RE: How Can Trump Unite the Country? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion



Message


ThatDizzyChick -> RE: How Can Trump Unite the Country? (11/11/2016 3:15:53 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: DaddySatyr


quote:

ORIGINAL: Marc2b

This makes no sense. A liberal is a person who believes in equal rights and equal access to opportunity for everyone regardless of race, gender, religion, ethnicity, etc.



... as long as you either agree with them or shut the fuck up about your own opposing viewpoint.



Michael


So not so very different than American conservatives then.




ThatDizzyChick -> RE: How Can Trump Unite the Country? (11/11/2016 3:19:36 AM)

quote:

Actually, that depends on how you define fascism (as well as the 'left' or 'right' movements you compare it to).

No. Fascism is a specific p[olitical philosophy, and as such has a specific definition (which I have given)
quote:

I define right as promoting social and economic hierarchies as the 'natural' order, and left as promoting egalitarianism.
If you agree with me, then fascism is inarguably right-wing.

Your definition is correct, however, that does not make fascism right wing as fascism is and always has been the "third way", neither left nor right.




Marc2b -> RE: How Can Trump Unite the Country? (11/11/2016 3:51:48 AM)

quote:

Oh any number of ways. It could be the military leadership, the landed gentry, members of a given political party or social class, or an ethnic group.


Which, in order, would be: ideology, social class, ideology, social class and racism. The point you are missing is that the whatever distinction is being used to justify a separate ruling elite whether it is "we are better than you" or we are smarter than you" (or usually both) IS the bigotry. I know of no example of an egalitarian fascistic government . . . probably because the term egalitarian fascist is an oxymoron.

quote:

You can repeat and rephrase your opinion as often as you wish, and you will still be wrong.


But you haven't proven me wrong. Give me an example of a fascist government or movement that doesn't incorporate bigotry of some sort into its ideology.

quote:

Oh I don't know, I guess I'm just weird thinking that one ought to understand and correctly use political terminology in a political discussion.


I think it is more likely that you are upset that I call Trump a fascist.




bounty44 -> RE: How Can Trump Unite the Country? (11/11/2016 4:02:29 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Marc2b

quote:

... as long as you either agree with them or shut the fuck up about your own opposing viewpoint.


Wrong.

A liberal believes in freedom of speech for everyone regardless of races, gender, etc. If someone attempts to use the power of government and/or physical violence or threats then that person is not a liberal.



then there are boatloads of "liberals" who have stopped being so. and that's essentially whats being said here.

and that said, there's nothing in your quote above that distinguishes a liberal from a conservative.




Marc2b -> RE: How Can Trump Unite the Country? (11/11/2016 4:26:35 AM)

quote:

then there are boatloads of "liberals" who have stopped being so. and that's essentially whats being said here.


Agreed. There are plenty of people - usually on the extreme left - who call themselves liberals or are called liberals by others who in fact are not liberal but fascists. Remember Melissa Click? Many people called her and her fellow protesters liberals but being that she was against freedom of speech and the press and was willing to use violence then clearly she was not a liberal but a fascist. The people who went around calling her a liberal were primarily right wing facists who wanted to discredit liberalism by lumping it in with left wing fascism.

quote:

and that said, there's nothing in your quote above that distinguishes a liberal from a conservative.


Well, true liberals and true conservatives (as distinguished from the fascists in their wing of politics) are much closer on the political line, so there really isn't much to distinguish them. Differences in opinions on fiscal policy mostly. It is possible to be a liberal (free health care for everybody!) and still be a conservative (but don't raise my taxes!). Also, just as there are "liberals" who are not liberals but left wing fascists, there are "conservatives" who are not conservative but right wing fascists.

