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.
2015/11/03 03:11:35
Subject: Re:The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
Rule 1: Be Polite
This seems obvious, however many folks can sometimes forget that common courtesy goes a long way to lending respect to both you and your opinions. Just because you don't see the other users' faces doesn't mean they don't have feelings and won't be hurt by rude comments or offensive images. When you see something that you find silly, rude or insulting first assume that perhaps there is more to it than you initially thought. Look at it again, keeping in mind that tone and inflection is difficult to convey in a visual format. It may be that the person is attempting a joke or is exaggerating on purpose. It is best to politely request clarification before accusing someone being ignorant, a liar, or worse.
If after clarification you still disagree with the person then politely outline your points. Try to avoid name-calling or even implying insults wherever possible. These tactics generally only inflame a situation and lead to what are known as "Flame Wars." Whenever a flame war starts it usually ruins a perfectly good discussion. Others will lose interest in the thread and the site in general if this kind of interchange becomes a common occurrence.
2015/11/03 03:13:13
Subject: The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
whembly wrote: [Good... give up that line of attack because it's never going to be what you want it to be.
Line of attack? No, it's going to be the usual thing where you say something ridiculous, people call you out on it, you double-down on it without actually giving anything of substance, people get exasperated, and then you move on to another Hilary Clinton scandal story from your preferred right-wing echo chamber "news" source.
You know, how this thread has worked for the last 180 fething pages.
"Denmark: We Are Not The Socialist Utopia Bernie Sanders Thinks We Are
In the first Democratic primary debate, both Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders spoke of their fondness for Denmark.
Sanders, in particular, suggested that the US could adopt a socialist system by emulating Scandinavia. “I think we should look to countries like Denmark, like Sweden and Norway, and learn from what they have accomplished for their working people,” said the US presidential candidate, who identifies himself as a “democratic socialist.”
But Danish prime minister Lars Løkke Rasmussen, speaking at Harvard’s Kennedy School of Government this week, says Sanders got more than a few things wrong.
“I know that some people in the US associate the Nordic model with some sort of socialism. Therefore I would like to make one thing clear. Denmark is far from a socialist planned economy. Denmark is a market economy.”
Oops?
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2015/11/03 03:14:51
Live Ork, Be Ork. or D'Ork!
2015/11/03 03:18:25
Subject: The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
I think other than the folks that like to pretend that any mention of socialism = communism, the vast majority of people actually do know that mixed market economies are a thing that exists.
2015/11/03 03:19:40
Subject: Re:The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
To be fair, "socialism" by US standards and "socialism" by the rest of the world's standards are two very different things.
There is no such thing as a hobby without politics. "Leave politics at the door" is itself a political statement, an endorsement of the status quo and an attempt to silence dissenting voices.
2015/11/03 03:24:30
Subject: Re:The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
d-usa wrote: I think other than the folks that like to pretend that any mention of socialism = communism, the vast majority of people actually do know that mixed market economies are a thing that exists.
I wouldn't be so sure about that, D.
The article that Whembly posted (shocker!) doesn't actually say that anything Sanders said about Denmark was "wrong" and neither does the article it sources. For instance, the article quotes Rasmussen as saying, "I know that some people in the US associate the Nordic model with some sort of socialism. Therefore I would like to make one thing clear. Denmark is far from a socialist planned economy. Denmark is a market economy.” However, I can't find anything that has Sanders claiming that Denmark is a socialist planned economy. Quite the opposite, there is a video in one of the links in Whembly's article has a video of Sanders talking about the fact that Denmark is a mixed market economy.
I think Rasmussen is actually addressing people that are critical of Sanders' statement about how the United States could learn from Denmark and the Nordic system as the prevailing notion among right-leaning people in the States is that the Nordic countries are one step away from full-blown communism.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2015/11/03 04:03:26
d-usa wrote: "When the Internet sends its people, they're not sending their best. They're not sending you. They're not sending you. They're sending posters that have lots of problems, and they're bringing those problems with us. They're bringing strawmen. They're bringing spam. They're trolls. And some, I assume, are good people."
2015/11/03 03:55:21
Subject: The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
Anonymous claims to have leaked KKK members online and some Republican leaders are on there. So fake or is this going to blow up into a big scandal?
Without dealing with a bunch of the inbetween gak....
