The only riots occurring are in the headlines of those silly right-wing blogs you read.

There are around 310 million Americans. Two major parties. Your generalizations of about one of them is getting boring.

We get it. You love Republicans for some unfathomable reason. They blew up the deficit and pushed an hysterical drunk to the Supreme Court while the party leader cozied to dictators and isolated the US from fellow democracies, none of which is remotely conservative. Dems are now more traditionally conservative than Republicans.

You vote Republican because you always did because your parents did because most of your social circle does and it's boring.

“crooked hillary”

DEADBEAT DONALD

thank you for what??

a conservative constitutionalist who believes the president can pardon himself and encourage lawbreakers with pardons so he can run the government like a mafia

right...

i view myself as a planetary ai then

...

...

AZ Republicans Get Their Roger Stone Ratf*ck On

https://www.wonkette.com/this-is-you...n-james-okeefe

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php...ldid=863342626

Mr.Rape Face




raper
Incumbent
Assumed office
October 6, 2018
Nominated by Donald Trump
Preceded by Anthony Kennedy
Judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit
In office
May 30, 2006 – October 6, 2018
Nominated by George W. Bush
Preceded by Laurence Silberman
Succeeded by Vacant
White House Staff Secretary
In office
June 6, 2003 – May 30, 2006

For showing with your own words that I’m not banging the drum for anyone!


This is what you offer......what a freaking joke!!!

I do a recap of the week and because I quoted our President......that’s banging a drum?

Using your logic -???- quoting Crooked Hillary somehow isn’t banging the drum for her?

I was presenting both sides, but clearly you only see it one way......and this is why Democrats and the FarLeft are loosing!!

And this......


evollove responds with a census report?

Do you not think that America realizes that “We Must Disobey-We Must Disrupt “ and ANTIFA as being associated with the Democratic Party?

YES — it’s mostly associated with the FarLeft, but when Crooked Hillary opens her mouth saying the Democratic Party cannot be civil unless they have the power, America recognizes that as being mainstream Democrat and America voted two years ago they wanted NO PART of that......and I believe they will soon do so again!!!

I noticed how neither one of you addressed Hillary’s statement???

Oh - I wasn’t banging the drum-drum for Alex Jones, just pointed out that it’s bad JuJu when social media platforms silence content.

What would have happened if the FBI Investigation of Judge Kavanaugh revealed that the Judge set up a server in his bedroom closet so he could avoid detection from our Government?

What if the FBI discovered that Jusge Kavanaugh sold uranium to Russia?

What if Judge Kavanaugh and his wife received payments from Russia?

......Mueller might have something then!!!!

are you serious or are you trolling?

no, by this question i do not mean “you are objective and impartial” (wtf)

i just mean: are you just jerking people’s chains here? or are you really that ignorant to continue with this “hillary sold 20% of american uranium to russia” bullshit you drank with your breitbart & hannity & tucker carson koolaid?

because yes that 2nd option would make you deadbeat donald’s little drummer boy.

if you’re just trolling though—well played, funny guy.

here. please read something written by grownups, for grownups, in that far-left commie rag, forbes magazine:

https://www.forbes.com/sites/jamesco.../#61e805147b55

“I unfortunately always felt the day would come when alternative media would be scrubbed from major social media sites,” Anti-Media’s Chief Creative Officer S.M. Gibson said in a statement to me. “Because of that I prepared by having backup accounts years ago. The fact that those accounts, as well as 3 accounts from individuals associated with Anti-Media were banned without warning and without any reason offered by either platform makes me believe this purge was certainly orchestrated by someone. Who that is I have no idea, but this attack on information was much more concise and methodical in silencing truth than most realize or is being reported.”
It is now clear that there is either (A) some degree of communication/coordination between Twitter and Facebook about their respective censorship practices, or (B) information being given to both Twitter and Facebook by another party regarding targets for censorship. Either way, it means that there is now some some mechanism in place linking the censorship of dissident voices across multiple platforms. We are beginning to see smaller anti-establishment alternative media outlets cut off from their audiences by the same sort of coordinated cross-platform silencing we first witnessed with Alex Jones in August.

Don’t be fooled by Bannon’s split with Trump. He’s leading a Trumpian onslaught to undermine European democracy itself



https://www.theguardian.com/commenti...e-europe-trump

I'd say it depends how rigid you want to be about something being future oriented. Certainly the Futurists were (needless to say) future-oriented but even they ultimately looked back to Rome as their underlying model for their 'new' society - just as the Nazis may have looked forward to a Master Race, but saw that too as a revival of a kind of Northern European pagan/folkloric past. So while it's too simple to say fascism is devoid of any future orientation, it does seem to always define that future as a rebirth of something from the past. Which I suppose is the very definition of any re-birth. At its core Fascism is a pallngenetic movement but that doesn't stop it also being future orientated.