Part of the problem with defining terms like liberal, conservative and fascist is that there not always a clear dividing line amongst the people. Someone my be a liberal but still hold a few conservative ideas or vice versa. It is only the terms that are well separated from each other (like liberal and fascist) that are mutually exclusive.




bounty44 -> RE: How Can Trump Unite the Country? (11/11/2016 4:54:19 AM)

you might enjoy this; I posted it awhile ago and it didn't get any traction really:

https://www.theobjectivestandard.com/2012/06/political-left-and-right-properly-defined/

just taking notice your signature---if you think that is an accurate indictment on people who believe in god, you are mistaken. or, as I have said many times here, people like to redefine "hate" for their own purposes.




heavyblinker -> RE: How Can Trump Unite the Country? (11/11/2016 5:09:56 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: ThatDizzyChick
Your definition is correct, however, that does not make fascism right wing as fascism is and always has been the "third way", neither left nor right.


This is what you said:

'Fascism is a political philosophy that places the interests of the state above those of the people or any segment of the people.'

If the state is placing its own interests above those of the people or any segment of the population, then it is enforcing a hierarchy.

Of course, people will start talking about Stalin and Mao, but the common American definition of communism/left-wing societies doesn't fit the original definition at all and is heavily influenced by cold war propaganda. Assuming that they are somehow what the left wants or are the inevitable product of left wing policies is extremely limiting and absurdly dishonest.

The purest expression of left wing ideals is anarcho-communism-- the classless, stateless society that Marx himself described as happening some point in the future. That society is also the exact opposite of fascist society, which unapologetically embraces both class and state as being unchangeable, unavoidable aspects of the 'natural order'.

Fascism is inherently cynical about human nature and sees individuality and especially diversity as something that must be suppressed in favor of some state-created idea like 'the nuclear family', 'the Aryan race' or 'the American dream'-- it provides people with a false identity that can be manipulated to suit the state's interests, while anyone labelled a deviant or misfit is forced to suppress or reject their true identity if possible (eg: homosexuals, Jews) or try to escape (eg: visible minorities, people who refuse to conform or hide). Egalitarianism and the left both actively celebrate and viciously defend the very diversity that fascists seek to suppress (ie: the dreaded SJWs, feminists, multiculturalism, etc).

Fascists manipulate the people through nationalism, populism, religion, anti-intellectualism, xenophobia, fear of degeneracy, and a sense of pride in their race, religion, culture. Other cultures and races are inferior, irrelevant or a threat. This is also how fascists justify their militarism. I don't think you can separate that from the definition of fascism, or link any of those things with the egalitarian left... at least, not unless you're going by the cold war style 'spheres of influence' sense of left and right.

The fascist state will occasionally dole out 'socialist-style' concessions (like free health care or education, for example) and luxuries (Hitler gave everyone a vacation) as appeasements, but this hardly makes anyone equal because there are no labor unions, no civil rights groups, and these concessions are not requested or demanded by the people, nor are they granted in the interests of equality... and often they are only granted in a manner that directly benefits the economic or imperialistic interests of the ruling class.




DaddySatyr -> RE: How Can Trump Unite the Country? (11/11/2016 5:11:39 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Marc2b

quote:

ORIGINAL: DaddySatyr

... as long as you either agree with them or shut the fuck up about your own opposing viewpoint.


Wrong.

A liberal believes in freedom of speech for everyone regardless of races, gender, etc. If someone attempts to use the power of government and/or physical violence or threats then that person is not a liberal.

Do not confuse dissent with censorship. A person using their freedom of speech to disagree with things you say (regardless of whether their being polite about it or not) is NOT a fascist. Disagreement and dissent are not censorship.

The distinction is really not that difficult to figure out. I am a liberal. If I say "fuck Donald Trump" I'm still a liberal. If I say "Trump supporters are ignorant fuckwads" I'm still a liberal. If I beat the crap out of a Trump supporter because of what he said then I stop being a liberal and become a fascist.



I can't believe I'm doing this, but here goes:

I'm not wrong. Eight years ago, when I said that I could not support (then) Sen. Obama because I'd done my due dilligence and checked his senate voting record and as much as we knew about him, back then, and I had judged him to be a socialist, I was immediately labeled a racist by the vitriolic loony left, here.