I've been watching this via my FB feed today. One of my buddies lives in a city whose mayor (or maybe it was the neighboring town?) was on that list as a KKK member.... Within moments of him posting, another of his friends pointed out that that particular mayor, is openly gay.
With that being said, I wouldn't be surprised at some of the "bigger" names on the list being true, but as has already been mentioned.... This isn't a credible source of information, and I completely withhold judgement until better information comes out.
2015/11/03 04:04:25
Subject: The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
Confirms Sanders already understood Rasmussen's point. Rasmussen..unsure why he opened his mouth.
@Ensis Ferrae
Yah, I saw that too. Certainly stranger things have happened but it also does not bode well for credibility. Its possible (probable) the non affiliated leaker took info out of context or fabricated a bunch to be the first to break the story.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/11/03 04:08:10
2015/11/03 04:52:07
Subject: Re:The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
I think there is literally no reason anyone should believe anything on the current KKK list, neither when Anonymous actually releases it, and certainly not when some random other people post one that's not even the list in question.
I well remember when the internet "identified" the Boston Bomber.
lord_blackfang wrote: Respect to the guy who subscribed just to post a massive ASCII dong in the chat and immediately get banned.
Flinty wrote: The benefit of slate is that its.actually a.rock with rock like properties. The downside is that it's a rock
2015/11/03 04:55:53
Subject: Re:The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
Ouze wrote: I think there is literally no reason anyone should believe anything on the current KKK list, neither when Anonymous actually releases it, and certainly not when some random other people post one that's not even the list in question.
I well remember when the internet "identified" the Boston Bomber.
What's that? Persons unknown with zero accountability and sketchy history with reliable information shouldn't be trusted? But what else is the internet for!
What's that? Persons unknown with zero accountability and sketchy history with reliable information shouldn't be trusted? But what else is the internet for!
Cat videos and Pron..... duh
2015/11/03 05:10:16
Subject: Re:The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
Ouze wrote: I think there is literally no reason anyone should believe anything on the current KKK list, neither when Anonymous actually releases it, and certainly not when some random other people post one that's not even the list in question.
I well remember when the internet "identified" the Boston Bomber.
True.
Pretending that politicians could never be closet racists and maybe possibly KKK members is silly.
Trusting the internet hacker called Anon is even sillier.
Automatically Appended Next Post: This just needs a "scared of Hillary '16" text and you have the first GOP ad!
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/11/03 09:17:15
2015/11/03 11:44:41
Subject: The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
whembly wrote: Not plausible at all... considering the source.
Did you even read what I said? I said that it's plausible that some republicans (but probably not any important ones) are KKK members because the republican party includes the racist right, not that the source is a credible one. In fact I explicitly stated that the list alone is worthless without supporting evidence.
Honest question. Why do you associate racism with 'the right'? (I'm not really worried about your attributed party affiliation, more your left/right ideological spectrum). Plenty of leftist racists out there. One of the left's big heroes, Che, was very racist. There are plenty of US left of center (some far left of center) racists out there as well. Not all are white either.
I'm not close to convinced racism is a purely or even a mostly right wing trait. I believe there are racists spanning the spectrum.
Every time a terrorist dies a Paratrooper gets his wings.
2015/11/03 11:48:03
Subject: The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
CptJake wrote: One of the left's big heroes, Che, was very racist.
I think you are conflating 'college students who wear t-shirts' with 'the left'. Many on the left, in fact the majority of them in the US, aren't Communist radicals who are ok with killing the opposition. It is more of one of those things the right imagines about the left than is actually all that true.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/11/03 11:48:19
Amidst the mists and coldest frosts he thrusts his fists against the posts and still insists he sees the ghosts.
2015/11/03 12:12:36
Subject: The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
CptJake wrote: One of the left's big heroes, Che, was very racist.
I think you are conflating 'college students who wear t-shirts' with 'the left'. Many on the left, in fact the majority of them in the US, aren't Communist radicals who are ok with killing the opposition. It is more of one of those things the right imagines about the left than is actually all that true.
Those college kids are taught by a left leaning group of professors for the most part, and like it or not, Che is an icon of the left. Hell, they still make movies romanticizing his life.
I never said all/most/many on the left in the US are communist radicals okay with killing the opposition. What I did say, and stand by, is that racism is not a right wing trait, and that there are racists spanning the political left-right spectrum. Folks on both ends of the spectrum use racism to further their agendas. That is not new.
