Lurker > legendary_zell

Funkydog posted...

legendary_zell posted...

These aren't just loose coalitions of non-believers with nothing else connecting them though. They are members of specific online communities with a community culture and history, all up voting or down voting the same things, sharing the same memes, reacting to them same stories, and many of the members share obvious demographic similarities (young, white, working to uppers middle class men).

Then focus on these specific online groups, not "atheists".

Targeting ostracized people online is something many insidious groups do, from terrorists to the alt right. Not denying that isn't a problem, but trying to establish it as an atheist problem is dishonest. It is a concern for lonely men, who feel a victim of society, regardless of faith or colour.

That's essentially what the article talks about. And what I talked about in this topic. I have zero interest in tarring atheists as a whole with the alt right label. But it's something I've been noticing for years. It's actually not regardless of faith because there's versions of the alt right that hinge on a non religious world view.

And specific on-line atheist communities have cultivated an edgy, transgression based, taboo breaking culture, free speech absolutist culture that is essentially identical to the ones in alt right spaces, which isn't surprising because these places are often the same, reddit and 4 Chan.

Online atheists are a particularly ripe target and that means people must be vigilant for people being radicalized. They can't be scared to alienate people or say "atheists have no connection to each other " and let it happen.
---

https://imgur.com/0Bi86cp

Funkydog posted...

FrozenXylophone posted...

Why isn't it a group?
Those who believe in a god have vastly varying views, but they are a group.

Yet the antiform of that is not a group because?

Because we aren't?

Rejection of one group doesn't make you a group, as we otherwise have no unifying thoughts/beliefs other than the rejection of one (insert bit about how we only believe in one less god than everyone else here).

And antifa is a group people purposely subscribe to. If an atheist group popped up where they could actively participate, then those members would be part of whatever it would be called.

These aren't just loose coalitions of non-believers with nothing else connecting them though. They are members of specific online communities with a community culture and history, all up voting or down voting the same things, sharing the same memes, reacting to them same stories, and many of the members share obvious demographic similarities (young, white, working to uppers middle class men).
---

https://imgur.com/0Bi86cp

There is a connection on the internet version of white identity extremists, not the old school version. The hallmarks of late 2000s, early 2010s internet atheism was a facts over feelings, we tell the uncomfortable truth, majority culture is misguided, proud of being edgy culture. This was especially popular on 4 Chan and Reddit.

That combination lends itself pretty readily to internet extremism, whether that's socialism, communism, and anarchism, or ethnonationalism, right populism, and Trumpism. The far right was a lot more successful because they had the memes, and Obama was in power which activated racial issues and made it easier to say the left was the beast to fight against. And frankly, a lot of the euphoric dudes were sheltered white guys and it wasn't that hard to get them to think they were being oppressed and everyone else was just whining.

Stir for about 10 years and you have our modern ecosystem of ironic white supremacists, and anti feminists.
---

https://imgur.com/0Bi86cp

Of all the people to potentially start a cult, he is the least surprising.
---

https://imgur.com/0Bi86cp

RoboLaserGandhi posted...

Antifar posted...

RoboLaserGandhi posted...

There's no way that isn't being exploited by foreign adversaries, directly or indirect

This is so dumb, dude. If you are so worried about our divisions being exploited by foreign adversaries, it is vital that work be done to address them.

You end up looking this silly otherwise:

That looks silly partly because of hindsight. MLK became a massive historical figure. Any time you look at doubters and skeptics of the past it's going to have that effect.

And I don't think there actually IS any work to be done. What the hell else were we supposed to do after the civil rights era besides stopping individual discrimination? There's only so much you can do before you get into things like affirmative action. Everyone these days has latched on to what is essentially a revival of civil rights era rhetoric hamfistedly applied to much less significant issues.

This is one of the worst posts I've seen on any forum that didn't dip into blatant racism. We could already tell you thought racism was solved in the 60s, but thanks for being the first to say it out loud.
---

https://imgur.com/0Bi86cp

RoboLaserGandhi posted...

Antifar posted...

Bernie Sanders, who was criticized by liberal activists in 2016 for not focusing more on racial injustice

That's pretty ridiculous.

