, I can understand why you would be hostile to that belief, and I can even understand why it would motivate you to be constantly rude to me, to misrepresent what I've said, and to create ad hoc justifications for why the "Be Polite" rule shouldn't apply to you and your conservative buddies. But to be clear, I have never once argued that you or anyone else is a fascist because they disagree with me. If you disagree with me, I simply think you're wrong. Which is only natural, since if I didn't think I was right, I would change my position.

Gailbraithe wrote:

Monster Rain wrote:

rubiksnoob wrote:I think the problem here is that G-Man is a nice guy and has a lot to contribute, but he's quite outspoken about his views/beliefs/etc. and can sometimes tick people off.

You can be outspoken about your beliefs. You, for example, have been on the opposite side of a few arguments from me and I don't think you're a bad guy. Quite the contrary, actually.

There's a difference between saying "I believe X" and saying "I believe X and everyone that doesn't is a Nazi, fascist slow that should be put to death."

I have never said anyone who doesn't believe what I believe is a fascist, a slow or should be put to death. You can't find a single example of me doing anything at all like that. You haven't quite come out and said that I have, but your implication is clear: You believe that I have, and thus that I am a bad guy, and thus that I deserve to have people like you jump down my throat every single time I post (which is pretty much exactly what you, Monster Rain, have done -- even in this thread!).

What I have said is that I believe that the American conservative movement is fascist, and thus that American movement conservatives are fascists. As a movement conservative, I can understand why you would be hostile to that belief, and I can even understand why it would motivate you to be constantly rude to me, to misrepresent what I've said, and to create ad hoc justifications for why the "Be Polite" rule shouldn't apply to you and your conservative buddies. But to be clear, I have never once argued that you or anyone else is a fascist because they disagree with me. If you disagree with me, I simply think you're wrong. Which is only natural, since if I didn't think I was right, I would change my position.

Conservatism isn't Fascism they're not even related other than they're both right and ideologies (one way more than the other but I'll let you decide which is which). Conservatism is a political and social philosophy that promotes the maintenance

of traditional institutions and supports minimal and gradual change in society. Fascism however is a radical and authoritarian nationalist political ideology, seeking to organize a country to corporatist perspectives, values, and systems, including the

political system and the economy. Saying American Conservatives are Fascists would be about as factually correct as saying Communism is a democracy, you're comparing apples to oranges.