I have two brothers adopted from Korea, and went to a school OCONUS on the economy where I was the only white kid in my grade (and at one point the only in the school). I've been to several Central and South American countries where skin tone and or amount of indian physical characteristics you showed could determine how you were treated. I've got a daughter adopted from China. I've seen that racism is not limited to white folks, let alone conservative/right wing folks.
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2015/11/03 12:21:10
Every time a terrorist dies a Paratrooper gets his wings.
2015/11/03 12:14:15
Subject: The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
CptJake wrote: One of the left's big heroes, Che, was very racist.
I think you are conflating 'college students who wear t-shirts' with 'the left'. Many on the left, in fact the majority of them in the US, aren't Communist radicals who are ok with killing the opposition. It is more of one of those things the right imagines about the left than is actually all that true.
Those college kids are taught by a left leaning group of professors for the most part, and like it or not, Che is an icon of the left. Hell, they still make movies romanticizing his life.
Do they?
Do they, really?
I never said all/most/many on the left in the US are communist radicals okay with killing the opposition. What I did say, and stand by, is that racism is not a right wing trait, and that there are racists spanning the political left-right spectrum.
If you try and equate "Black Lives Matter" to racism, I might have to laugh at you. For a year.
2015/11/03 12:29:57
Subject: The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
CptJake wrote: One of the left's big heroes, Che, was very racist.
I think you are conflating 'college students who wear t-shirts' with 'the left'. Many on the left, in fact the majority of them in the US, aren't Communist radicals who are ok with killing the opposition. It is more of one of those things the right imagines about the left than is actually all that true.
Those college kids are taught by a left leaning group of professors for the most part, and like it or not, Che is an icon of the left. Hell, they still make movies romanticizing his life.
Do they?
Do they, really?
I never said all/most/many on the left in the US are communist radicals okay with killing the opposition. What I did say, and stand by, is that racism is not a right wing trait, and that there are racists spanning the political left-right spectrum.
If you try and equate "Black Lives Matter" to racism, I might have to laugh at you. For a year.
Did I do that? No.
As for movies
Every time a terrorist dies a Paratrooper gets his wings.
2015/11/03 13:15:01
Subject: Re:The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
Co'tor Shas wrote: It didn't sound like he said that the R's are rasicts, just that racists are more likely to be R's. Which makes sense. Racism and liberalism tend no to go hand in hand. Racism is a reactionary thing, and the R's attract the conservatives and the reactionaries. Does this mean that the R's are a racist party, no. In fact, I'd posit Carson's success is proof that the R's aren't a racist party.
Edit: double ninjaed
horse gak. Commies are excellent at oppressing minorities by killing them. look at Europe and its treatment of Jews in the last decade, or same on college campuses today.
n
-"Wait a minute.....who is that Frazz is talking to in the gallery? Hmmm something is going on here.....Oh.... it seems there is some dispute over video taping of some sort......Frazz is really upset now..........wait a minute......whats he go there.......is it? Can it be?....Frazz has just unleashed his hidden weiner dog from his mini bag, while quoting shakespeares "Let slip the dogs the war!!" GG
-"Don't mind Frazzled. He's just Dakka's crazy old dude locked in the attic. He's harmless. Mostly."
-TBone the Magnificent 1999-2014, Long Live the King!
2015/11/03 13:34:41
Subject: Re:The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
Ahtman wrote: Right, because there have never been biopics about other people, just Che.
How would that refute my point? I never said the only bio-pics ever made were of Che. I said he is an icon of the left, and that they still make movies romanticizing his life. Where am I wrong?
Every time a terrorist dies a Paratrooper gets his wings.
2015/11/03 13:35:14
Subject: Re:The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
Co'tor Shas wrote: It didn't sound like he said that the R's are rasicts, just that racists are more likely to be R's. Which makes sense. Racism and liberalism tend no to go hand in hand. Racism is a reactionary thing, and the R's attract the conservatives and the reactionaries. Does this mean that the R's are a racist party, no. In fact, I'd posit Carson's success is proof that the R's aren't a racist party.
Edit: double ninjaed
horse gak. Commies are excellent at oppressing minorities by killing them. look at Europe and its treatment of Jews in the last decade, or same on college campuses today.
n
...