Seems that all anyone can think about is race. Everyone's been whipped up into a frenzy to think that race is the biggest issue in the country. Sanders focused on actual, tangible changes to the quality of life of the populace (though I disagree with his methods), and there is a massive looming issue ahead with the increase in foreign power (Chinese economic and Russian military). But race. That's what we're all squabbling about. And it's so easy to get us riled up about it too. There's no way that isn't being exploited by foreign adversaries, directly or indirectly.

Race is pretty goddamn important in American life and history. It's something that we've fought a war over, we have at least 3 constitutional amendments about it, it helps determine where people live, where they go to school, who they vote for, what church they go to, etc. This idea that it's a side issue or that it's separate from economics and other "real issues" is simply inaccurate and you're gonna be left scratching your head when you can't solve a lot of those issues because you ignored the huge, glaring racial component.
---

https://imgur.com/0Bi86cp

Alucard188 posted...

Gamers only seem more toxic because the level of bullshit developers and Publishers stoop to to get more money out of its population. Remember all the aggression out of online passes? That seems almost quaint now. People are by and large tired of all the recurrent monetization schemes.

While there's definitely some truth to this concerning negativity, I don't think that's the only reason at all. A vocal minority of gamers blow a gasket at the mere mention of minorities or women in or around gaming. Games are described as either Game of the Year or trash. There's a huge problem with rampant abuse towards other players and towards developers, and it's considered either justified or a joke, depending on the moment.

But calling your customers assholes isn't gonna make the abuse decrease. It's gonna lead to coordinated boycotts and harassment campaigns.
---

https://imgur.com/0Bi86cp

Gaming culture took a nosedive in the 2000s and is now extremely toxic and entitled. At the same time, no developer is perfect and their business depends on the support of customers so you never ever handle it this way.
---

https://imgur.com/0Bi86cp

I told you you're young AF. You still have so much time ahead of you to build your confidence and skills, this is only the beginning. Never catastrophize your life.
---

https://imgur.com/0Bi86cp

I watched a bunch of Breadtube videos a few weeks ago and now YouTube keeps trying to serve political vids to me, including alt right trash. It's simply a fact that YouTube does this. It's not designed to work politically, and the company as a whole may be """""liberal"""", but the business model works based on amplifying what it thinks you like and giving you a slightly more intense version with each recommendation.

It starts with a video of Trigglypuff or Anita, then a gaming commentator/comedian with right leaning views like Crowder or something, then political videos for the purpose of mocking the other side, then political rants, then political "journalists" promoting conspiracies and right wing hot takes about PC Culture, Islam, immigration, feminism etc destroying our culture, then finally you end up at videos about the Great Replacement and Cultural Marxism, and the Jews directing all the social movements you've been taught to hate.

You can try it for yourself, it's simply true. I mean even Facebook labels us politically and serves us ads based on their analysis of our ideologies, YouTube has access to you building your ideology, of course they use it to keep you interested. That has the unintended side effect of radicalizing some percentage of people.
---

https://imgur.com/0Bi86cp

Some lawyers work hundred hour weeks and have the fates of industries, companies, and governments riding on their production. And I don't think they get paid nearly as much as these CEOs. This disparity is simply not justifiable and feeds itself because increased compensation leads to increased political power and ability to block anything that would give labor more power or reduce the power of management.

We could have a rule limiting this to 150x your average employee and they would still live lives of incomprehensible luxury. Is it really our position as a society that people can and should make the absolute greatest amount of money they possibly can, even if that creates gross disparities of wealth and power in society?
---

https://imgur.com/0Bi86cp

Man, what horrible, awful injury luck. Dude lost a ton of money betting on himself and cursed the Warriors.
---

https://imgur.com/0Bi86cp

If you've seen pictures of the jail cell and his sheets, analyzed the functioning of surveillance cameras, read the autopsy, and have expertise on how likely the neck injuries were to be from strangulation, then let us all know, otherwise you can't lay claim to common sense against someone who is saying we should actually investigate these things so we can actually hold people accountable for whatever went wrong, whether it was a hit or incompetence.
---

https://imgur.com/0Bi86cp

Bloodychess posted...

legendary_zell posted...

I was initially sympathetic to the conspiracy angles, but the way people are acting like experts on jail suicide protocol, jail architecture, jail conditions, and crime scene investigation when they know little beyond the most basic facts about each of these things has turned me off.

We are being told he broke his neck via hanging with tissue paper bed sheets on the same day the cameras malfunctioned and the guards fell asleep.