You, yourself, made a grand re-entrance and said that you hoped that we could try and civilize this site somewhat (shortly after which you excoriated me in a typically Alinskyesque barrage).

When you use terms like "racist" (or "fascist" or any of the "ists" we have), you nullify the message of the person speaking because you dehumanize them. How very progressive of the left. Their parents would be proud.

You see, there's Censorship and then, there's censorship. When the mob shouts down the minority, it's censorship. That is: a silencing of a portion of the population because it makes the self-appointed guardians of free speech get a warm and fuzzy feeling for being morally superior.

Fuck the left and their sanctimonious bullshit.



Michael




ohthat1percent -> RE: How Can Trump Unite the Country? (11/11/2016 5:17:14 AM)

Sorry but those who are saying you hope the dems give him issues sound like children, whining because you lost. Grow up.

The biggest problem with obama and the government is obama doesnt know how to LEAD! Hes a great motivational speaker, but he diesnt know how to unite and have people follow him. You cant demand people follow you because you have a title, thats what obama expected. All presidents had to figure out how to get the opposing party to follow them as president and their leader. Most were capable because they were leaders. Obama is a motivational speaker - not a leader. I know people dont like to hear that but its true.

Trump already leads - its his business - he knows how to get what he wants. I dont think he'll have too much trouble getting people on his side so to speak. He will lead them.

All in all, the proof is clear in the last 8 years, obsmas legacy is a divided government and divided country. That says a lot about his leadership skills. He doesnt have them. He does know how to motivationally speak but no follow through.





WhoreMods -> RE: How Can Trump Unite the Country? (11/11/2016 5:21:42 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: ohthat1percent
All in all, the proof is clear in the last 8 years, obsmas legacy is a divided government and divided country.

Really? That was never a problem in the 'States before 2008, then?




ThatDizzyChick -> RE: How Can Trump Unite the Country? (11/11/2016 5:51:57 AM)

quote:

Which, in order, would be: ideology, social class, ideology, social class and racism. The point you are missing is that the whatever distinction is being used to justify a separate ruling elite whether it is "we are better than you" or we are smarter than you" (or usually both) IS the bigotry.

Darling, I was was describing authoritarianism, not fascism. They are not interchangeable terms.
quote:

But you haven't proven me wrong.

But I have. I have provided you with the correct definition of fascism.
quote:

I think it is more likely that you are upset that I call Trump a fascist.

LOL
Well yes, as I said, I think that political terms should be used correctly, and you used it incorrectly. It is not because it was Trump you referred to (I am in no way a Trump supporter, see I'm a communist), it was because you used the term incorrectly.




ThatDizzyChick -> RE: How Can Trump Unite the Country? (11/11/2016 5:53:13 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: bounty44


quote:

ORIGINAL: Marc2b

quote:

... as long as you either agree with them or shut the fuck up about your own opposing viewpoint.


Wrong.

A liberal believes in freedom of speech for everyone regardless of races, gender, etc. If someone attempts to use the power of government and/or physical violence or threats then that person is not a liberal.



then there are boatloads of "liberals" who have stopped being so. and that's essentially whats being said here.

and that said, there's nothing in your quote above that distinguishes a liberal from a conservative.


I can't actually disagree with this.




ThatDizzyChick -> RE: How Can Trump Unite the Country? (11/11/2016 5:54:37 AM)

quote:

I posted it awhile ago and it didn't get any traction really:

Because it is complete and utter bullshit, that's why.




ThatDizzyChick -> RE: How Can Trump Unite the Country? (11/11/2016 5:57:32 AM)

quote:

If the state is placing its own interests above those of the people or any segment of the population, then it is enforcing a hierarchy.

Incorrect.




ThatDizzyChick -> RE: How Can Trump Unite the Country? (11/11/2016 5:58:49 AM)

quote:

and I had judged him to be a socialist

Your judgement could not have been more off. Obama is not a socialist, he is a conservative.




