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.

The goal of a Rod Rosenstein impeachment has always been to kill the the Mueller investigation.

First, you ask for some ridiculous stuff, that no AG had ever been asked for before and no Congress had ever requested. If he gives you what you ask for, keep asking. Ask for all sorts of privileged investigation about an ongoing investigation, and then leak it the second you get it. Eventually you're going to ask for something that Rosenstein will refuse to give. At that point, you can claim that he is in contempt, and then impeach him. If you impeach him, then you get a guy who was too incompetent from the Florida state government, who will almost certainly kill the Mueller investigation.

That's why you get rid of a guy who has zero bias and was a Trump appointee 94-6.

If you don't believe that's always been the plan, then you probably are the person who strenuously argues that GOP led voter ID laws were never intended to disenfranchise voters that would vote for the opposition even after prominent GOP officials explicitly said that was exactly the plan.

IMO Trump should just fire Mueller. Just do it! These clowns aren't going to impeach him! Who is going to take that principled stand exactly? The guy who's wife Trump called ugly and claimed his dad killed a president, and who then did get-out-the-vote calls on Trump's behalf? Please. These spineless cowards would eat their way through a boxcar of Trump's gak and wouldn't say a word with a mouth full of it.

Just as expecting Trump to be impeached is naive, November 2016 thinking on the part of the left, the idea that there would be any meaningful consequences at all for Trump is playing pretend on the part of the right.

There's nothing simple about identity. It's one of the most complex subjects in sociology and the reason you see politicians poking the identity bear so much is because it works. I don't see how it will ever not work.

Yes you are correct, its not simple, so why does the regressive left keep boiling it down to skin colour, gender and sexuality, i can show the literal videos of this happening across the US and UK, they are mainstream, So I am asking again, how to deal with this big issue that the left has currently.

Seriously. It's obvious you don't even understand the premise. Political party identity is just the amalgamation of a whole bunch of identities into a broader scope. You might as well argue that macro-evolution exists but micro-evolution doesn't. One is the other. The other is the one. The difference is of scale not of substance.

No it is clear that it is in fact you that does not understand, you are clearly talking about people identifying with a certain party, partisan politics, I am talking about the tactics used by the regressive left and alt right to drum up support for their respective side, so while yes there are many reasons for people to indentify with a specific party or political ideology, but you seem to be talking about something more general, I am being specific.

Maybe stop treating some people like scum of the earth in national rhetoric for starters. The polarization comes from the situation in a lot of ways. People with problems going unaddressed, in no small part because it is a central position of national politics in part to not address the issue and even deny it's existence. It's amazing how much simple lip service and patronizing calms gak down and as insulting as lip service and patronizing can be at least it doesn't involve the President of the United States blatantly insulting people in really asinine ways. Trump might be the king, but Obama and Bush also had their flubs, and that's not even going into some of the gak that comes out of Congress and state Legislatures.

This has nothing to do with Trump (ass that he is), this was going on long before he started running and I would argue that he is in power as a direct result of the far left becoming mainstream and the media support it has received.

You need to be specific when you say "deny it exists" deny what exists, the infinate genders? campus rape culture? the gender pay gap? the partriachy? White privilidge? male priviliedge? and all the other actual made up terms that keep getting thrown out by the media and deny science, economists and actual evidence.

From what I have seen your congress is sitting at a 18% approval rating at the moment, but thats a totally different discussion, one I would love to have later, but for now...

We still have not got to the bottom of our main issue, you say that identity politics is part of partisan politics, I say that it isnt and identity politics a not what you are referring to, but I do concede that politicians have used race as a weapon for a long time, just not in this manner and its not the politicians that are using it now, its the media and students/professors.

That is completely wrong Formosa. Cite an example of a university professor using race as a weapon in their professional capacity as a teacher.

It is also hilarious you claim that infinite genders is made up and goes against the science when the science actually says that gender is a spectrum.

Trump was elected because of 'white genocide' identity politics duribg/after Obama. Its the result of decades of media and Republican politician dog whistles that finally got hijacked by someone who actually seems to believe in this gak instead of people employing it as a cynical tool for votes/views. What is the point of LordofHats coming back to argue with you when you're deadset on considering it all a left wing MSM conspiracy anyway? Is everyone equal, have we reached colourblind/genderblind utopia already according to all of your experts?

 A Town Called Malus wrote:
That is completely wrong Formosa. Cite an example of a university professor using race as a weapon in their professional capacity as a teacher.

It is also hilarious you claim that infinite genders is made up and goes against the science when the science actually says that gender is a spectrum.

https://edition-m.cnn.com/2016/01/26/opinions/professor-charged-missouri-student-protest-randazza/index.html?r=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com%2F


Um that was easy, want more?


And no, science, as in credible peer reviewed science, does not say that gender is a spectrum, but let’s give you the benefit of the doubt, post one of those studies and I will take a read.

I don't know how you got what you did from that article you posted. But the actions of that woman are in no way related to her professional capacity as a teacher, its in fact the opposite, neither her job nor the law gave her any authority to do what she did. Trying to remove a reporter at a university protest is firnly outside of her professional capacity.

 Formosa wrote:
Yes you are correct, its not simple, so why does the regressive left keep boiling it down to skin colour, gender and sexuality

Because those are the most commonly targeted parts of a person's identity. If we lived in a world where bigoted s hated people for their shoe size then shoe size would be an important part of identity, but that isn't the real world.

This has nothing to do with Trump (ass that he is), this was going on long before he started running and I would argue that he is in power as a direct result of the far left becoming mainstream and the media support it has received.

You really don't understand what "far left" really means if you think that it's mainstream in the US. In fact, doesn't calling it mainstream kind of negate the idea that it's simultaneously the extreme fringe?

You need to be specific when you say "deny it exists" deny what exists, the infinate genders? campus rape culture? the gender pay gap? the partriachy? White privilidge? male priviliedge? and all the other actual made up terms that keep getting thrown out by the media and deny science, economists and actual evidence.

You're right about denial, but it's going in the opposite direction. All of the things you mention are real, regardless of what right-wing fringe sources claim.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Formosa wrote:
And no, science, as in credible peer reviewed science, does not say that gender is a spectrum, but let’s give you the benefit of the doubt, post one of those studies and I will take a read.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA NO. This is on the level of you claiming that the sky is green and water is dry and demanding peer-reviewed science to prove otherwise. The fact that gender is a spectrum is an obvious fact that you can discover simply by looking at a large enough group of people. The only argument against the concept is right-wing (usually Christian) culture war zealots who insist on everything following the rules of their religion and their imagined 1950s utopia.