At this point people with a shred of common sense don't give a damn about what you think.

I'm not even disputing that the situation looks bad in the aggregate or asserting that we just take the story as we get it. I'm disagreeing with the extreme armchair autopsying, investigation, and journalism that are surrounding this case. I want to see what actually happened here, and wild, unfounded theorizing is going to poison the waters and discredit the idea of asking questions.

I want legit questions answered by legit people, not assertions about cameras and TP sheets when we don't actually have info on that yet and theories from people who have no idea about how to evaluate causes of death.

But I'm sure you and Cena are the voices of common sense.
---

https://imgur.com/0Bi86cp

I was initially sympathetic to the conspiracy angles, but the way people are acting like experts on jail suicide protocol, jail architecture, jail conditions, and crime scene investigation when they know little beyond the most basic facts about each of these things has turned me off. No one here has seen the jail cell or the materials Epstein had, so they can't really comment on whether hanging was possible or what distance he could have fallen.

No one here really understands what types of bone breaks are possible during a suicide attempt and how those compare to strangulation wounds.

If we want accurate answers and not to just speculate wildly all day, we should be camped outside our lawmakers and investigators offices calling them and knocking on their doors demanding a gigantic investigation by independent people who actually know what they're talking about.
---

https://imgur.com/0Bi86cp

You still have 3/4ths of your life. You are in a bad mental space and a good therapist CAN help you get out of it. You have many of the resources you need to heal, you are not out on the street. You are still the person that scored highly on those exams and if you are in a program like accounting, you are more intelligent than me, and I think I'm pretty smart.
---

https://imgur.com/0Bi86cp

It's interesting/will be even more interesting to see people who are otherwise obsessed with law and order cheer on an employer breaking the law by interfering with collective bargaining rights and threatening retaliation against his employees. Cool to see how that principle is selectively applied.

Almost all of you are workers, it makes no sense to undercut your own power in the space where you derive your economic power and where you spend half your waking hours. You want democracy in the political sphere but you fight for your workplace to be a dictatorship. Doesn't make sense.
---

https://imgur.com/0Bi86cp

Sad_Face posted...

I wonder how often young white boys are called out for being a "privilege white male". I've encountered kids on this very site who felt ashamed to feel any negative emotions regarding their life because being "privileged" means they have no right to complain about anything in life.

If you keep vilifying someone, they'll gravitate to somewhere they'll find acceptance.

This is a bs excuse for virulent white supremacy. By this same logic, most black, Hispanic, and Asian people should have been expected to become supremacists and no one could call them out for it.

Willfully misunderstanding a term isn't an excuse to want a white ethnostate, no matter what. I used to hear this term personal responsibility used as a weapon, whatever happened to that?
---

https://imgur.com/0Bi86cp

The Great Muta 22 posted...

BillyKidd posted...

It's actually based on watching hours of livestream footage; some of which, yes, was uploaded to youtube uncut. If you watch them, you'd see the white supremacists were separated from the regular folk there to just protest the statue takedown/renaming of the park, yet those separated from the fucking nazis are the ones being attacked by Antifa/BLM. When it comes down to providing shitty narratives, perhaps, you should start by looking in the mirror.

I watched the damn thing as it unfolded live, uncut, on live streams at the time, so save your breath claiming I'm pushing a narrative after the fact. There was no "regular folk there to just protest the statue takedown", those people have never existed and there's not ONE example you can actually give me of them being there, nor has a single person came out after the fact to claim they are one. Those people were NOT the ones being attacked, and you cannot provide any evidence of that being the case because that evidence simply does not exist.

Likewise the entire event was promoted and created to be a unification of white nationalist, neo confederate, neo nazis, and other various groups "uniting" in a public space to show unity. It was fucking promoted as such through flyers and even acknowledged as such by people such as Gavin McInness, who pleaded for his Proud Boys not to attend due to what it actually was, and was acknowledged as such on various platforms such as The_Donald subreddit in their promotion of the event where they called for people attending to not "punch right" against people they may find extreme. Frankly, the fact you're trying to pretend as if this mythical group of innocent people were there and coexisting separately from the entire thing is flat out wrong and if you feel like there was, provide me with ANY documentation of such people.