LordWynne wrote:----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bullying, yep, I was bully'd pretty badly when I was younger, first day of grade seven, had the crap kicked out of me by a grade 9 student, then spent the next two years hiding in the library each break so he wouldn't get me, although he delighted in throwing his elbow in my face as we passed in the corridoor, when he left year 10 I though I was free, so i ventured into the yard again only to become the victim of more bully's constant name calling and shoving but not too bad like the last guy, until i snapped and lashed out to make them stop....bad idea, now i was the skinny crying kid that they got a reaction from! so it just went on and on until i left grade ten, although in my break between schools i was attacked by a gang of youths in a local store and damaged some bones in my face and jaw and eye sockets, not much luck hey? al because I was skinny and quiet and kept to myself, now i've learnt the secret is self confidence! yes that's right! get some now! I looked at the people doing this and the people they didn't mess with so I took it apon myself to re create my life, I shaved my head (tough guys have shaved heads) I grew a beard (tough guys have beards) I worked out and drank protein shakes every day (tough guys are buff) and then i started doing martial arts (tough guys...anyway) so in the end I went from a skinny quiet kid with a boy band haircut, to someone who had confidence and looked like they knew how to handle themselves and in reality I probably did, but deep down i was still the kid who doesn't like confrontation and was sick of being picked on, some people just need to bully someone to feel whole, they need the rush of being 'better' than someone, I saw one of my tormentors years after, and when he saw me all i said to him was "I do believe I owe you a beating from when we went to school?" and smiled, the look on his face was priceless! he ended up working at my work for a few years but was always super friendly towards me, so is bullying a kids thing? or do we each have our own methods for getting to the light at the end of the bullying tunnel? and how do we stop it? is it getting worse for the youth of today? I( was lucky but i keep hearing about the poor kids/adults who take their own life because of someone else and no one should feel that helpless, if I had children who were being bullied I wouldn't hesitate to push the envelope and confront the bully's and the parents until it was resolved. if I could i'd become an advocate for anti bullying behavior I don't think it has a place in todays society, it was a hell of a decade for me and I wouldn't wish it apon anyone, I do have to say though that I wouldn't be who I was and as strong if I didn't have to fight my way through the pain it caused, but it still isn't good, fun or right.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Almost my story, but....it started in Jr. High School with the same group of bullies all the way untill 11th grade. These guys hung around in a big group of about 30 skin heads and picked on just about everyone they saw. I was there pet project because they could get away with murder as the Principals and Councilers at my schools were well worthless. So in 10th grade or so these guys corner me in the locker room after PE and stat pushing me and this other kid around. Well this upset me as the other kid was about 5 ft, 86 lbs soaking wet and was cornered in the shower in a 5 on 1 situation. I choose the biggest strongest guy in the group, grabbing him by his neck and back of the pants and ran him down the locker dials about 10 ft and throw him face first into the tiled wall with a loud bloody crack. I turned around and looked at these 4 guys, their jaws dropped to the floor and said "Ok he is done...Who is next?" I can tell you this, they ran faster than I have ever seen anyone run in my life out of the locker room. This now lone bully (Eric) was on the ground nose busted up and back in pain looked up at me and said that I would pay for what I did. 2-weeks later (Eric and his buddies who were in my auto-shop class started in on me and again I get angry (tossing my desk across the room awaking the sleeping teacher who looked like a ghost). I said yet again "I said stop it!" The Teacher did not care that these guys were teasing me and 4 other people in class that day he sent me to the priciples office. After school at the bike rack I was ambushed by Eric and his buddies from behind (was pushed over the bike rack and was stomped by the 5 guys). Latter that night I saw Eric at the local pizza place playing a video game alone (evil smile) I then jumped him from behind and gave him the beating of his life in the store, I then dodged out the back door as the police arrived. I procceded to hunt down every bully in that group on my terms 1 on 1 and beat them harshly. After all that was over no one wanted to mess with me again. I meet Eric at my 20th reunion the guy liked anarexic, balding and saw me at my best all 6ft 2, 215lb finest decked out in my Army uniform, me being in the armed forces for a long time. He ran out of the hotel just as fast as I remember 20 yrs ago and I just smiled and everyone there clapped.

Cool story Bro.

I would've just left his contact information on 4chan and let people have fun with it, or possibly just personally delivered CP to his email address.Something internetz related

Gailbraithe wrote:

Monster Rain wrote:

rubiksnoob wrote:I think the problem here is that G-Man is a nice guy and has a lot to contribute, but he's quite outspoken about his views/beliefs/etc. and can sometimes tick people off.

You can be outspoken about your beliefs. You, for example, have been on the opposite side of a few arguments from me and I don't think you're a bad guy. Quite the contrary, actually.

There's a difference between saying "I believe X" and saying "I believe X and everyone that doesn't is a Nazi, fascist slow that should be put to death."

I have never said anyone who doesn't believe what I believe is a fascist, a slow or should be put to death. You can't find a single example of me doing anything at all like that. You haven't quite come out and said that I have, but your implication is clear: You believe that I have, and thus that I am a bad guy, and thus that I deserve to have people like you jump down my throat every single time I post (which is pretty much exactly what you, Monster Rain, have done -- even in this thread!).

What I have said is that I believe that the American conservative movement is fascist, and thus that American movement conservatives are fascists. As a movement conservative, I can understand why you would be hostile to that belief, and I can even understand why it would motivate you to be constantly rude to me, to misrepresent what I've said, and to create ad hoc justifications for why the "Be Polite" rule shouldn't apply to you and your conservative buddies. But to be clear, I have never once argued that you or anyone else is a fascist because they disagree with me. If you disagree with me, I simply think you're wrong. Which is only natural, since if I didn't think I was right, I would change my position.