 Formosa wrote:

 A Town Called Malus wrote:
That is completely wrong Formosa. Cite an example of a university professor using race as a weapon in their professional capacity as a teacher.

It is also hilarious you claim that infinite genders is made up and goes against the science when the science actually says that gender is a spectrum.

https://edition-m.cnn.com/2016/01/26/opinions/professor-charged-missouri-student-protest-randazza/index.html?r=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com%2F


Um that was easy, want more?


And no, science, as in credible peer reviewed science, does not say that gender is a spectrum, but let’s give you the benefit of the doubt, post one of those studies and I will take a read.

That is not in her capacity as a teacher. Try again. Find me an example of a university professor using race as a weapon in their teaching.

No, the science does say that. Where have you heard that it doesn't? As for finding studies, do have access to research sites, as many of these are not in the public domain.

 Disciple of Fate wrote:
Trump was elected because of 'white genocide' identity politics duribg/after Obama. Its the result of decades of media and Republican politician dog whistles that finally got hijacked by someone who actually seems to believe in this gak instead of people employing it as a cynical tool for votes/views. What is the point of LordofHats coming back to argue with you when you're deadset on considering it all a left wing MSM conspiracy anyway? Is everyone equal, have we reached colourblind/genderblind utopia already according to all of your experts?

Your the ones reaching for a utopia, and I actually agree with you to a point, but I watched all the anti trump and pro Hilary media, and there was sooooo much of it everywhere, and he still won, let that sink in, the left was utterly rejected, I sit here and wonder why, you lot just blame the “man” or whatever but I decided to dig deeper, apart from her very clear corruption I had to wonder why in the U.K. the left was rejected twice and then it happened in the US, I wanted to know why, so I started frequenting different political sites, different Facebook pages, that’s when I discovered the alt right, a bunch of lunatics that were proposing a white ethno state (this is what the alt right is BTW) and using a new term I hadn’t encountered “identity politics” so more digging and watching all kinds of political discourse, the more I watched the more I saw the radical left, fringe left gain ground, it was no longer the right that was trying to shut people down, it was the left, and I remember when it was the right during the 80’s 90’s that was doing it, So I kept digging as I didn’t believe it, didn’t want to believe it, then circa 2015 ish I saw a big shift in media, the leftist media were now repeating the lies of the radicals, like they didn’t even care what they were saying and didn’t face check it, I was craving more information and I couldn’t get it from the normal media outlets, then I discovered you tube... yeah I know, I’m late to the party, it had several hour long political theory and discussion lectures, without the severe bias of the mainstream media, and that’s when I discovered the SJW, I was horrified at the actions of these people, and again I wanted to know why they were the way they were, why they were so racist, sexist and bigoted and didn’t even know it, why they chanted Marxist slogans and didn’t even know it, at least when I did it I knew what I was chanting, then history opened my eyes, but I digress, so after noticing that both the media and these “SJWs” were saying the same things I began to wonder who was teaching them this nonsense, step in the eduction system, I kept seeing lecturer after lecturer spouting the same rhetoric, saw universities creating “safe spaces” saw them teaching about “white/male privilege” saw the pure insanity that they love to throw out and divide the students, saw them deny any proof that disagreed with their world view. I then saw the far left turn violent on many occasions in the name of diversity and understanding, I’ve even seen several dakka posters condone these acts “punch a Nazi” when as far as they are concerned anyone not as far left as them is a Nazi, even saw them start to call long term leftist feminists “sexist, racist and transphobic”.

As for conspiracy, why does it have to be one, do you really think all these professors get together with their little red books and decide to bring down western civilisation, don’t be so stupid, they are loosely tied together by ideology and then teach the students the same poisoned ideology, which in turn grows, that’s not a conspiracy, it’s right out in the open.

All this and more showed me in very real terms that the modern threat is not the tiny fringe right that has almost no voice outside of the internet, it’s the far left.

But I know this will all fall on deaf ears, the usual accusations will be made

 Formosa wrote:


But I know this will all fall on deaf ears, the usual accusations will be made

You're the one providing the ammunition.

Go out on the fresh air. Talk to people, not screens. It will do your worldview a great service.

 Formosa wrote:
the left was utterly rejected

It really wasn't. Trump lost the popular vote and only won the election because of an obsolete system that grants vastly disproportionate voting power to a handful of swing states. A majority of voters picking "the left" is hardly something I'd call utter rejection.

I sit here and wonder why

Because, for many people, a con man selling lies they want to believe is more appealing than the difficult truth. Clinton said the honest reality: that the US economy has changed, obsolete industries (such as coal mining) are not coming back, and recovery in the regions suffering from that change will be through retraining and moving into new industries. Trump simply lied and told them that he'd make their jobs come back. It was an obvious lie even at the time. The economic factors which made those jobs obsolete in the first place are not going to change, and Trump himself has a long history of screwing over his workers for his own benefit. But, rather than accept that they are in a hard situation and need to work to get out of it, people voted for the more comfortable story.

(Plus racism, etc, but the alt-right and other racist s were going to vote for whoever had the R next to their name no matter what. It was the economic issues in key states that gave Trump the win.)

several dakka posters condone these acts “punch a Nazi” when as far as they are concerned anyone not as far left as them is a Nazi

{citation needed}

I know I have explicitly stated that my endorsement of violence against Nazis only applies to actual Nazis (with a similar endorsement applying to terrorist groups like the KKK), and have not accused "anyone not as far left as me" of being a Nazi. One would think that this would actually be a right-wing position to take, given their belief in the importance of gun ownership for both self defense and to prevent an oppressive government (such as the Nazis) from gaining or keeping power. If violence against Nazis, arguably the clearest example of evil in human history, is not morally justified then when could it ever be acceptable?

even saw them start to call long term leftist feminists “sexist, racist and transphobic”.

That's because they are those things. Not all of them, of course, but there are feminists who are transphobic s or who, at best, don't understand race-related issues and don't care about them because they don't hurt white women. The label "feminist" is not an automatic guarantee of moral virtue, nor is being right about one set of issues a guarantee that a person is right about all of the others and immune to criticism.