They will never ever acknowledge this. It explodes one of the pillars of their world view, that libs and leftists and the media are unfairly branding millions of regular people as alt right, and purposefully misreading the president's words to tar him as a white nationalist sympathizer. The event was called Unite the Right and had the stated purpose of building connections between groups that are all racist trash. It was openly organized by Jason Kessler and Richard Spencer.

Anyone who showed up to that and wasn't a counter protester is a deplorable, a racist, and a member of the alt right. Not a single fine person to be found, point blank, periodt.
---

https://imgur.com/0Bi86cp

Or is simply saying "I'm not a Nazi" enough to absolve you when you riot with Nazis in defense of confederate statues?
---

https://imgur.com/0Bi86cp

s0nicfan posted...

legendary_zell posted...

s0nicfan posted...

Heineken14 posted...

s0nicfan posted...

The Great Muta 22 posted...

That's an accurate argument though, why do you think it's fake?

Jk I know why, and that's because I remember your reaction that day in topics about Charlottesville.

I'm not saying the argument is fake, but it's still a different argument. People are right when they say Trump wasn't calling nazis fine people, just as people are right the protesters who stuck around and hung with the nazis aren't fine people either.

So what you're saying is, Donnie was wrong to say there were "fine people on both sides" since 1 side had either Nazis or people who were fine with Nazis? Cool.

What I'm saying is exactly what I said:

People are right when they say Trump wasn't calling nazis fine people, just as people are right the protesters who stuck around and hung with the nazis aren't fine people either.

So he wasn't calling Nazis fine people, just people who joined with Nazis and did the same things as Nazis, and that is meaningfully different?

They are morally equivalent actors and distracting from that with semantics is a bad look. Calling people who would riot with Nazis fine people is the same as calling Nazis fine people, especially in light of the fundamentally disgusting and racist purpose of the event.

I think in a country where there is an actual debate over whether it is acceptable to punch a nazi if you see one, it's not just "semantics" in how you take people (even bad people) who aren't nazis and just call them nazis because it's politically expedient. If nazis don't deserve a voice or a platform, then you can't ALSO just casually decide that people who are "close enough" fall into the same category anyway. That's just straight up authoritarianism.

I'm not here because I want to defend nazis. Fuck them. I'm here in this topic because I fundamentally disagree with the "well let's just call these other people nazis too even though they aren't" attitude.

It's not because it's politically convenient or because of a "close enough" attitude. It's because when put next to each other, they unite and act in concert with each other to have a racist riot. I don't know how it could be clearer they are functionally identical, whatever stories they tell others or themselves to avoid the Nazi stigma. They prove it with their own actions.

This only applies to the people who freaking stayed after seeing people Nazi salute in the streets. These are the people you're spending calories typing to defend and the people Trump called fine.
---

https://imgur.com/0Bi86cp

You cant use historical oppression to explain all differences in outcomes away. For example, when the Dutch arrived in South Africa, they brought modern agriculture. Tribes have been living on that land for a long time, and tribes have been fighting each other there for just as long. White people werent stopping anybody from learning how to farm during all those centuries. Since then, the Dutch instituted racist and terrible policies... and fed millions of people.

I never said it explained all differences in outcomes, I said it's a basic, bedrock historical fact that straight white men unfairly gained and hold disproportionate power and wealth in our society. I don't know how we can even discuss politics or society without acknowledging something so demonstrable and elemental.

You seem to have some other theories about why different groups have different outcomes, and they must be very strong indeed if they can produce our current and historical results while you discount the role of oppression.
---

https://imgur.com/0Bi86cp

s0nicfan posted...

Heineken14 posted...

s0nicfan posted...

The Great Muta 22 posted...

That's an accurate argument though, why do you think it's fake?

Jk I know why, and that's because I remember your reaction that day in topics about Charlottesville.

I'm not saying the argument is fake, but it's still a different argument. People are right when they say Trump wasn't calling nazis fine people, just as people are right the protesters who stuck around and hung with the nazis aren't fine people either.

So what you're saying is, Donnie was wrong to say there were "fine people on both sides" since 1 side had either Nazis or people who were fine with Nazis? Cool.

What I'm saying is exactly what I said:

People are right when they say Trump wasn't calling nazis fine people, just as people are right the protesters who stuck around and hung with the nazis aren't fine people either.

So he wasn't calling Nazis fine people, just people who joined with Nazis and did the same things as Nazis, and that is meaningfully different?

