Is the "Alt-Left" Hurting the Republicans, or the Democrats? - Page 9 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

All general discussion about politics that doesn't belong in any of the other forums.

Moderator: PoFo Political Circus Mods

#14843043
Pants-of-dog wrote:So when racists do their rallies, and shout their racist beliefs at everyone, they are partly to blame for any violence that may result.

Not unless they target individuals for racist abuse.

Violence begets violence and both extremists on left and right feed of each other and their violence.

I want to see racism not reversed but erradicated completely.
#14843063
jessupjonesjnr87 wrote:Not unless they target individuals for racist abuse.


Why does it matter if the racists are yelling at groups or individuals? Why is one more right than the other?

Violence begets violence and both extremists on left and right feed of each other and their violence.

I want to see racism not reversed but erradicated completely.


Do you see both sides as being equally wrong?
#14843200
This vid is one of the best I've ever seen about the lies of BLM and a black guy who's seeing clearly.

Pretty telling huh?

Who are these "great Americans" helping? The tissue companies?

It's sickening to watch. And it's MAKING more Republicans, and Trump supporters.
Conga-rats "alt-left" or "commies" or whatever you wanna call yourselves.
You've come completely unhinged, and are acting like babies.
#14843236
Actually I think many now do.
Why do you think Pelosi and Feinstein would say the things they have recently?

Excess of any kind is hurtful. I saw someone claim there are 2 sides in politics.
This is not the case in reality. Only about 60% of the public claim to be either Democrat or Republican in the US.
That leaves 40% of the entire population, who are either independent or undecided. Yet the primary political ideologies, liberal and conservative, are, in an exhibition of pure genius, drifting further to extremes. The leaders of the liberal camp are trying to put a lid on this, because they see what's happening.

Pundits on the right do and say some pretty loony things sometimes, but they don't scream and cry and run around picking fights with their perceived opponents.
#14843259
Pants-of-dog wrote:Why does it matter if the racists are yelling at groups or individuals? Why is one more right than the other?



Do you see both sides as being equally wrong?


Because there's a difference between voicing your opinion and intentionally instigating a violent situation.

Yes both sides are wrong, extremists on both sides are aggressive, irrational and do more harm than good to their own cause.

That's the key issue, would you support someone who holds your ideals even if their actions do more harm to the cause than good?
#14843277
Buzz62 wrote:Actually I think many now do.
Why do you think Pelosi and Feinstein would say the things they have recently?


I thought they were courting conservative voters!

But your idea that they are doing this because imaginary people are sad that you don't like them is a much more logical idea!

Excess of any kind is hurtful. I saw someone claim there are 2 sides in politics.
This is not the case in reality. Only about 60% of the public claim to be either Democrat or Republican in the US.
That leaves 40% of the entire population, who are either independent or undecided. Yet the primary political ideologies, liberal and conservative, are, in an exhibition of pure genius, drifting further to extremes. The leaders of the liberal camp are trying to put a lid on this, because they see what's happening.

Pundits on the right do and say some pretty loony things sometimes, but they don't scream and cry and run around picking fights with their perceived opponents.


This is all irrelevant and we already discussed it.

The right does this so much that they actually have a whole media industry around spreading hate and saying awful things. I pointed this out and I also pointed out that the left has no comparable industry.

People make money selling hate to the alt-right.

No one makes money selling hate to the left.

Thus there is no financial incentive for the alt-left to exist.

---------------

jessupjonesjnr87 wrote:Because there's a difference between voicing your opinion and intentionally instigating a violent situation.


Not always.

What does this have to do with your claim that there is a difference between yelling "N*****" at one black person and yelling the exact same thing at a whole group of them?

Why is the latter more morally correct?

Yes both sides are wrong, extremists on both sides are aggressive, irrational and do more harm than good to their own cause.

That's the key issue, would you support someone who holds your ideals even if their actions do more harm to the cause than good?


The whole "alt-left" thing was specifically made up by right wing pundits to make both sides look equally bad.

I see a difference between white supremacists who have an inherently violent ideology and who violently try to impose this ideology and those who oppose these people with violence.