 Disciple of Fate wrote:
I don't know how you got what you did from that article you posted. But the actions of that woman are in no way related to her professional capacity as a teacher, its in fact the opposite, neither her job nor the law gave her any authority to do what she did. Trying to remove a reporter at a university protest is firnly outside of her professional capacity.

Have you seen what she was teaching her students that led to the protest in the first place ?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Because those are the most commonly targeted parts of a person's identity. If we lived in a world where bigoted s hated people for their shoe size then shoe size would be an important part of identity, but that isn't the real world.

And by just focusing on those details rather than the myriad complicated reasons behind them you just shut down any discourse to try and find out WHY any of this happens, its counter productive.

You really don't understand what "far left" really means if you think that it's mainstream in the US. In fact, doesn't calling it mainstream kind of negate the idea that it's simultaneously the extreme fringe?

Yes I do and in context its fringe in the UK and mainstream in the US, it varies by country, as you well know.

You're right about denial, but it's going in the opposite direction. All of the things you mention are real, regardless of what right-wing fringe sources claim.

No thats not correct, were it going the other way we would see a lot more examples of it happening, rather than the social justice movement screaming about it, we always hear about this right wing movement but it doesnt exist, the real push back against the regressive left if from the less extreme left and centrists who dont want to be associated with the insane rhetoric, and what happens when they do push back.... herpa derp... racist.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA NO. This is on the level of you claiming that the sky is green and water is dry and demanding peer-reviewed science to prove otherwise. The fact that gender is a spectrum is an obvious fact that you can discover simply by looking at a large enough group of people. The only argument against the concept is right-wing (usually Christian) culture war zealots who insist on everything following the rules of their religion and their imagined 1950s utopia.

No I see clinical psychologists and biologists state this and continue to state this, and a couple of papers state otherwise, the gender spectrum is a myth until i see proof otherwise.

 Formosa wrote:

 Disciple of Fate wrote:
I don't know how you got what you did from that article you posted. But the actions of that woman are in no way related to her professional capacity as a teacher, its in fact the opposite, neither her job nor the law gave her any authority to do what she did. Trying to remove a reporter at a university protest is firnly outside of her professional capacity.

Have you seen what she was teaching her students that led to the protest in the first place ?

The protests weren't about teaching, they were about racist incidents at the university and the perceived lack of response from the university management to combat such incidents, along with loss of workplace benefits (graduate health insurance).

 A Town Called Malus wrote:

 Formosa wrote:

 A Town Called Malus wrote:
That is completely wrong Formosa. Cite an example of a university professor using race as a weapon in their professional capacity as a teacher.

It is also hilarious you claim that infinite genders is made up and goes against the science when the science actually says that gender is a spectrum.

https://edition-m.cnn.com/2016/01/26/opinions/professor-charged-missouri-student-protest-randazza/index.html?r=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com%2F


Um that was easy, want more?


And no, science, as in credible peer reviewed science, does not say that gender is a spectrum, but let’s give you the benefit of the doubt, post one of those studies and I will take a read.

That is not in her capacity as a teacher. Try again. Find me an example of a university professor using race as a weapon in their teaching.

No, the science does say that. Where have you heard that it doesn't? As for finding studies, do have access to research sites, as many of these are not in the public domain.

https://www.professorwatchlist.org/watchlist-directory/

Take your pick, and actually bother to look please.

 Formosa wrote:

 A Town Called Malus wrote:

 Formosa wrote:

 A Town Called Malus wrote:
That is completely wrong Formosa. Cite an example of a university professor using race as a weapon in their professional capacity as a teacher.

It is also hilarious you claim that infinite genders is made up and goes against the science when the science actually says that gender is a spectrum.

https://edition-m.cnn.com/2016/01/26/opinions/professor-charged-missouri-student-protest-randazza/index.html?r=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com%2F


Um that was easy, want more?


And no, science, as in credible peer reviewed science, does not say that gender is a spectrum, but let’s give you the benefit of the doubt, post one of those studies and I will take a read.

That is not in her capacity as a teacher. Try again. Find me an example of a university professor using race as a weapon in their teaching.

No, the science does say that. Where have you heard that it doesn't? As for finding studies, do have access to research sites, as many of these are not in the public domain.

https://www.professorwatchlist.org/watchlist-directory/

Take your pick, and actually bother to look please.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turning_Point_USA

I will take this as an admission that you have no credible source, else you would not need to turn to such a partisan source for information.

I mean, just look at some of this crap!

Stephanie Baran, a teaching assistant at University of Wisconsin – Milwaukee, attended a “White Privilege Conference” and said that she would be “down” with the idea of “kicking out capitalism” as she believes it causes racism. Baran describes herself as a “vulgar Marxist” because she desires “to see the entire dismantling of the system versus the other, softer, kinder, brutal Marxists.”

The horror! She has left-wing views and thinks that capitalism is bad!

Dr. Michael Green is a professor of history at University of Nevada in Las Vegas. He said that Trump was “a syphilitic Nazi” in a Facebook discussion with a former student. In an editorial about Republicans, he also made many misleading statements about Cabinet nominees, describing them as “a health secretary who opposes health, a secretary of state who may love Vladimir Putin even more than his president, a housing and urban development secretary who thinks his department is a movie that starred Paul Newman, and an education secretary who hates public education and those who work in it, but thinks school is a good place for kids to learn to shoot grizzlies.”

He doesn't like Trump and said so in private communication with a former student! He accurately summarises the political views of Trumps picks for political positions!

And what sources do they cite to justify their putting these people on their site? Well, there's the Daily Caller, Daily Wire, Campus Reform (project of the Leadership Institute, a conservative student activist group), The College Fix (conservative news organisation), etc.

There's many more but I think I made my point.

The University of California-Berkeley has 1,525 academic staff.

Your Professorwatch site has managed to find out a whole 0.13% of them as secret communist sympathisers.

One of them's crime:

Nancy Scheper Hughes
Dr. Nancy Hughes is a professor of anthropology at the University of California-Berkeley. In a post on her blog after the tragic massacre at a gay Orlando night club, Hughes blamed the National Rifle Association for the massacre. Despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary, Hughes also blamed the shooting as well as the massacre in San Bernadino on “retrograde, orthodox conservatives who fear change, who lack self-discipline, courage, and who suffer, if it may be called that, a perversity of heart.”