They are morally equivalent actors and distracting from that with semantics is a bad look. Calling people who would riot with Nazis fine people is the same as calling Nazis fine people, especially in light of the fundamentally disgusting and racist purpose of the event.
---

https://imgur.com/0Bi86cp

tennisdude818 posted...

legendary_zell posted...

tennisdude818 posted...

legendary_zell posted...

tennisdude818 posted...

creativerealms posted...

Related question, do you think SJW has a meaning?

It applies to intersectional feminists who think that straight white males have unjustly obtained a disproportionate amount of power and wealth. It has a lot in common with alt right views if you replace straight white males with Jews. That comparison still misses the fact that SJWs and alt righters have polar opposite views on LGBT issues.

.....wait, are you arguing that straight white makes HAVEN'T unjustly gained a disproportionate amount of wealth and power? You say that like it's some type of conspiracy theory and not a historical and currently existing fact.

I think my explanation was pretty neutral.

Neutral in that it cuts out all of history. That definition includes anyone who is aware of....anything.

All of history, including military conquest by all groups of people, slave ownership by all groups of people, a disproportionate amount of scientific discoveries by Europeans in recent history, the discovery of penicillin, modern agriculture and medical care, etc.

Life isnt as simple as intersectional feminists and alt righters make it seem. Each demographic has a mixed contribution to humanity. No group has a monopoly on violence.

All of the other groups weren't even allowed to participate in the scientific discovery you're talking about! Because they were slaves or property or outcasts.

Yes, groups of people throughout history have participated in heinous acts and taken advantage of others. But if we're talking about the factors that led to the current distribution of wealth and power in modern society, it was definitely white men doing most of that because again, they were the only ones who were allowed to play the game. Everyone else wasn't just lazing around relying on white men to discover everything, they were deliberately excluded from every mechanism that allows discovery to happen.

It certainly wasn't women and minorities depriving themselves of the right to vote or excluding themselves from law firms etc. No one ever asserted that anyone has or ever had a monopoly, that's a strawman constructed from whole cloth.
---

https://imgur.com/0Bi86cp

s0nicfan posted...

coh posted...

Well its true he wasnt referring to Nazis when he said that.

Which is why the argument always becomes:
DarkChozoGhost posted...

"Debunked"

If you see a group of neo-nazis, and decide to join up with them to protest, you are not a "fine person." Therefore, 0% of people on the nazi side were "fine people."

So the argument "becomes" an accurate defense against attempts to sanitize Trump's Charlottesville statements? This isn't the gotcha you seem to think it is.

When some """"different group"""" sees Nazis chanting "Jews will not replace us" in the course of defending the statutes lionizing a white slave based ethnostate posted by white supremacists as an attack on the civil rights movement years, to a century after the Civil War, and decides to join the Nazis, they are in fact not fine people and anyone who calls them that knows exactly what they're doing.
---

https://imgur.com/0Bi86cp

tennisdude818 posted...

legendary_zell posted...

tennisdude818 posted...

creativerealms posted...

Related question, do you think SJW has a meaning?

It applies to intersectional feminists who think that straight white males have unjustly obtained a disproportionate amount of power and wealth. It has a lot in common with alt right views if you replace straight white males with Jews. That comparison still misses the fact that SJWs and alt righters have polar opposite views on LGBT issues.

.....wait, are you arguing that straight white makes HAVEN'T unjustly gained a disproportionate amount of wealth and power? You say that like it's some type of conspiracy theory and not a historical and currently existing fact.

I think my explanation was pretty neutral.

Neutral in that it cuts out all of history. That definition includes anyone who is aware of....anything.
---

https://imgur.com/0Bi86cp

NeoShadowhen posted...

legendary_zell posted...

tennisdude818 posted...

creativerealms posted...

Related question, do you think SJW has a meaning?

It applies to intersectional feminists who think that straight white males have unjustly obtained a disproportionate amount of power and wealth. It has a lot in common with alt right views if you replace straight white males with Jews. That comparison still misses the fact that SJWs and alt righters have polar opposite views on LGBT issues.

.....wait, are you arguing that straight white makes HAVEN'T unjustly gained a disproportionate amount of wealth and power? You say that like it's some type of conspiracy theory and not a historical and currently existing fact.