I'm not inclined to go through your posting history for crazy things, they're there for anyone who wants to read them that doesn't already know what you're all about. I really don't have time to play around on the internet arguing with you,
I have to go to a Fascist cocktail party at Sean Hannity's house, and I have to pick up Oliver North and Ann Coulter on the way over. I won't be calling you on your bad behavior anymore, I'll just report it to the moderators and save myself the cringing that comes from reading your posts.

Monster Rain wrote:

Galbraithe wrote:

Monster Rain wrote:

rubiksnoob wrote:I think the problem here is that G-Man is a nice guy and has a lot to contribute, but he's quite outspoken about his views/beliefs/etc. and can sometimes tick people off.

You can be outspoken about your beliefs. You, for example, have been on the opposite side of a few arguments from me and I don't think you're a bad guy. Quite the contrary, actually.

There's a difference between saying "I believe X" and saying "I believe X and everyone that doesn't is a Nazi, fascist slow that should be put to death."

I have never said anyone who doesn't believe what I believe is a fascist, a slow or should be put to death. You can't find a single example of me doing anything at all like that. You haven't quite come out and said that I have, but your implication is clear: You believe that I have, and thus that I am a bad guy, and thus that I deserve to have people like you jump down my throat every single time I post (which is pretty much exactly what you, Monster Rain, have done -- even in this thread!).

What I have said is that I believe that the American conservative movement is fascist, and thus that American movement conservatives are fascists. As a movement conservative, I can understand why you would be hostile to that belief, and I can even understand why it would motivate you to be constantly rude to me, to misrepresent what I've said, and to create ad hoc justifications for why the "Be Polite" rule shouldn't apply to you and your conservative buddies. But to be clear, I have never once argued that you or anyone else is a fascist because they disagree with me. If you disagree with me, I simply think you're wrong. Which is only natural, since if I didn't think I was right, I would change my position.

I'm not inclined to go through your posting history for crazy things, they're there for anyone who wants to read them that doesn't already know what you're all about. I really don't have time to play around on the internet arguing with you,

I have to go to a Fascist cocktail party at Sean Hannity's house, and I have to pick up Oliver North and Ann Coulter on the way over. I won't be calling you on your bad behavior anymore, I'll just report it to the moderators and save myself the cringing that comes from reading your posts.

Please don't I don't want Gailbraithe to get banned again.

Cheesecat wrote:Conservatism isn't Fascism they're not even related other than they're both right and ideologies (one way more than the other but I'll let you decide which is which). Conservatism is a political and social philosophy that promotes the maintenance of traditional institutions and supports minimal and gradual change in society. Fascism however is a radical and authoritarian nationalist political ideology, seeking to organize a country to corporatist perspectives, values, and systems, including the political system and the economy. Saying American Conservatives are Fascists would be about as factually correct as saying Communism is a democracy, you're comparing apples to oranges.

No, you're claiming that the American conservative movement is conservative. It is not. The American conservative movement is not conservative at all, it is in fact extremely radical -- the changes it seeks are neither minimal nor gradual, but quite the opposite. Nor does it seek to promote the maintenance of traditional institution -- it seeks to destroy the very institutions that helped America dominate the 20th century.

Combining bronze age social morality, neo-liberal (or neo-conservative, same thing) foreign policy, and anarcho-capitalism economic theory, which is precisely what the modern conservative movement does, is not maintaining American traditions. It is bucking them entirely.

Monster Rain wrote:I'm not inclined to go through your posting history for crazy things, they're there for anyone who wants to read them that doesn't already know what you're all about. I really don't have time to play around on the internet arguing with you, G-donkulous.

If you don't have the time to argue with me, then stop taking your precious time to attack me. If you're not willing to back up lies you're telling about me, then stop telling lies.

I have to go to a Fascist cocktail party at Sean Hannity's house, and I have to pick up Oliver North and Ann Coulter on the way over. I won't be calling you on your bad behavior anymore, I'll just report it to the moderators and save myself the cringing that comes from reading your posts.

Censorship is the last refuge of the scoundrel.

Here's a nice article that talks about bullying and suggest ways of handling them at the end of the article.
http://www.psychologytoday.com/articles/200910/big-bad-bully

The American conservative movement is not conservative at all, it is in fact extremely radical -- the changes it seeks are neither minimal nor gradual, but quite the opposite.