Professorwatch's Mission
The mission of Professor Watchlist is to expose and document college professors who discriminate against conservative students and advance leftist propaganda in the classroom.

They're failing.

It really wasn't. Trump lost the popular vote and only won the election because of an obsolete system that grants vastly disproportionate voting power to a handful of swing states. A majority of voters picking "the left" is hardly something I'd call utter rejection.

The US system was purposefully set up that way in all fairness, and for an arguably good reason, though I am not set on that, and Trump won, thats a total rejection pure and simple, will he win next time... god I hope not.

Because, for many people, a con man selling lies they want to believe is more appealing than the difficult truth. Clinton said the honest reality: that the US economy has changed, obsolete industries (such as coal mining) are not coming back, and recovery in the regions suffering from that change will be through retraining and moving into new industries. Trump simply lied and told them that he'd make their jobs come back. It was an obvious lie even at the time. The economic factors which made those jobs obsolete in the first place are not going to change, and Trump himself has a long history of screwing over his workers for his own benefit. But, rather than accept that they are in a hard situation and need to work to get out of it, people voted for the more comfortable story.

Cant argue with that, cant stand the bloke and yep he is a con man, I get why people voted for him though, a lot of people believed he would close the borders, which is fair enough, others just didnt want clinton, also fair enough... so many varied reasons why people voted for him, even some racist.

{citation needed}

"Chin them. It Is Never Wrong To Punch A Nazi. Ever. It’s the only thing that stops them."
https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/90/761576.page

I know I have explicitly stated that my endorsement of violence against Nazis only applies to actual Nazis (with a similar endorsement applying to terrorist groups like the KKK), and have not accused "anyone not as far left as me" of being a Nazi. One would think that this would actually be a right-wing position to take, given their belief in the importance of gun ownership for both self defense and to prevent an oppressive government (such as the Nazis) from gaining or keeping power. If violence against Nazis, arguably the clearest example of evil in human history, is not morally justified then when could it ever be acceptable?

No its never ok to use violence to get your point across, all it does is legitimise them, and frankly feth the nazis, the problem comes in (and I have seen it on dakka) is when you (general, not specific you) accuse people of being a Nazi for expressing different views, then the "its ok to punch Nazis" comes in and suddenly people are getting punched for just turning up to a milo yiannopoulos speech, even though the guy is clearly not alt right, clearly not a nazi, he and his supporters get attacked on just the accusation.

That's because they are those things. Not all of them, of course, but there are feminists who are transphobic s or who, at best, don't understand race-related issues and don't care about them because they don't hurt white women. The label "feminist" is not an automatic guarantee of moral virtue, nor is being right about one set of issues a guarantee that a person is right about all of the others and immune to criticism.

I agree no one is immune to criticism and rightly so, but when you call a professor of gender studies and a life long feminist such things, you lose credibility, and I agree the label "feminist" is not a guarentee of moral virtue, I think we have finally found some common ground here.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 A Town Called Malus wrote:

 Formosa wrote:

 A Town Called Malus wrote:

 Formosa wrote:

 A Town Called Malus wrote:
That is completely wrong Formosa. Cite an example of a university professor using race as a weapon in their professional capacity as a teacher.

It is also hilarious you claim that infinite genders is made up and goes against the science when the science actually says that gender is a spectrum.

https://edition-m.cnn.com/2016/01/26/opinions/professor-charged-missouri-student-protest-randazza/index.html?r=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com%2F


Um that was easy, want more?


And no, science, as in credible peer reviewed science, does not say that gender is a spectrum, but let’s give you the benefit of the doubt, post one of those studies and I will take a read.

That is not in her capacity as a teacher. Try again. Find me an example of a university professor using race as a weapon in their teaching.

No, the science does say that. Where have you heard that it doesn't? As for finding studies, do have access to research sites, as many of these are not in the public domain.

https://www.professorwatchlist.org/watchlist-directory/

Take your pick, and actually bother to look please.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turning_Point_USA

I will take this as an admission that you have no credible source, else you would not need to turn to such a partisan source for information.

That was just a tester to see if you would actually check, now knowing that you didnt is there any point to me posting up all the videos you will just call biased?

How about this, you tell me what you would consider a credible source? just so we dont waste each others time, and no buzzfeed isnt credible

 A Town Called Malus wrote:

 Formosa wrote:

 A Town Called Malus wrote:
That is completely wrong Formosa. Cite an example of a university professor using race as a weapon in their professional capacity as a teacher.

It is also hilarious you claim that infinite genders is made up and goes against the science when the science actually says that gender is a spectrum.

https://edition-m.cnn.com/2016/01/26/opinions/professor-charged-missouri-student-protest-randazza/index.html?r=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com%2F


Um that was easy, want more?


And no, science, as in credible peer reviewed science, does not say that gender is a spectrum, but let’s give you the benefit of the doubt, post one of those studies and I will take a read.

That is not in her capacity as a teacher. Try again. Find me an example of a university professor using race as a weapon in their teaching.

No, the science does say that. Where have you heard that it doesn't? As for finding studies, do have access to research sites, as many of these are not in the public domain.

I'd go with an example like this from my Alma Mater https://www.nationalreview.com/2017/10/math-racist-university-illinois-professor/

I would agree that gender can be a spectrum, but when biological sex and gender for something like 99.5% of people is the same then saying it is a wide spectrum for most people is a bit misleading.

http://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/wp-content/uploads/How-Many-Adults-Identify-as-Transgender-in-the-United-States.pdf

 Formosa wrote:



That was just a tester to see if you would actually check, now knowing that you didnt is there any point to me posting up all the videos you will just call biased?

How about this, you tell me what you would consider a credible source? just so we dont waste each others time, and no buzzfeed isnt credible

No, this was you posting garbage to support your garbage argument.

I did examine it and it was crap.

How about you find a peer reviewed metastudy examining racial political bias in university teaching. Or a peer reviewed metastudy of the prevalence of anti-white political content in university lectures.