I think it would be difficult to argue that they gained their wealth and power unjustly without implying that everyone else with wealth and power also gained it unjustly.

.....nah, I think it's pretty easy to argue that a group in society that gave themselves political and economic power and excluded everyone not white, not male, and not straight through control of social norms, the criminal justice system, outright violence, and the Constitution itself from the founding of the country until the 70s at earliest, got that power unjustly. Wtf is unjust if that's not unjust? No one else was even allowed to compete, so how was it fair?
---

https://imgur.com/0Bi86cp

tennisdude818 posted...

creativerealms posted...

Related question, do you think SJW has a meaning?

It applies to intersectional feminists who think that straight white males have unjustly obtained a disproportionate amount of power and wealth. It has a lot in common with alt right views if you replace straight white males with Jews. That comparison still misses the fact that SJWs and alt righters have polar opposite views on LGBT issues.

.....wait, are you arguing that straight white makes HAVEN'T unjustly gained a disproportionate amount of wealth and power? You say that like it's some type of conspiracy theory and not a historical and currently existing fact.
---

https://imgur.com/0Bi86cp

IShall_Run_Amok posted...

He's just regular old far right authoritarian.

I think this is the right answer. He's spewing familiar reactionary stuff in an """"intellectual""" way. It's updated for the new Millennium. I do think people on the left should be able to distinguish between someone who is on the far right and someone who is alt right because I think we get in trouble sometimes when we don't. Ben Shapiro is another great example and for many of the same reasons. He's another public intellectual who believes heinous things and makes arguments in a way that greases the wheels for a descent into alt rightery, but he himself is simply crazy right, not alt right.

His racist comments about Arabs wanting to live in open sewers are racist and reveal a messed up world view, but are not quite alt right.
---

https://imgur.com/0Bi86cp

Parts of the right have grown to support and identify with racist outbursts and have much more of a problem with people who react negatively to them than they do with blatant racists. So there'd be claims that people mad at him were virtue signaling SJWs who are wielding cancel culture as a weapon to silence comedians.
---

https://imgur.com/0Bi86cp

Well he's definitely not any type of left winger. His whole claim to fame online is attacking pretty much every pillar of left wing thought such as concern for equity, fairness, inclusion, etc.

He's a reactionary right wing figure that flirts with some crazy fringe stuff at times like pandering to incels and people obsessed with traditional gender roles and associations when he talks about women, harping about postmodern neomarxism (definitely somehow different from the alt right buzz word cultural Marxism), fetishizing hierarchy based on the lobster, but not animals with matriarchal societies, fetishizing "the west" which means the good parts of the white, Christian world etc

His philosophy and statements, if bought into, are very very attractive to alt rightees and make for a great pipeline into their world view and he KNOWS it. He makes money off of it.
---

https://imgur.com/0Bi86cp

Trump is not a Hitler or Stalin type. But the only thing keeping him from being a Mussolini or African dictator style authoritarian is our social/political norms and the courts. He would clearly outright punish criticism and advocate state violence if he could get away with that here.
---

https://imgur.com/0Bi86cp

Again, this dude is a right wing activist who did not post any backing for this gigantic claim. It's just some guy saying stuff.
---

https://imgur.com/0Bi86cp

s0nicfan posted...

legendary_zell posted...

If you want to prosecute, do it, and give out the proscribed punishment

And what exactly do you think the prescribed punishment is for a repeat serious criminal offender non-citizen was twice ordered removed from the country and has a habit of removing his GPS tracker the moment it is given to him?

He had already served time in jail. Repeatedly. It's not like this guy wasn't given a chance. The only place where he had legal citizenship was Iraq.

It certainly can't be deportation to a country he has literally no connection, no ability to speak the language of, no cultural understanding of, and serious mental and physical illnesses. That couldn't happen to him just for the criminal stuff, it's essentially happening because he lacks a piece of paper. Very very few would support making someone functionally stateless, homeless, culture less etc.

That's why the crime bit has to be relied on, he can't be viewed as a human being who is functionally American, his humanity has to be replaced with the label of criminal.

If you want to punish him for crimes he committed, punish him for those, but you can't deport someone for a crime and should never deport someone to an unknown place after decades of residency. It's especially bad when you impose a cruel, human rights violating punishment due to the status of past criminality and the status of not having a C next to his name.