You realize that this is really not very helpful, right?

A dozen times, or more, I've seen you suggest that the "American conservative movement" is in fact "fascist. Then some random sucker, who hasn't seen how this always turns out, says "no it's not." And then, by way of counter argument, you say "yes it is," but with lots of colorful and slightly awkward prose.

That's not helpful.

We know you think it is. But when challenged, you generally just say "IT IS" in even more embellished, infuriated tones.

It's just not very productive. If you enjoy it, that's cool... But I just want to be clear, you're not actually providing any support for your assertions, you're just restating them more and more vehemently.

This is really how you approach pretty much everything. You also have opinions about what is good government, but when asked to explain it, you never seem to explain the actual detail of what needs to be done. It's just how "liberalism is really what makes America strong," again, said with varying degrees of agitation and frustration.

There's really not any substance.

Gailbraithe wrote:It's basically the same reason people like you and dogma keep starting gak with me.

For the record, I came down on you because I thought that you tended to bully people while making poor arguments.

Gailbraithe wrote:That's why I know that dogma and Phryxis haven't been banned for all the times they have baited me into flamewars.

Sweet, sweet irony.

Gailbraithe wrote:But to be clear, I have never once argued that you or anyone else is a fascist because they disagree with me. If you disagree with me, I simply think you're wrong. Which is only natural, since if I didn't think I was right, I would change my position.

Yeah, right, you've never explicitly said that those who disagree with you are fascists (though you did try to force a similar dichotomy in the Blood Dolphins thread). Very few people, bar deliberate trolls, would do such a thing.

Unfortunately, what you explicitly state is not the sum of what you mean. You've already outlined one position by which you have created the means by which those who disagree with you would be considered fascists. After all, if you think that movement Conservatives are fascists, and a movement Conservative disagrees, then he must be doing so because he is a fascist. At least per your argument.

Now, that isn't necessarily a bad thing. After all, there are cases in which people do disagree with you simply because they like something. For example, an argument over whether or not ice cream is good. The problem is that movement Conservatism isn't very much like ice cream, its members don't seem to particularly like fascism. Therefore, when you call a movement Conservative a fascist, you aren't simply saying 'movement Conservatism is crap' you're equating movement Conservatism with something that movement Conservatives don't like. That's a nice rhetorical technique, but it isn't particularly useful in the course of rational debate, which you seem to so highly prize. If you believe that movement Conservatism is a fascist movement, then you must argue to that effect. You cannot simply say it is so. In the absence of such an explanation people are left to wonder as to why you are equating the two, and many will immediately conclude that its simply a disparagement on grounds of disagreement; explicit statement or no.

I've been in this boat myself, it sucks when people read things into your argument that you didn't put there. But the answer isn't to disparage them, and call them jack-booted thugs. The answer is to explain you meaning more effectively.

Also, I believe that you tend to lump everyone into the 'Conservative' category out of a general spite, rather than a tendency towards accurate categorization. I'm not a conservative, for example. I'm almost certainly more conservative than you, but I'm not a conservative. I'm less conservative than both Monster Rain, and Phryxis for example.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Gailbraithe wrote:neo-liberal (or neo-conservative, same thing) foreign policy,

No, not at all. Neo-liberals embrace institutions. Neo-conservatives reject them on principal. Neo-conservatism is realism + moral judgments.

Gailbraithe wrote:
Censorship is the last refuge of the scoundrel.

Says the man who places people on ignore.

Phryxis wrote:

The American conservative movement is not conservative at all, it is in fact extremely radical -- the changes it seeks are neither minimal nor gradual, but quite the opposite.

You realize that this is really not very helpful, right?

A dozen times, or more, I've seen you suggest that the "American conservative movement" is in fact "fascist. Then some random sucker, who hasn't seen how this always turns out, says "no it's not." And then, by way of counter argument, you say "yes it is," but with lots of colorful and slightly awkward prose.

That's not helpful.

We know you think it is. But when challenged, you generally just say "IT IS" in even more embellished, infuriated tones.

I actually have explained exactly why I think that, and you were involved in that conversation (its where we started this little kerfluffle), but if you need a reminder, here you go.