 Formosa wrote:

 Disciple of Fate wrote:
Trump was elected because of 'white genocide' identity politics duribg/after Obama. Its the result of decades of media and Republican politician dog whistles that finally got hijacked by someone who actually seems to believe in this gak instead of people employing it as a cynical tool for votes/views. What is the point of LordofHats coming back to argue with you when you're deadset on considering it all a left wing MSM conspiracy anyway? Is everyone equal, have we reached colourblind/genderblind utopia already according to all of your experts?

Your the ones reaching for a utopia, and I actually agree with you to a point, but I watched all the anti trump and pro Hilary media, and there was sooooo much of it everywhere, and he still won, let that sink in, the left was utterly rejected, I sit here and wonder why, you lot just blame the “man” or whatever but I decided to dig deeper, apart from her very clear corruption I had to wonder why in the U.K. the left was rejected twice and then it happened in the US, I wanted to know why, so I started frequenting different political sites, different Facebook pages, that’s when I discovered the alt right, a bunch of lunatics that were proposing a white ethno state (this is what the alt right is BTW) and using a new term I hadn’t encountered “identity politics” so more digging and watching all kinds of political discourse, the more I watched the more I saw the radical left, fringe left gain ground, it was no longer the right that was trying to shut people down, it was the left, and I remember when it was the right during the 80’s 90’s that was doing it, So I kept digging as I didn’t believe it, didn’t want to believe it, then circa 2015 ish I saw a big shift in media, the leftist media were now repeating the lies of the radicals, like they didn’t even care what they were saying and didn’t face check it, I was craving more information and I couldn’t get it from the normal media outlets, then I discovered you tube... yeah I know, I’m late to the party, it had several hour long political theory and discussion lectures, without the severe bias of the mainstream media, and that’s when I discovered the SJW, I was horrified at the actions of these people, and again I wanted to know why they were the way they were, why they were so racist, sexist and bigoted and didn’t even know it, why they chanted Marxist slogans and didn’t even know it, at least when I did it I knew what I was chanting, then history opened my eyes, but I digress, so after noticing that both the media and these “SJWs” were saying the same things I began to wonder who was teaching them this nonsense, step in the eduction system, I kept seeing lecturer after lecturer spouting the same rhetoric, saw universities creating “safe spaces” saw them teaching about “white/male privilege” saw the pure insanity that they love to throw out and divide the students, saw them deny any proof that disagreed with their world view. I then saw the far left turn violent on many occasions in the name of diversity and understanding, I’ve even seen several dakka posters condone these acts “punch a Nazi” when as far as they are concerned anyone not as far left as them is a Nazi, even saw them start to call long term leftist feminists “sexist, racist and transphobic”.

As for conspiracy, why does it have to be one, do you really think all these professors get together with their little red books and decide to bring down western civilisation, don’t be so stupid, they are loosely tied together by ideology and then teach the students the same poisoned ideology, which in turn grows, that’s not a conspiracy, it’s right out in the open.

All this and more showed me in very real terms that the modern threat is not the tiny fringe right that has almost no voice outside of the internet, it’s the far left.

But I know this will all fall on deaf ears, the usual accusations will be made

You always say others don't understand what you write, but here I clearly say that Trump was able to exploit decades of work by others and you say we "just blame the 'man'"? That's obviously not what I said, I clearly blames it on white identity politics that certain media and the Republican party have employed for decades. This is not some vague concept of the 'man', this is an observable decade long buildup to the point that people just accept and support this kind of behaviour, which you ignore in favor of right wing talking points about how "the left made us do this!"

The right has never stopped trying to shut people down either. The alt right evolved out of the 90's, its the same movement with fancier bells and whistles. It sounds like you got talked into right wing viewpoints by pseudo intellectuals if you believe in SJW and that identity politics is new. There have always been people fighting for 'social justice' in the community, SJW is just the latest derogatory term they came up with to try and paint their efforts in a bad light. Sure you have the extreme ones, but their views are marginal at best. Not at all part of mainstream discourse. These professors and safe spaces are all fringe elements. The public culture wars blow these out of proportion which makes them much bigger than they are, but it takes two to tango. And the far left has turned violent at multiple times since WW2, but its never been as consistently violent as the far right, certainly not in the US.

Just because people are long term feminists doesn't mean they can't hold viewpoints that are problematic. In fact that's becoming a big split inside places like the femenist and LGBTQ+ communities. Certain groups thinks its done, while others want to continue, its creating friction.

Because it has all the makings of a conspiracy. The fringe left controls discourse on MSM to affect society and libby profs are infecting the children! Which are established conspiracy theories if you just replace fringe left with marxists/Jews. Its almost a carbon copy.

You say the threat is not the fringe right but the fringe left. The statistics on the deathtoll from far right terror attacks versus far left would most certainly disagree. One is screaming about society reform and trying to change it by shouting on social media, the other wants to regress society back to the good old racist days by shooting up churches or driving into crowds.

The think tank New America has compiled information on terrorist activities in the United States after 9/11. It details data on deadly attacks by ideology up to the Aug. 12, 2017 Charlottesville attack.

Here’s their breakdown on the number of deaths caused by individuals of different ideologies: 95 by jihadist, 68 by far-right, and eight by black separatist/national/supremacist.

Even individuals who carry out jihadist attacks, however, are sometimes American citizens or longtime residents.

"The terrorist threat in the United States is almost entirely homegrown, as no foreign terrorist organization has successfully directed and orchestrated an attack in the United States since 9/11," said Albert Ford, a program associate with the International Security and Fellows programs at New America.

Of 418 individuals tracked by New America who are accused of jihadist terrorism related crimes in the United States since 9/11, 85 percent of them were either U.S. citizens or U.S. legal residents, and about half were born American citizens, Ford said.

Until the Orlando nightclub shooting, "the number of deaths caused by far-right-wing attacks outnumbered those caused by jihadism-related attacks," Ford said.

https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2017/aug/16/look-data-domestic-terrorism-and-whos-behind-it/

Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Formosa wrote:

 Disciple of Fate wrote:
I don't know how you got what you did from that article you posted. But the actions of that woman are in no way related to her professional capacity as a teacher, its in fact the opposite, neither her job nor the law gave her any authority to do what she did. Trying to remove a reporter at a university protest is firnly outside of her professional capacity.

Have you seen what she was teaching her students that led to the protest in the first place ?

Have you? Maybe you should post that article instead.