Being dialectical, Communism is always future orientated.

The only political ideology which might conceivably exist in a 'timeless present' is laissez faire Capitalism, or maybe some branches of Libertarianism.


I agree. Intersectionality has nothing to do with working class interests. A member of the black or LGBT community can also be a member of the bourgeoisie or an aristocrat, in the way that a member of the working class simply cannot. That's not to say the Working Class should ever seek to separate itself from a member of any of those groups if they happen to be working class, regardless of their race, gender or sexual orientation. Talk of a White Working Class only muddies the water by forcing an unnecessary rift between people with shared class interests and ultimately relegates class politics to the same level as identity politics.


The stand off will likely be between an anti-democratic globalist system (typified by the EU, DAVOS, etc) an anti-democratic nationalist system (typified by Russia, China, etc) and an anti-democratic theocracy (typified by Saudi Arabia and the UAE).


I agree. And you can add the Brexit movement to that, and to some degree the rise of Jeremy Corbyn. I don't think they could've ever realistically joined forces but I do think, in their very different (and often conflicting) ways, we might ultimately come to see them as representing what may end up being the last gasp of any kind of meaningful democracy.

I was really only trying to nuance Stanley's argument, rather than disagree with yours, but anyway.

I see Trump as largely irrelevant in all this. The really interesting thing will be who succeeds him, either from the Conservative/Right, Liberal/Left or some other axis that's yet to emerge. The obvious fear amongst his opponents is that he's defining the beginning of something, but I tend to think he's more a chaotic convulsive interregnum merely marking the end of a Boomer inspired Progressive/Neo-Liberal experiment, that's been rejected by those largely from that generation who felt increasingly alienated by it. I'd say the same thing about Brexit. But, for all the studies looking at how millennials are thinking politically, we really have no idea. My feeling though is that Sanders probably arrived onto the scene two elections too early and watch out for Steve Bannon, or anyone who might emerge in his image.

I think there are parallels between intersectionality and fascism but I now consider the thinking (for want of a better word) behind much of what it stands for to be so muddled and contradictory and essentially self-defeating that I exhaust myself knowing where to even start with it. Fascism at least has a logic, as does Communism, Free Market Capitalism, Classical Liberalism and all the other grown-up ideologies. They at least allow for a rational argument either for or against them. Identity politics is like a shouting child, whose shouts only become louder and more impassioned the more you try to reason with it. The tragedy is that so-called adults gave it a voice to begin with, so now we're not only doomed to having to listen to it but even adjust our lives according to its imbecilic demands.

--

See? This is what happens when I'm deprived of football for a week.

the thing with identity politics is that it’s always been there though. tribalism is the constant of what the marxists like to call the barbaric stage of society. even in the so-called logic of fascism there is a core of irrationality and identity politics—blood and race. so il duce invades ethiopia, adolph exterminates the jews and subjugates the slavs, etc. the english royal family thus changes their german names to windsor. so very ethnic.

communism ignored ethnicity and look at what happened: the breakup of yugoslavia gave us a long bloody civil war and ethnic cleansing. the soviets split back into their republics and it hasn’t been as popular to talk about the bloodbath in the caucasus but that mess will continue for at least another century.

the enlightenment and classical liberalism glossed over the expansion of empires that justified their conquests on the bases of ethnicity. france in algeria, belgians in the congo, england all around the globe, the dutch in indonesia and south africa, spain and portugal in the americas, continental genocide, the slave trade, etc. sure there were economic interests at stake but those were justified on the basis of ethnic or religious arguments. the white man’s burden, the advancement of christian civilization, manifest destiny vs. the wild irish, the beastly negro, the primitive indian, etc etc etc. and it was always a man’s world.

at the same time many of the modern republics rose from ethnic / nationalists impulses out of the old empires. greeks freed from the turks, ireland freed from england, finland out of russia or was it sweden? etc etc.africa is still figuring it out but let’s not forget rwandan machetes. latin america is a bit different, too long to get into it, but it was the creoles (whites) lording it over brown people—so, ethnic. now catalonia wants to break free again. scotland might try again. every ethnic group is looking to separateas the world becomes more integrated. laugh at alvin toeffler all you want but he saw this coming.

do i find identity politics appealing? as a global mongrel, i certainly do not. but that’s also based on my identity no? hahahaha. well, everyone is a mongrel really if you ask me, but many find the label repugnant/insulting. dumbfucks love racial purity and hate science.