Fascism is hard to define precisely, and no two fascist movements are ever exactly the same. But they have some common properties.

Fascism movements are always sexually repressive. They oppose rights for women. They condemn homosexuality. They are obsessively concerned with what people do in their bedrooms, even when they are hypocritically libertine. The modern conservative movement is extremely homophobic, always ranting about the dreaded "gay agenda," and fiercely anti-woman. They seek to strip away women's right to control their own reproduction, making it the government's business to insure that every baby born of even rape and incest makes it into the world. Fascism movements are racist and nationalistic. This can be seen in the right's assault on immigrants and Muslims as dangerous, predatory threats to "real Americans," to white, Christian Americans.

Fascism movements are anti-democratic and opposed to parlimentary democracy. This can be seen in the increasing refusal of the GOP to play ball with the democratically elected majority, and in the threats of far-right candidates like Sharron Angle to seek out "second amendment remedies" should they not win at the ballot box.

Fascist movements are anti-labor. They attack the left as dangerously socialist or communist, they attack labor unions and worker's rights, they attack anything that goes against the will of their corporate overlords. Which brings us naturally to: Fascist movements are corporatist. Mussolini wrote that a better name for fascism would be corporatism. The movement is supported almost entirely by a handful of extremely wealthy industrialists, and it is the agenda of those industrialists that the movement is primarily interested in advancing (throwing women, gays, Muslims and immigrants under the bus is just a means to an end).

There is more, but those are the big points. The conservative movement is made up primarily of disillusioned and dissatisfied middle class workers who want someone to blame for their vague feeling that they've been screwed, and the leadership of the conservative movement is a bunch of corporate lackeys willing to feed them women, gays and minorities in order to secure their vote to advance a radical pro-corporate, oligarchic agenda. And that is fascism. That is what you call a political movement that uses fear of the powerless (gays, immigrants, muslims, women) to turn people who have lost power (the white middle class) into supporters of the very policies that have disempowered them (corporatism).


Automatically Appended Next Post:

dogma wrote:

Gailbraithe wrote:Censorship is the last refuge of the scoundrel.

Says the man who places people on ignore.

Seriously? And people wonder why I dismiss you as completely disingenuous.

That I choose to ignore your blather is not a form of censorship at all, dogma, and I'm 100% certain you already know that. Me putting you on ignore only prevents me from hearing you, it doesn't prevent you from speaking. Which is what getting someone banned does.

But you just keep on demonstrating why I don't think you're worth talking to.

The target. Ya'll missed it. Now it's mocking you.

Get back on topic dudes, this started out good and now you are talking about extreme politics? This is why we can't have good things!

Gailbraithe wrote:
Seriously? And people wonder why I dismiss you as completely disingenuous.

If I were to be labeled as disingenuous I would have to be one who put others on ignore. I've never done that to anyone.

Gailbraithe wrote:
That I choose to ignore your blather is not a form of censorship at all, dogma, and I'm 100% certain you already know that. Me putting you on ignore only prevents me from hearing you, it doesn't prevent you from speaking. Which is what getting someone banned does.

Your comment was clearly limited to speech with respect to Dakka. After all, it isn't as if your ban would affect your ability to speak otherwise.

It is disingenuous to propose that censorship, the ignorance of certain speech given a certain context, is bad if you choose to ignore certain speech given a certain context.

It would be much easier to presume that censorship is not always bad. Of course, Critical Race Theory already supposes that.

Regardless, it is illustrative that you chose to respond only to my euphemistic dig.

Oh, and hey, if you want me to avoid you don't mention me specifically.

dogma wrote:If I were to be labeled as disingenuous I would have to be one who put others on ignore. I've never done that to anyone.

You don't know what disingenuous means, do you?

It is disingenuous to propose that censorship, the ignorance of certain speech given a certain context, is bad if you choose to ignore certain speech given a certain context.

Ignoring someone is not censorship. It's just not, dogma. You know its not the same thing. EVERYONE knows that its not the same thing. Your right to speak does not mean I have to listen, and me choosing to ignore you is not any kind of censorship at all. Censorship has noting to do with "ignorance of certain speech given a certain context." Interesting use of ignorance there.