 DrGiggles wrote:


I'd go with an example like this from my Alma Mater https://www.nationalreview.com/2017/10/math-racist-university-illinois-professor/

I would agree that gender can be a spectrum, but when biological sex and gender for something like 99.5% of people is the same then saying it is a wide spectrum for most people is a bit misleading.

http://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/wp-content/uploads/How-Many-Adults-Identify-as-Transgender-in-the-United-States.pdf

The problem with that is it is basically re-posting a story from Campus Reform, a conservative activist website. As such, it is likely to be lacking in detail in order to put across the message they wish to. For example we have two sentences from the entire lecture, so are lacking any further context or arguments she used to build on her point.

But to ignore that, she is not actually wrong. Our teaching of maths does heavily represent greek and other european names for mathematical formulae over other terms. The theorem we call pythagoras theorem was independently discovered all around the world. We don't actually have any record of Pythagoras' proof, no written record of it, only later references to Pythagoras apparently proving it from texts which did survive.

 Disciple of Fate wrote:
Trump was elected because of 'white genocide' identity politics duribg/after Obama. Its the result of decades of media and Republican politician dog whistles that finally got hijacked by someone who actually seems to believe in this gak instead of people employing it as a cynical tool for votes/views. What is the point of LordofHats coming back to argue with you when you're deadset on considering it all a left wing MSM conspiracy anyway? Is everyone equal, have we reached colourblind/genderblind utopia already according to all of your experts?

No.

He was elected because:
1. The middle class and flyover country never recovered from the 2008 recession and decades of jobs disappearing. This group has been voting for outsiders for sometime, including Obama.

2. Yes tribal politics

3. Hillary Clinton

The Democrats focused on non economic SJW causes and forgot the working class. If they refocus on that they will win.

 A Town Called Malus wrote:

 DrGiggles wrote:


I'd go with an example like this from my Alma Mater https://www.nationalreview.com/2017/10/math-racist-university-illinois-professor/

I would agree that gender can be a spectrum, but when biological sex and gender for something like 99.5% of people is the same then saying it is a wide spectrum for most people is a bit misleading.

http://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/wp-content/uploads/How-Many-Adults-Identify-as-Transgender-in-the-United-States.pdf

The problem with that is it is basically re-posting a story from Campus Reform, a conservative activist website. As such, it is likely to be lacking in detail in order to put across the message they wish to. For example we have two sentences from the entire lecture, so are lacking any further context or arguments she used to build on her point.

But to ignore that, she is not actually wrong. Our teaching of maths does heavily represent greek and other european names for mathematical formulae over other terms. The theorem we call pythagoras theorem was independently discovered all around the world. We don't actually have any record of Pythagoras' proof, no written record of it, only later references to Pythagoras apparently proving it from texts which did survive.

I'll try and link one of her studies where she supports that view when I get home from work.

For the greek and european names though that is probably because they were the foundation for the advancement in scientific theory during the enlightenment in the west. If the enlightenment had happened in say china instead of the west then we would likely be using the names of old Chinese philosophers and mathematicians instead.

EDIT: Here is a separate article and an interview that shed more light on her views, you would need to read her book "Building Support for Scholarly Practices in Mathematics Methods" to get the full picture most likely.
http://www.news-gazette.com/news/local/2017-10-26/ui-defends-professor-after-book-chapter-draws-attention.html
https://theeducatorsroom.com/mathematics-political-post-session-rochelle-gutierrez/

But from these it still seems that her claim is that math is dominated by "White" culture which i would disagree with when the majority of STEM majors are asian.

https://www.clevelandfed.org/newsroom-and-events/publications/economic-trends/2015-economic-trends/et-20150331-racial-and-ethnic-differences-in-college-major-choice.aspx

You always say others don't understand what you write, but here I clearly say that Trump was able to exploit decades of work by others and you say we "just blame the 'man'"? That's obviously not what I said, I clearly blames it on white identity politics that certain media and the Republican party have employed for decades. This is not some vague concept of the 'man', this is an observable decade long buildup to the point that people just accept and support this kind of behaviour, which you ignore in favor of right wing talking points about how "the left made us do this!"

And yet you deny that the Left has been guilty of the same thing for decades, you say its white identity politics, something from what I have seen is mostly true, its the white middle class that is perpetuatiing the problem, but I see it coming from the very large group on the left not the tiny fringe on the right (both in the US), the far right has copied the recent Identity politics trend, thankfully no one listens to them, they are idiots.

The right has never stopped trying to shut people down either. The alt right evolved out of the 90's, its the same movement with fancier bells and whistles. It sounds like you got talked into right wing viewpoints by pseudo intellectuals if you believe in SJW and that identity politics is new. There have always been people fighting for 'social justice' in the community, SJW is just the latest derogatory term they came up with to try and paint their efforts in a bad light. Sure you have the extreme ones, but their views are marginal at best. Not at all part of mainstream discourse. These professors and safe spaces are all fringe elements. The public culture wars blow these out of proportion which makes them much bigger than they are, but it takes two to tango. And the far left has turned violent at multiple times since WW2, but its never been as consitently violent as the right, certainly not in the US.

The far right has never stopped, but the right has basically stopped, since the late 90's it barely happens in the UK and I rarely see it in the US, while the standard identity politics term may be older, the movement is not the same as the historical one, this new wave of it is NOT the same as the old one, same with the modern feminist movement, just because they share a name does not mean they share the same ideology, its propaganda pretending to be fact, SJW is a negative term not because the right is trying to paint them as bad, but because the actions of the people who identify as SJWs have painted them in a bad light, I disagree that they are not part of the mainstream, you and I have both seen the propaganda that is the pay gap etc. in the mainstream news, in spite of it being debunked so many times.

I dont disagree that certain elements have been blown out of all proportion, and yep it takes two to tango, something I have pointed out repeatedly.

Just because people are long term feminists doesn't mean they can't hold viewpoints that are problematic. In fact that's becoming a big split inside places like the femenist and LGBTQ+ communities. Certain groups thinks its done, while others want to continue, its creating friction.

who decides what is problamatic, and yep its splitting what would otherwise be great communities that strive for great things.

Because it has all the makings of a conspiracy. The fringe left controls discourse on MSM to affect society and libby profs are infecting the children! Which are established conspiracy theories if you just replace fringe left with marxists/Jews. Its almost a carbon copy.