but anyway, identity politics has lived longer and harder than any modern political ideology. everyone believes they’re the chosen people, or beyond that, simply “the people”, and the rest are just barbarians, bar bar bar, barking unintelligible words, or you know what, merely animals—let’s put them to work.

intersectionality etc is merely the current way of describing those on the receiving end of the ethnically centered and gendered power systems that haven been with us since the dawn of time. i find it absurd and logical at the same time. it’s a form of resistance, but it goes nowhere.

the talk of white working class you find so objectionable is precisely what’s going on here: the white working class left out of the feast of globalization embracing identity politics. it really is an ethnic voting block.

when will this end? i have no fucking idea. but it’s been with us since the dawn of our species. and none of the grownup political ideologies have properly grappled with it.

my hopes are of course on liberalism, not in the “left liberal” sense that came to be in america but on the broader one that gave us modern democracy, human rights, economic freedom, and protects the individual from collective oppression, updated for our time. the full promise of the enlightenment.

the unavoidable march of globalization might be delayed but can’t be stopped. it’s been inevitable since we left africa, and the only real question is what are the values that will shape it.

I read the words "identity politics" as just a right wing complaint that suddenly all these pesky brown people, gays, disabled folks and women are demanding a place at the debate and decision table. That's just inclusivity, moving more closely to what the founding documents for this country profess (acknowledging that we've never attained the goals.) But, WTF, we can fucking aspire to the rhetoric, can't we?

:rolleyes:

damn, that's some fucking ugly ideology you got there, rail:fuckyou:

I believe everyone has the right to speak. The problem with Identity Politics (capital A capital P) is that it prioritises certain groups over others and prohibits the critique of certain positions through de-platforming, the introduction of 'safe-spaces', etc.


There's too many points here to address individually but a lot of what you say (most of which no reasonable person could disagree with) hinges on the idea that Identity Politcs is just a politics that acknowledges peoples identity. Of course, pretty much all politics does that, but the kind of politics I'm talking about is more specific than that. I'm talking about a particular kind of Marxism that emerged after 68, which replaced its emphasis on class and economics with 'oppression' and culture. This was welded to ideas about power from people like Foucault which gives rise to this strange topsy-turvy world we see now, where the daughter of a banker at Harvard can tell an unemployed guy from the rust belt to check his privilege. Where the 'Left' are willing to fall behind a politician if they say the right thing about an oppressed group, regardless of the fact their neo-liberal economics are essentially Reagonomics/Thatcherism on steroids - and unquestionably do more damage to the oppressed people of the world than someone who might innocently miss-apply a gender pronoun.

The world is in a seriously dangerous state right now so we need to be serious about it. Identity Politcs just seems like a frivolous distraction to me. Decadent in the broadest sense of the word.

Couldn't agree more with this!

i’ll reply to the rest later but this jumped at me because i think you’re missing the point of what you’re arguing against. well at least in an american context.

first since you said harvard it reminded me of henry louis gates getting arrested in his house for “disorderly conduct” after being questioned for breaking into his own house, HAVING PROVEN ALREADY IT WAS HIS HOUSE. sure sure, he said some unpleasant things, but it was his first amendment right and he was not prosecuted because there was no case against him.

...later another cop called him a jungle monkey...

second, yes, money confers privilege, but in some circumstances race erases it

e.g., just quickly googled some terms and blam

https://money.cnn.com/2016/07/14/new...ing/index.html

i dont know who this hypothetical or actual daughter of a banker might be, or in what circumstances she would say but, but money is not everything

last, here an english journo explains how/why you might be missing the point:

https://www.theguardian.com/commenti...ucation-income

ok, monday morning, gotta run... the rest later

ive never run into a campus safe space, but the idea of it reminds me of what used to be the gay bar, where gay people could go and be who they wanted to be without fear of violence of persecution. these days i suppose in big cities nobody gives a shit, but there is a terribly made documentary called “small town, gay bar” which illustrates the ongoing plight of gay people in the unsafe space that is the american south. just because it is terribly made and it’s overly repetitive and too long it does not mean the subject is bad. it’s a great subject actually which is why i watched it completely and know it’s overly repetitive and too long. it’s because the subject matter is great.

anyway, we all want society to be a safe space and thatks why we have rules of conduct and laws and police etc.

but again the problem is a little bit like what i mentioned above. if yuo’re a black person in america, a routine interaction with the police is not safe...

see, even an encounter with a fellow student in a university campus can be threatening... if yuo’re black andfall asleep i your own dorm, a white student will call the cops on you

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...called-police/

read the whole list of “while black” situations listed there. a child selling lemonade in front of her own house was the latest i recall.