Humans should be treated as humans and there are certain things you should not do to humans. This guy may not have understood that, but that doesn't mean we should add to the cruelty in the world ourselves.
---

https://imgur.com/0Bi86cp

ThePrinceFish posted...

CE's bleeding hearts won't be happy until nobody is deported for any reason no matter their legal status.

This is definitely the post of a left leaning individual.
---

https://imgur.com/0Bi86cp

Just because he was a bad person doesn't mean you kidnap him and drop him of in a country he has no connection to so he can die. If you want to prosecute, do it, and give out the proscribed punishment, but what they actually did was cruel and unusual.

This idea that you can just do literally anything bad to people who have done bad things is cave man trash. It's backward and indefensible. They summarily dumped this dude with major health issues on the other side of the planet after he had become American in every way except on paper. In a place where he didn't speak the language or understand the culture and had no roots whatsoever. They made him homeless and stateless essentially.
---

https://imgur.com/0Bi86cp

You're laughing now, but you'd be thanking him if 30-50 wild feral hogs invaded that Starbucks. Did you ever think of that you elitist soyboy gun grabbing libs?
---

https://imgur.com/0Bi86cp

I hope this isn't against the spirit of the topic, but it's interesting see what people consider the center here. It looks like very few of the posters that I'd definitely identify as conservative identify that way themselves. They say they're center left.

That said, I seem to fit most as a social democrat as of right now.
---

https://imgur.com/0Bi86cp

Mark_DeRosa posted...

legendary_zell posted...

It's would be hard to deliberately engineer worse optics than this. The fact that they got rid of the policy so quickly is a pretty good indicator of not needing to do it in the first place.

Anyone defending it should take into account the associations this brings for a lot of people and the danger potentially associated. It looks straight out of 1859, not 2019. What if the horse kicked him? What if the horse got spooked and took off running?

Hes between the horses and hes not tied to the horse.....

He's tied to the cop who is temporarily at the mercy of the horse. And they could get unsynced in that scenario, leading to a kick. And again it's just a very very bad look that was immediately considered unnecessary as soon as the public became slightly aware of it.
---

https://imgur.com/0Bi86cp

It's would be hard to deliberately engineer worse optics than this. The fact that they got rid of the policy so quickly is a pretty good indicator of not needing to do it in the first place.

Anyone defending it should take into account the associations this brings for a lot of people and the danger potentially associated. It looks straight out of 1859, not 2019. What if the horse kicked him? What if the horse got spooked and took off running?
---

https://imgur.com/0Bi86cp

Damn_Underscore posted...

did they ban spaces in June 2005?

They might have. I don't understand any of the thought process behind this username. Zell isn't even in my top 30 favorite FF characters, so it's weird that I'm still going by this name 14 years later.
---

https://imgur.com/0Bi86cp

I feel an incredible new power flowing through my veins. That could be the beer though.
---

https://imgur.com/0Bi86cp

What a morally bankrupt response by the Nebraska GOP. They have berm completely taken over by Dark Psychic Forces to the point where they actively purge anyone who isn't fully on the worst parts of the Trump Train. Sad!
---

https://imgur.com/0Bi86cp

What choices did I make in life that led me to this point???
---

https://imgur.com/0Bi86cp

He does have political talent, but it seems it all comes in the form of one on one's and and less artificial statements. Whenever he's speaking off the cuff about something that's not directly policy related, you get things like this and the BLM answer.

He just sucks at set pieces like debates where he has to communicate in a succinct and rehearsed manner and can't talk as much as he wants to or can be interrupted.
---

https://imgur.com/0Bi86cp

Also it's clear who has never been to a meeting or debate in their lives if they're getting triggered by the word privilege in the context of parliamentary debate.

It's pretty clear this is one of those times where the internet right is gonna have their jollies regardless of logic and reality, so the rest of us should just let them have their giggles.
---

https://imgur.com/0Bi86cp

Does TC scour the internet for anger/anti-sjw bait to fuel his world view? That's kinda sad. I've seen the same trait radicalize a lot of internet conservatives. Maybe use your time more productively? Or at least try to understand why people do what they do.
---

https://imgur.com/0Bi86cp

They are a pure negative influence on this planet at this point so, yeah. They are living proof that not everyone spouting heinous stuff in meme form was joking.
---

https://imgur.com/0Bi86cp