Its fringe over here, its mainstream over in the US and yes the left does indeed control a majority of the MSM, thats a simple fact, and yes libby profs are infecting the children, they should be preparing them for further life and not teaching them to hate each other and themselves, its sad, a whole generation of children that will likely have real issues in further life so some prof can push their ideology on them, and whats this got to do with jews, why even bring them up, how odd, and yep I do think that a lot of these ideals are influenced heavily by marxism, I know it was pushed heavily when I was at university, I even bought into it for a long time.

You say the threat is not the fringe right but the fringe left. The FBI statistics on the deathtoll from far right terror attacks versus far left would most certainly disagree. One is screaming about society reform and trying to change it by shouting on social media, the other wants to regress society back to the good old racist days by shooting up churches or driving into crowds.

You dont want to play that game dude, the left has wiped out a lot more people wholesale than the right, my real fear is this, if we keep allowing this censorship and shutting down of discourse, violent acts in the name of ideologies, we could end up repeating these mistakes

 Frazzled wrote:

 Disciple of Fate wrote:
Trump was elected because of 'white genocide' identity politics duribg/after Obama. Its the result of decades of media and Republican politician dog whistles that finally got hijacked by someone who actually seems to believe in this gak instead of people employing it as a cynical tool for votes/views. What is the point of LordofHats coming back to argue with you when you're deadset on considering it all a left wing MSM conspiracy anyway? Is everyone equal, have we reached colourblind/genderblind utopia already according to all of your experts?

No.

He was elected because:
1. The middle class and flyover country never recovered from the 2008 recession and decades of jobs disappearing. This group has been voting for outsiders for sometime, including Obama.

2. Yes tribal politics

3. Hillary Clinton

The Democrats focused on non economic SJW causes and forgot the working class. If they refocus on that they will win.

Yes, decades of dog whisteling had made the base inured to the absolutely vile rethoric Trump was spewing and decades of massaging facts made sure that people lined up to go back to the 1950's. 1 only worked because of a willful choice to deny reality because emotions>facts.

Clinton might have been bad to part, but Trump was actually appaling. A man spitting on the disabled, the sexually assaulted, dead soldiers and POWs, with a list of issues just as long if not longer than Clinton.

The use of SJW just discredits your argument. The Republicans work on identity politics just as hard, their economic platform was non existent even if the Democrats had a mediocre one. The Republicans have forgotten about the working class for just as long if not longer. The issue is that Trump's base was massaged to accept someone like Trump for decades. Clinton didn't have that luck with Democrats.

 A Town Called Malus wrote:

 Formosa wrote:



That was just a tester to see if you would actually check, now knowing that you didnt is there any point to me posting up all the videos you will just call biased?

How about this, you tell me what you would consider a credible source? just so we dont waste each others time, and no buzzfeed isnt credible

No, this was you posting garbage to support your garbage argument.

I did examine it and it was crap.

How about you find a peer reviewed metastudy examining racial political bias in university teaching. Or a peer reviewed metastudy of the prevalence of anti-white political content in university lectures.

I know this is pointless but here you go, lots and lots of videos showing what im talking about.

https://www.facebook.com/FilmYourMarxistProfessors/


Automatically Appended Next Post:
warning though its defo a right wing page

So you ask for other users to post studies to back up their points, and respond to their queries with a Facebook page? Please ensure you have sensible, polite expectations and exchanges with other users in this thread, we don't need it getting blown out by anything like this thanks

 Formosa wrote:

 A Town Called Malus wrote:

 Formosa wrote:



That was just a tester to see if you would actually check, now knowing that you didnt is there any point to me posting up all the videos you will just call biased?

How about this, you tell me what you would consider a credible source? just so we dont waste each others time, and no buzzfeed isnt credible

No, this was you posting garbage to support your garbage argument.

I did examine it and it was crap.

How about you find a peer reviewed metastudy examining racial political bias in university teaching. Or a peer reviewed metastudy of the prevalence of anti-white political content in university lectures.

I know this is pointless but here you go, lots and lots of videos showing what im talking about.

https://www.facebook.com/FilmYourMarxistProfessors/


Automatically Appended Next Post:
warning though its defo a right wing page

Ah yes, heavily edited videos such as a university lecture, probably an hour long at least, distilled down to two and a half minutes. And during those two and a half minutes he still doesn't actually say what the facebook page claims that he does. And his point is valid. In order to dismantle racist sociological structures you often do have to break the law, as there will be laws written to prevent such actions from taking place. Apartheid in South Africa, for example, was opposed and brought down by illegal actions forcing the apartheid government to negotiate with leaders of the black population, such as Nelson Mandela.

You only serve to further discredit yourself by continuing to post such "evidence", especially when you ask others for a higher standard of evidence than you are capable of providing for your own arguments.

 Frazzled wrote:


The Democrats focused on non economic SJW causes and forgot the working class. If they refocus on that they will win.

Wont happen, would go against the interest of the people they actually listen to, their donors.

 Formosa wrote:


Its fringe over here, its mainstream over in the US and yes the left does indeed control a majority of the MSM, thats a simple fact, and yes libby profs are infecting the children, they should be preparing them for further life and not teaching them to hate each other and themselves, its sad, a whole generation of children that will likely have real issues in further life so some prof can push their ideology on them, and whats this got to do with jews, why even bring them up, how odd, and yep I do think that a lot of these ideals are influenced heavily by marxism, I know it was pushed heavily when I was at university, I even bought into it for a long time

Curious, where are the Marxist influences?

 Formosa wrote:

You always say others don't understand what you write, but here I clearly say that Trump was able to exploit decades of work by others and you say we "just blame the 'man'"? That's obviously not what I said, I clearly blames it on white identity politics that certain media and the Republican party have employed for decades. This is not some vague concept of the 'man', this is an observable decade long buildup to the point that people just accept and support this kind of behaviour, which you ignore in favor of right wing talking points about how "the left made us do this!"

And yet you deny that the Left has been guilty of the same thing for decades, you say its white identity politics, something from what I have seen is mostly true, its the white middle class that is perpetuatiing the problem, but I see it coming from the very large group on the left not the tiny fringe on the right (both in the US), the far right has copied the recent Identity politics trend, thankfully no one listens to them, they are idiots.