but see, if you take a knee during the national anthem to protest unjustified killings of black people by police... the wingnuts start crying “identity politics!”

i know that you’re addressing a very narrow definition of the term, but that academic definition is not what we’re experiencing here on an everyday basis.

now DEADBEAT DONALD is refusing to pay the million dollars he offered for charity if elizabeth warren proved she had native american ancestry.

ha ha ha ha deadbeat donald always lying

What you're describing isn't a safe space in the sense I'm using it. Of course all students (all everyone) should be safe from harm and persecution but the safe space culture I'm talking about is when a lecturer or a fellow student can't even mention a topic, or a perspective on it, that might offend or in some way trouble another student. So a transgender student is 'protected' from being exposed to a position that might, for example, question the idea of a gender spectrum. The fact that the universities are actually facilitating this practice arguably makes them even more pathetic than the students they're trying pandering to. If a person can't handle ideas that challenge their beliefs they shouldn't be in higher education, period.

okay, if that’s the case, that’s pretty much irrelevant to what goes on here

whole swaths of the population are under attack here

president grab them by the pussy sure triggered part of this intifada. for one thing, the women are finally fed up. but on the other hand the knuckle draggers are also encouraged.

just the other day in colorado 2 harmless shoppers were speaking in spanish at some drugstore when some racist bitch came to harass them for speaking their language

then another more educated white woman threw the racist bitch out, called the cops on her, and had her arrested for harassment

ha ha ha ha

ha ha ha ha

fucksakes, i want the drugstore to be a safe space but it shouldn’t be on the basis of having a handy white savior— thank fuck for that lady but cmon

deadbeat donald has fired up the crazies, as john mccain famously said, and has turned the country very ugly for minorities, women, and even the people he claims to stand up for, the ethnic white working class, because he’s just using demagoguery to sell them down the river, and the fools believe him

anyway i am sorry i cannot sympathize with the notion that the overprotection of routinely murdered abused raped and ostracized transgendered people is an urgent social issue. i’m sure it can be resolved within academia like all academic debates. and yes, academia attracts bolsheviks and thought cops for sure, and the crime of blasphemy moved from the church to the university but it’s not a big social issue.

much more urgent to me seems—can women, gays, trans, queer, hispanics, black people, the disabled, etc, go to the drugstore without being threatened and harassed? can the cops stop shooting black people in the back? and can women feel safe from coworkers?

that’s way more urgent if you ask me. let’s make drugstores safe again. and traffic stops. and the workplace. and selling lemonade in your front lawn when you’re 7.

Man, I have to say at this point, I'm actually experiencing this shit on a daily basis. Anyone who has contact with a university right now who won't privately admit (they'd likely lose their job if they ever uttered it on campus) that this shit is rife and going way beyond what you're talking about, is either a liar or one of the lunatics actually endorsing it (and they're all over academia at the moment). Universities are in absolute crisis over this. The fact you weren't aware of it is alarming, not because you're wilfully ignorant (which you obviously aren't) but because the news obviously just isn't getting out. Humanities departments, especially, are now little more than Intersectionality propaganda machines, and anyone who doesn't buy into it is essentially purged.

Believe me you wouldn't wanna be a white working class, brexit-voting, heterosexual male, working in a university art department right now.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/e...-a7815991.html

oh yes i am not overly familiar with that

ha ha ha the humanities. yes...

i am a humanities phd dropout because i was not interested in garbage social science posing as “literary criticism”. otherwise i would have studied sociology.

and yes, it’s garbage.

but this garbage has made the humanities nearly irrelevant for everyday life. i feel your pain, i do, but it’s a pain i walked away from. harder to do once you’re already committed to the profession of course. but it’s... it seems to me to be an internal matter. maybe it’s more common in england?

i... again i dont think i’m getting what you’re meaning by interesectionality, but as i understand it, it makes perfect sense to me. e.g., if you’re black, woman, lesbian, transgendered, poor, you’re essentially getting fucked 5 ways and not in a nice way. if you’re white, man, straight, cisgender, poor, then you’re just getting fucked in 1 way—the poor way.

but i’ll keep reading dead white straight cis males even if they were assholes to their wives and children though. some of their stuff is good regardless of their personal shortcomings. the only people with a clean conscience are the ones with bad memory.

ha ha ha ha sorry for the oversimplification. i didn’t sleep much last night and i am tired.

ps- i am friends with a number of bolshevik university professors and often give them shit about their kooky notions ha ha ha ha. one started banging the table on me the other day. reminded me of kruschev. lmao.