One side is trying to impose an inherently unjust system. The other side is not.

One side is trying to perpetuate historical injustices. The other is not.

One side is deliberately trying to instigate violence by holding rallies in places where they know they have no support. The other side does not.

One side targets ethnic and religious minorities who are already marginalised. The other side targets right wing militants in order to defend minorities.

It is only when we ignore all of this and look only at the fact that both sides use violence at far right rallies that we can pretend both are equal.

This is all true even if we do not support the militant left, or more correctly, militant anarchists.
#14843296
Pants-of-dog wrote:I thought they were courting conservative voters!

But your idea that they are doing this because imaginary people are sad that you don't like them is a much more logical idea!

:lol:

Pants-of-dog wrote:This is all irrelevant and we already discussed it.

Oh of course... :roll:

Pants-of-dog wrote:The right does this so much that they actually have a whole media industry around spreading hate and saying awful things. I pointed this out and I also pointed out that the left has no comparable industry.

People make money selling hate to the alt-right.

No one makes money selling hate to the left.

Thus there is no financial incentive for the alt-left to exist.

Errr...I showed you examples of how the left-side freaks finance themselves.
You ignored it.
Gee...what a shocker...

Show us where the Le Meute guys started any violence.
Show us where any of these demonstrations, STARTED any sort of violence? And remember...nobody really knows who started it the night before the main Charlottesville episode.
You're trying to claim that their very ideals and presence are a justification to attack them.
The law disagrees with you.
Deal with it.
#14843307
jessupjonesjnr87 wrote:@Pants-of-dog
Would you support someone who shares your ideals if there actions caused more harm to your cause than good?


That depends.

Now, are you going to address my last post?

------------------

Buzz62 wrote: :lol:

Oh of course... :roll:


Lol. I asked for evidence that left wing pundits made money off spreading hate and you gave me a link to a Christian apocalypse website that claimed that the Soros is funding antifa.

I then laughed at your incredibly crappy evidence.

Show us where the Le Meute guys started any violence.
Show us where any of these demonstrations, STARTED any sort of violence? And remember...nobody really knows who started it the night before the main Charlottesville episode.


So you are simply going to ignore the evidence I provided.

Anyway, my claim about this issue is that the far right makes money off pundits spreading hate, and at there is no comparable industry of the far left or progressives.

You're trying to claim that their very ideals and presence are a justification to attack them.
The law disagrees with you.
Deal with it.


This is not my claim.

My claim is that there is no alt-left and that the violence perpetrated by groups such as antifa is qualitatively different from the violence of the alt-right.
#14843314
Pants-of-dog wrote:Lol. I asked for evidence that left wing pundits made money off spreading hate and you gave me a link to a Christian apocalypse website that claimed that the Soros is funding antifa.

I then laughed at your incredibly crappy evidence.

Of course you did...

Pants-of-dog wrote:So you are simply going to ignore the evidence I provided.

Anyway, my claim about this issue is that the far right makes money off pundits spreading hate, and at there is no comparable industry of the far left or progressives.

riiight... :roll:

Pants-of-dog wrote:This is not my claim.

My claim is that there is no alt-left and that the violence perpetrated by groups such as antifa is qualitatively different from the violence of the alt-right.

Except its not.
You lose.
Bye.
Last edited by Buzz62 on 13 Sep 2017 19:27, edited 1 time in total.
#14843816
Ya ya yaaa.
That's the best you 2 can do?
Laugh and say the reporter's name isn't really Robinson?
Good for you 2. That's definitely gonna change things.
Interesting neither of you 2 have anything to say about the content of the clip.
But I can understand how saying anything useful to your "cause", might be difficult, when faced with a clip of an Englishman attacked by Muslims, because he has the audacity to walk down a street in ENGLAND!

Enjoy tea time...
  • 1
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10

Christ I am a Leninist and even I am thinking of […]

Trump Takes on NFL

President calls for fans to refuse to go to NFL[…]

If you import right wing conservative religious ty[…]

This is literally insane. Are you talking about[…]