I'm not denying anything, but at least the left was playing the game to those disenfranchised, not trying to entrech inequality as it existed. Seriously? You think its a tiny fringe on the right? Opposition to gay marriage from the right was part of identity politics for years, voter ID is identity politics, they even admit to it. Reagan played to the white middle class with his dog whistles against the poor and minorities to win the presidency. There is nothing recent or fringe about its use on the right, they just were never as brazen about it as they have become under Trump.

Yes the fringe left goes too far or comes in from a skewed viewpoint in some cases, but at least its coming from a place of trying to redress historical grievances. Identity politics on the right have none of those redeeming qualities, its all about maintaining societal and political power in white Judeochristian hands, the idea of having to share being 'white genocide'.

 Formosa wrote:

The right has never stopped trying to shut people down either. The alt right evolved out of the 90's, its the same movement with fancier bells and whistles. It sounds like you got talked into right wing viewpoints by pseudo intellectuals if you believe in SJW and that identity politics is new. There have always been people fighting for 'social justice' in the community, SJW is just the latest derogatory term they came up with to try and paint their efforts in a bad light. Sure you have the extreme ones, but their views are marginal at best. Not at all part of mainstream discourse. These professors and safe spaces are all fringe elements. The public culture wars blow these out of proportion which makes them much bigger than they are, but it takes two to tango. And the far left has turned violent at multiple times since WW2, but its never been as consitently violent as the right, certainly not in the US.

The far right has never stopped, but the right has basically stopped, since the late 90's it barely happens in the UK and I rarely see it in the US, while the standard identity politics term may be older, the movement is not the same as the historical one, this new wave of it is NOT the same as the old one, same with the modern feminist movement, just because they share a name does not mean they share the same ideology, its propaganda pretending to be fact, SJW is a negative term not because the right is trying to paint them as bad, but because the actions of the people who identify as SJWs have painted them in a bad light, I disagree that they are not part of the mainstream, you and I have both seen the propaganda that is the pay gap etc. in the mainstream news, in spite of it being debunked so many times.

I dont disagree that certain elements have been blown out of all proportion, and yep it takes two to tango, something I have pointed out repeatedly.

How has the right stopped? It has fought tooth and nail against the progressive movement every step of the way. Gay rights were grudgingly given up just to be replaced by trans rights with a load of bathroom bills. The "illegal immigrants stealing our jobs/cause more crime" is a tune that hasn't stopped playing since the 90's either. Its been there all along, attention was just diverted from it because of the Afghanistan/Iraq wars and the crisis.

That's why we call them different waves, its another generation that has adapted goals. SJW is a bad name because people dig through loads of drivel to parade around small fish like they matter. When a Nazi calls themselves Republican does that paint Republicans in a bad light too? That's the issue, you let nuts determine how the whole movement is classified which is a terrible standard.

The pay gap isn't a myth, even in the Netherlands research has been done showing it exists for a multiple reasons. One of those is that society is geared towards men having careers and women taking care of children. The pay gap does exist just like gender discrimination. To call it a myth is propaganda. Just last week we had the Tokyo Medical University admit that it fails women just so it can have a quota of 70% male students regardless of scores. Workplace discrimination is real and that feeds partly into that pay gap as well.

 Formosa wrote:

Just because people are long term feminists doesn't mean they can't hold viewpoints that are problematic. In fact that's becoming a big split inside places like the femenist and LGBTQ+ communities. Certain groups thinks its done, while others want to continue, its creating friction.

who decides what is problamatic, and yep its splitting what would otherwise be great communities that strive for great things.

Both sides make their own decisions. Just look at how Polanski being blocked from an event split second and third wave feminists in France (the artist versus sex offender debate). As in many things, the current generation finds that the older movement holds outdated views. Its going to happen to the current movement too in the future. Defenitions and perceptions shift. Just look at the part of the feminist movement that is against transgenders as a threat to women's issues. You would say that as feminists they would probably be progressive, but that's still transphobic

 Formosa wrote:

Because it has all the makings of a conspiracy. The fringe left controls discourse on MSM to affect society and libby profs are infecting the children! Which are established conspiracy theories if you just replace fringe left with marxists/Jews. Its almost a carbon copy.

Its fringe over here, its mainstream over in the US and yes the left does indeed control a majority of the MSM, thats a simple fact, and yes libby profs are infecting the children, they should be preparing them for further life and not teaching them to hate each other and themselves, its sad, a whole generation of children that will likely have real issues in further life so some prof can push their ideology on them, and whats this got to do with jews, why even bring them up, how odd, and yep I do think that a lot of these ideals are influenced heavily by marxism, I know it was pushed heavily when I was at university, I even bought into it for a long time.

But can't you see how this is just a repeat of those older theories. The left has a larger presence in the media because that is where their costumer base is trending to, every generation after the babyboomers have become more left percentage wise. But the left infecting children at university has been a boogeyman since evenbefore the 90's. Has it ever shown its head after they left university? Why is this the moment when it will stick?

I bring up the Jews because of the well known conspiracy theory? You know, the one in which they supposedly control the MSM and 'infect' our children with their viewpoints? You really don't see the parallels? As for academic Marxism, not Marxism has to do with the economic position in society and Western consumerism, not with progressive politics unless its economic social policies.

 Formosa wrote:

You say the threat is not the fringe right but the fringe left. The FBI statistics on the deathtoll from far right terror attacks versus far left would most certainly disagree. One is screaming about society reform and trying to change it by shouting on social media, the other wants to regress society back to the good old racist days by shooting up churches or driving into crowds.

You dont want to play that game dude, the left has wiped out a lot more people wholesale than the right, my real fear is this, if we keep allowing this censorship and shutting down of discourse, violent acts in the name of ideologies, we could end up repeating these mistakes

You really don't want to play this game 'dude'. So because Stalin was alive in the 1930's, the left in 2018 in the US on the internet is more dangerous? Preposterous. Besides, untill the 80's the US right certainly played on communist levels, you think all those right wing death squads in Latin America got paid by the left? Historically speaking both sides are drenched in blood, but only the right in the US is pouring out more buckets now. The idea that we go from people crying for safe spaces on the internet to Stalinist death camps with a snap of the fingers is just ignoring massive amounts of historical buildup. For the same reason I could say that your real fear should be the right, because silly games of fear about the left is exactly how some of the worsst fascist regimes got into power....