PeonForHer -> RE: How Can Trump Unite the Country? (11/11/2016 6:07:31 AM)

quote:


Trump already leads - its his business - he knows how to get what he wants. I dont think he'll have too much trouble getting people on his side so to speak. He will lead them.


He can hardly be said to be leading the people if many of them are already angrily demonstrating against him up and down the country, with 'Trump is not my President' being one of their main cries.




Greta75 -> RE: How Can Trump Unite the Country? (11/11/2016 6:39:44 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: WhoreMods
quote:

ORIGINAL: ohthat1percent
All in all, the proof is clear in the last 8 years, obsmas legacy is a divided government and divided country.

Really? That was never a problem in the 'States before 2008, then?

I felt like during Bill Clinton and George W Bush time, they were able to bring both parties together.




Awareness -> RE: How Can Trump Unite the Country? (11/11/2016 6:41:00 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: cloudboy


What steps should Trump take to unite the country?
Yeah, that's not going to happen. The GOP are too exultant and the Democrats are a bunch of whiny fucking crybabies (a legacy of all those university safe spaces - college students are now officially a bunch of fucking pussies).

quote:

How obligated is Trump to follow the GOP playbook and wish list?
That's an irrelevance. Trump and the GOP are bedfellows of convenience. The partisan nature of American politics is devoid of compromise and the concept of working together is foreign to most congressmen and women - and thanks to the black eye the electorate gave the Democrats, the Republicans don't have to.

This is part of the problem - the whiny crybabies simply do not realise the depth of their rejection by the electorate. The Democrats lost the Presidency, while the Republicans kept the Senate, the House and flipped 3 governorships. The Republicans won a governor's race in Vermont. FUCKING Vermont, one of the bluest states around.

The Democrat party needs to be destroyed and rebuilt from the ground up with the socialist leftist influence eliminated from the equation. Socialised medicine and civil rights are one thing - their agenda to engage in thought control of society is quite another. Micro-aggressions, safe spaces, invented pronouns - these are all symptoms of a political class who thinks they have the right to tell people how to think. It's Orwellian bullshit and while I do think Trump will probably be disastrous, the only silver lining is that the current bunch of sellout elitist thought control fucks dominating the Democrats have been well and truly undermined.






Greta75 -> RE: How Can Trump Unite the Country? (11/11/2016 6:44:15 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer
He can hardly be said to be leading the people if many of them are already angrily demonstrating against him up and down the country, with 'Trump is not my President' being one of their main cries.

He is not YET President.

His FIRST Task was to win Presidentialship. That means, he cannot pander to these people protesting against him and just gotta stick to his instinct on who will help him win. Clearly not these people protesting and they didn't help Hillary win. So he was 100% right not to bother with these people in his election campaign.

Now, just be patient and watch. I trust Trump will bring unity. Let him be President first. That's like next year. For now, he needs to plan on what to do.




cloudboy -> RE: How Can Trump Unite the Country? (11/11/2016 6:45:24 AM)

I have not seen many ideas. Trump used to be a democrat and he's not a social conservative by any standard. Conceivably he could pivot to the center on a S.CT nomination, infrastructure spending, and immigration reform. According to many of his followers -- what he says is not to be taken literally -- its just a starting point for him to reach an objective. Now that he's President -- he's more able to reach across the aisle than any traditional Republican. He can pay lip service to social conservative issues but not make any moves there -- by saying something like -- "You know I hate abortion, but we need to give women access to family planning services to cut down on the number of abortions and accidental pregnancies that lead to a lot of family dysfunction."

He might also say, "We've analyzed the immigration problem and we plan to implement tougher border security measures with a reform plan similar to the one passed by Ronald Regan in 1980."

Then he can unite Democrats and Centrist Republican around a decent agenda while circumventing the Tea Party obstructive.

Look at the facts: (1) He does not like to be pushed around or told what to do; (2) he hates orthodoxy; (3) He's from NYC a cosmopolitan city with a huge immigrant population; (4) He's better than Ted Cruz.




Page: <<   < prev  2 3 [4] 5 6   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.046875