Which isn't liberalism. Those dictatorships that those attempts at communism created are hard to describe as "liberal". Radical maybe, but they are nothing like liberalism. Because liberal is a social construct. Liberal has very little to do with economics. The word you are looking for there is authoritarian (the opposite of libertarian).
Racism is reactionary, plain and simple. This does not mean that reactionaries are racist, and I never said that, or even suggested that. Now people can be reactionary on one front, but left-leaning on most others. But racism is reactionary.
Ahtman wrote: Right, because there have never been biopics about other people, just Che.
How would that refute my point? I never said the only bio-pics ever made were of Che. I said he is an icon of the left, and that they still make movies romanticizing his life. Where am I wrong?
Eh, the people who do so tend not to be particularly mainstream, and most of the time don't have a fething clue what they are talking about. From my limited experience at the very least.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/11/03 13:36:52
Homosexuality is the #1 cause of gay marriage.
kronk wrote: Every pizza is a personal sized pizza if you try hard enough and believe in yourself.
sebster wrote: Yes, indeed. What a terrible piece of cultural imperialism it is for me to say that a country shouldn't murder its own citizens
BaronIveagh wrote: Basically they went from a carrot and stick to a smaller carrot and flanged mace.
2015/11/03 13:51:41
Subject: Re:The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
Ahtman wrote: Right, because there have never been biopics about other people, just Che.
How would that refute my point? I never said the only bio-pics ever made were of Che. I said he is an icon of the left, and that they still make movies romanticizing his life. Where am I wrong?
The idea that he is some kind of universal "icon on the left".
I legitimately do not know anyone who considers themselves a lefty and considers Che an icon.
2015/11/03 13:57:32
Subject: Re:The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
Ouze wrote: I think there is literally no reason anyone should believe anything on the current KKK list, neither when Anonymous actually releases it, and certainly not when some random other people post one that's not even the list in question.
I well remember when the internet "identified" the Boston Bomber.
Even if it were true that active politicians were members of the KKK it wouldn't necessarily be a bad thing. The Democratic party happily embraced Robert Byrd and supported his multi-decade career in the Senate while he kept winning statewide elections in West Virginia.
Mundus vult decipi, ergo decipiatur
2015/11/03 14:35:01
Subject: Re:The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
Ahtman wrote: Right, because there have never been biopics about other people, just Che.
How would that refute my point? I never said the only bio-pics ever made were of Che. I said he is an icon of the left, and that they still make movies romanticizing his life. Where am I wrong?
The idea that he is some kind of universal "icon on the left".
I legitimately do not know anyone who considers themselves a lefty and considers Che an icon.
Ahtman wrote: Right, because there have never been biopics about other people, just Che.
How would that refute my point? I never said the only bio-pics ever made were of Che. I said he is an icon of the left, and that they still make movies romanticizing his life. Where am I wrong?
The idea that he is some kind of universal "icon on the left".
I legitimately do not know anyone who considers themselves a lefty and considers Che an icon.
And yet his image is on posters and t-shirts and they still make movies romanticizing his life.
I have yet to see you provide actual evidence that those movies "romanticized his life". Have you seen Che? Because I haven't--so I can't comment that it does or not.
As for t-shirts and posters, so what? There's a great number of t-shirts/posters spoofing the Che t-shirt thing.
But yeah, I can see how you would dismiss my point.
Have you actually read the list of people in your own link?
You have a list of the "Top 25 Political Icons". He's in the same list as Gandhi, Genghis Khan(I question his and Cleopatra's inclusion on this list, along with anyone pre-French Revolution), Churchhill, and Hitler.
Whether you agree with his politics or not, he was a political figure.
2015/11/03 15:11:39
Subject: Re:The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
Ouze wrote: I think there is literally no reason anyone should believe anything on the current KKK list, neither when Anonymous actually releases it, and certainly not when some random other people post one that's not even the list in question.
I well remember when the internet "identified" the Boston Bomber.
Even if it were true that active politicians were members of the KKK it wouldn't necessarily be a bad thing. The Democratic party happily embraced Robert Byrd and supported his multi-decade career in the Senate while he kept winning statewide elections in West Virginia.
In which we pretend there is no difference between someone being in the KKK right now in 2015, and a guy who was briefly in the KKK 75 years ago (when the country was segregated), described it as "the greatest mistake he ever made", and spent the latter part of his career apologizing for it.