This is why you aren't worth talking to. You're being ridiculous. Censorship is not refusing to listen to someone, censorship is denying them the ability to speak.

Seriously, man. What the feth are you trying to accomplish here? What is the point of this nonsense? What do you hope to accomplish with this idiotic, patently false and ridiculous argument you're trying to make? I thought you were supposed to be the smarty-smarty college educated philosophy major, and this is the nonsense you choose to post? This complete bullshrimp claiming that ignoring someone is the same as censoring them?

No, dogma, that's wrong. That's not even a little bit right. That's just dumb. It's really just a stupid thing to try to argue, and I am giving you the benefit of the doubt when I assume that you are being disingenuous. Because if you aren't being disingenuous, then you really don't understand that this argument of yours is fething slowed idiocy. It's just a giant stinking pile of stupid.

And I assume that you're bright enough to know that, and that you are presenting this argument in the hopes of bullshitting your way towards scoring a point against me, and that you are hoping that you can simply baffle everyone with BS and they'll assume you know what you're talking about. But if that's not the case, and you really think you're making a reasonable argument when you sit there and claim that ignoring someone is a form of censorship, then you aren't disingenous. You also overpaid for your education, because you're clearly brain dead.

So you want to stand by this? You want to keep claiming that ignoring someone is censoring them?

Actually, I don't care. You're a waste of my time.

Vargtass wrote:

The target. Ya'll missed it. Now it's mocking you.

Get back on topic dudes, this started out good and now you are talking about extreme politics? This is why we can't have good things!

God protects drunks, favours dogma and hates kids who don't stand up to bullies... and now, Godwins this thread.


I was bullied. I countered with EXTREME POLITICS.

The target. It's getting re-god-damn-diculous!

For feth sake people, take your political banterings to another thread, I am pretty sure this is not what the OP intended it to be. I understand what you are going for here, but you are both getting across as being dumbasses. Seriously, who the gives a about you two and your views of censorship when all you do is flinging gak at eachother. You are belittling the topic you are trying to convey and I am quite sure anyone with any common sense are already trying to ignore you. Trying...

Get your semi-political banter the out of here and into another thread, we are discussing bullying here in what was a serious fashion. You screwed it up. You fail.

Edit: @Arctik_Firangi - Who the heck is Godwin, and how did he become this thread?

On the other hand, it has now been demonstrated that 'bull gaking' and presumably 'gak' are not affected by the language filter.

Don't bother reporting me, I'm reporting myself.

Thanks !

..oh Hitler, you do get around don't you, you rascal !

..so..if , we could maybe get back to the topic at hand that'd be..well.... perhaps a first for the board but we live in hope eh !

I have had bullies since i was in primary 1 , now im in S1 and still bullied every day of every week im at school I have difficulty mainly cuase I don't play sport like Warhammer 40k and i play chess and I am "diffrent" . A girl tried to trip me down the stairs cause i askded her to stop kicking my chair .

Gailbraithe wrote:
You don't know what disingenuous means, do you?

Lacing in candor, according to Merriam-Webster. It can also mean calculating, or free from simple frankness; which is your choice?

Gailbraithe wrote:
Ignoring someone is not censorship. It's just not, dogma.

It is when 'ignore' removes that which you dislike from view.

Gailbraithe wrote:
Censorship has noting to do with "ignorance of certain speech given a certain context." Interesting use of ignorance there.

This is why you aren't worth talking to. You're being ridiculous. Censorship is not refusing to listen to someone, censorship is denying them the ability to speak.

You're denying my ability to speak to you, or so it seems. Apparently you feel the need to engage in disputes regarding methodology.

Gailbraithe wrote:
Seriously, man. What the feth are you trying to accomplish here?

What are you? You have, yet again, ignored the academic disputes that I have posed to you.

Gailbraithe wrote:
What is the point of this nonsense? What do you hope to accomplish with this idiotic, patently false and ridiculous argument you're trying to make? I thought you were supposed to be the smarty-smarty college educated philosophy major, and this is the nonsense you choose to post? This complete bullshrimp claiming that ignoring someone is the same as censoring them?