But this is getting derailed around details about something that's pretty marginal to the Trump thing. The person right now who I'd say pretty much reflects my view is this guy...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bTVXCxbC2to

pretty sure I've never "allowed you to speak", so STFU

lolwut

Your right. I'll leave you in peace to post your funny little pictures of Kavanaugh.

yeah ok his argument i understand and he’s not going back to 60’s marxists for his use of “identity politics”. so i can argue what the problem is with what he’s saying.

basically he’s right that our modern political culture made the individual supreme.

but what he’s avoiding/missing/not seeing/blind to/ etc. is that this “individual” is like man in the book of genesis constructed in the image of “the lord”.

so this supreme legal creation is male, white, straight (and likely married, with children, christian, affluent, etc etc etc).

i mean it’s the same issue at the bottom of the declaration of the independence.

“all men are created equal” except for the slaves and the women and the lower classes.

it’s all a very funny business.

i want to say more but i need a coffee and i need to do some work but please do not forget this point.

the individual is supreme yes. but the point you need to remember, you who trafficks in creatures of the imagination, is

“who” is this supreme individual jordan talks about, and what does he look like (cuz, eh, it’s a he).

the’s glossing over that fact either out of blindness or on purpose.

i just wanna stick to that for a moment please because that is the core of his flaw.

if you ignore that blind spot, he sounds perfectly reasonable.

but if you are aware of his blind spot, then you wonder if he’s fighting for reason and sanity or if he’s fighting for dominance.

let’s hang on to this point for a little while and not skip it.

so, demonyo, let’s dwell on this point for a moment yes?

the magna carta. who’s rights did it protect? the church and 25 barons or something?

the forefathers that bytor likes to invoke to justify the gun violence epidemic— who’s rights did they claim?

their own.

not women, not lower class people, not slaves

the history of the enlightment consists of the expansion of these individual rights to larger and larger groups. through hard fought struggle.

liberté, fraternité... yes.

égalité... not so much

so we purportedly arrive to our era as a detribalized society yes?

nooooo.... we arrive to our era tribalized in the image of the male dominated european tribe that colonized the planet.

it’s hard to see if you’re in that tribe.

but our modern society that the youtube guy you like celebrates... it not really universal yet

does not include a lot of people

and those people want in!

the reason identity politics “retribalize” is because many tribes were left out of the “supreme individual rights” tribe.

oh yes.

OUT.

we can’t really be one tribe until we really incorporate everyone

otherwise it is —yes— oppression

please answer my point dude

ha ha ha ha

tell me if i’m lying

Peterson covers a lot of ground, and you'd never get the nuances of any of them in a single video like that. suffice to say that he definitely considers any traditional rock solid concept of the individual as being deeply problematic, just that he also sees Idenity Politics as a massive, and in his view socially disastrous regression from any gains that could otherwise be made.

Like with all social commentators, there's areas where I definitely disagree with him - but his diagnosis of what he sees as a real problem within the Left/Liberal position right now, seems for the most part, pretty spot on to me, even if I'm not always that convinced by his alternatives.

--

Sorry, I wrote that before seeing your newer posts, in between. Will have to get back to you on those, Ilducio permitting.

right but you’re sidestepping the very point i want to discuss

the individual with supreme rights before the law is male, white, straight, rich

the individual with supreme rights before the law is from a particular tribe

it’s a pretty fluid tribe, but it’s still a tribe.

e.g., in the usa, when italians first arrived to america they were categorized as ‘black”. i have the papers to prove it lol.

now... not so much

the irish were dogs right? rejected by the nativists...
now everybody wears green for st patricks

jews? early 20th century, per fitzgerald or hemingway, they were a different tribe. all the way into the 60s easily. but since spielberg, the 80s, etc— the american jew is white. whiter than before anyway.

the tribe that killed everyone else became the bearer of the individual with those fancy rights.

everyone else got less, or no rights.

the current intifada is simply the request for the expansion of those rights.

is it a little bananas?

sure

is it the end of the world?

i don’t think so

oh, ignore il duce lololol

i agree with a lot of what he says but he’s a shit debater

he ignores everyone who disagrees with him so dont worry

“if you disagree with me you’re a nazi”

and he puts you on ignore, lololol.

anyway yes i await your reply. cool thanks.

Cherokee Nation responds to Senator Warren’s DNA test:

“A DNA test is useless to determine tribal citizenship. Using a DNA test to lay claim to any connection to the Cherokee Nation or any tribal nation, even vaguely, is inappropriate and wrong."

“It makes a mockery out of DNA tests..while also dishonoring legitimate tribal governments & their citizens, whose ancestors are well documented & whose heritage is proven. Sen. Warren is undermining tribal interests w/her continued claims of tribal heritage"