The best part about this post is it took very little effort to compose since someone literally made this exact point a single page ago
To sum up the last page: you know the left wing in america is just as racist as the right wing in America because a guy was racist for about a year before WW2, and because they make movies about Che Guevara, a non-American who has been dead for 50 years. I'd add some snarky comment but truthfully, even had Alpharius not warned against it, I truly think that observation stands on it's own.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2015/11/03 15:19:31
lord_blackfang wrote: Respect to the guy who subscribed just to post a massive ASCII dong in the chat and immediately get banned.
Flinty wrote: The benefit of slate is that its.actually a.rock with rock like properties. The downside is that it's a rock
2015/11/03 15:29:44
Subject: Re:The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
Co'tor Shas wrote: It didn't sound like he said that the R's are rasicts, just that racists are more likely to be R's. Which makes sense. Racism and liberalism tend no to go hand in hand. Racism is a reactionary thing, and the R's attract the conservatives and the reactionaries. Does this mean that the R's are a racist party, no. In fact, I'd posit Carson's success is proof that the R's aren't a racist party.
Edit: double ninjaed
horse gak. Commies are excellent at oppressing minorities by killing them. look at Europe and its treatment of Jews in the last decade, or same on college campuses today.
n
...
Which isn't liberalism. Those dictatorships that those attempts at communism created are hard to describe as "liberal". Radical maybe, but they are nothing like liberalism. Because liberal is a social construct. Liberal has very little to do with economics. The word you are looking for there is authoritarian (the opposite of libertarian).
Racism is reactionary, plain and simple. This does not mean that reactionaries are racist, and I never said that, or even suggested that. Now people can be reactionary on one front, but left-leaning on most others. But racism is reactionary.
Liberalism has a lot to do with economics. Half of the core tenets of liberalism are economics. Capitalism is liberalism, open markets and free trade between states is essential to liberalism being successful. In the US Republicans are all pretty much liberals, except neoconservatives which break from some of the liberalist ideals.
Racism exists on either side of the political spectrum. Its a myth that left equals peace love and understanding and right equals bad guys. Eugenics would be a left spectrum justification for racism.The so called reverse racism is also a left wing conceot of racism. Radicalism of the communist states IS left wing. You can't twist away because its ugly. However, the far right system of fascism is the only inherently racist political system I'm aware of.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2015/11/03 15:35:38
2015/11/03 15:36:19
Subject: Re:The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
No, that's libertarianism. Liberalism and conservatism are social. They often bleed into economics, but they are based around social ideas. Authoritarianism and libertarianism are the economic ones.
The terms are often used incorrectly (in fact, they are usually).
Liberalism is social freedom, libertarianism is economic freedom. Conservatism is social control, authoritarianism is economic control. The D's tend to lean liberal authoritarian, and the R's tend to lean conservative libertarian.
Homosexuality is the #1 cause of gay marriage.
kronk wrote: Every pizza is a personal sized pizza if you try hard enough and believe in yourself.
sebster wrote: Yes, indeed. What a terrible piece of cultural imperialism it is for me to say that a country shouldn't murder its own citizens
BaronIveagh wrote: Basically they went from a carrot and stick to a smaller carrot and flanged mace.
2015/11/03 16:21:33
Subject: Re:The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
Co'tor Shas wrote: No, that's libertarianism. Liberalism and conservatism are social. They often bleed into economics, but they are based around social ideas. Authoritarianism and libertarianism are the economic ones.
The terms are often used incorrectly (in fact, they are usually).
Liberalism is social freedom, libertarianism is economic freedom. Conservatism is social control, authoritarianism is economic control. The D's tend to lean liberal authoritarian, and the R's tend to lean conservative libertarian.
No man, liberalism needs economics to work. Liberalism is more than a social ideology. It believes in individual freedom and free trade open markets.
You are being the people that use the term wrong. I don't study this stuff for no reason. An I'm not making a career out of it for funzies.
Liberalism is an entire political philosophy dealing with domestic and international relations. It is counter to the philosophy of Realism which is a belief system often held by conservatives but not solely by them. Liberal and Conservative are social concepts of the political spectrum. Liberalism is a philosophy that makes use of ideas in the left wing of political ideology.
For the record libertarian exists slightly right of anarchism in ideology.