Yeah, that's what happens when you only quote the snark. Good job, dude. If you want to actually engage me, feel free. I'm all ears. I would love to hear your actual take on Singer.

Gailbraithe wrote:
No, dogma, that's wrong. That's not even a little bit right. That's just dumb. It's really just a stupid thing to try to argue, and I am giving you the benefit of the doubt when I assume that you are being disingenuous. Because if you aren't being disingenuous, then you really don't understand that this argument of yours is fething slowed idiocy. It's just a giant stinking pile of stupid.

And I assume that you're bright enough to know that, and that you are presenting this argument in the hopes of bullshitting your way towards scoring a point against me, and that you are hoping that you can simply baffle everyone with BS and they'll assume you know what you're talking about. But if that's not the case, and you really think you're making a reasonable argument when you sit there and claim that ignoring someone is a form of censorship, then you aren't disingenous. You also overpaid for your education, because you're clearly brain dead.

So you want to stand by this? You want to keep claiming that ignoring someone is censoring them?

Actually, I don't care. You're a waste of my time.

Stand by what? You haven't disputed anything. All you've done here is behave as a bully. I mean, it's fun to push people around; especially on the internet. But it really doesn't mount an argument.

You can keep calling me names, or you can addres smy objections to your arguments.

Well, i've grown accustomes to bullies and bullying, as i've lived in a pretty bad neighborhood until i was about 20. Since we were kids, we used to bully each other and start fights all the time from things that now seem so largely irrelevant (laundry clips were the usual motive, yes we would fight for those ))...

However, i always stood up for myself and never let any bullying attempt go unanswered. We all did so. And though the other kids i used to hang up with (as i said, we were bullying each other as well), would pick on the other smaller weaker kids, i never did that, but i never helped them either.

Then, in high-school, my social skills and the fact that i never lacked self-confidence got me hanging out with the bullies group. Again, i never bullied anyone, but i also didn't stand up for them.

College, all the same.

Recognize the pattern? Just as people said before, if you are perceived as weak, people WILL pick on you. If you stand up for yourself, it will usually stop. Yes, i did get beaten for standing up for myself, but i never kept my mouth shut or my fists unclenched. This stuff really helped.

I don't defend bullies, i don't approve to their behaviour at all, but i also don't approve to those getting bullied without fighting back. Even if you're 20 pounds lighter than your nemesis, you can still throw a punch or two. Yes, you may get beaten. Yes, it may hurt. Yes, it may happen again. But it will definitely send a message, not just to the bullies, but to the other kids as well.

Remember people, if you are in doubt, just kick him in the ballz. Peace!

dogma wrote:

Gailbraithe wrote:
Ignoring someone is not censorship. It's just not, dogma.

It is when 'ignore' removes that which you dislike from view.

No, it's not.

And I honestly don't care if this gets me banned again: Dogma, if you really believe that choosing not to listen to someone is that same thing as denying them the ability to speak, then you are an idiot. The very fact that you were able to post this nonsense despite the fact that I have you on ignore is proof that you are not being censored. There is no way to get around that. Either you know your argument is bullcrap, or you are a very stupid person. There are no other options.

And now, out of respect to everyone else, I am not engaging you further on this incredibly stupid point.

You're not listening to me? If that is so, then why are you replying to me?

Censoring is the process of examining things in order to determine that which should be removed; eg. certain (key concept there) things are censored in Iran, but no in the US (eg. in certain circumstances certain opinions are omitted by force while others are permitted). You exercise censorship; especially in ignoring people. The ignore function on Dakka being the point in question here, not ignorance in general. Thought that was clear, but maybe not.

Incidentally, the other possibility is that you are wrong, and I'm actually correcting you. You should have accounted for that; poor form.

You guys are really stupid arent you continuing to bicker in the topic after being asked not to.

Sport class is a god send for those that get bullied, expesialy with sports like rugby where we all run at each other noone see's hits coming, and boy does soccor even up the field i love me a slied tackle i got a kid to do two flips and a sumersault once, where i come from it's all verbal till someone blows a wistle, we all take some but we give it back.