I find this insinuation troubling. I also know you don't try to insult me but calling me "close to a Nazi apologist" isn't exactly an honor.
All I said is that they were ready to die for their beliefs, not that killing innocents and robbing people from their right to disagree with their beliefs (or face severe consequences) was good. Being fanatic is not good and I don't see how me saying they were true to their beliefs can be considered any kind of apology
alhoon is not a member of the infamous Hoons: a (fictional) nazi-sympathizer KKK clan. Of course, no Hoon would openly admit affiliation to the uninitiated.
"Angry Uncle Gordon" describes me well.
_______________________________________________________
Beta-tester for Darthmod Empire, the default modification for Empire Total War that does not ask for your money behind patreon.
Developer of Causa Belli submod for Darthmod, headed by Hammeredalways and a ton of other people.
Developer of LtC: Random maps submod for Lands to Conquer (that brings a multitude of random maps and other features).
Oh, well... it seems I was somewhat optimistic there.
https://edition.cnn.com/2019/10/30/p...yke/index.html
Still, there is no evidence I was too optimistic.
CNN is not unbiased by any means but still, the newspaper tries to be present the news even if they twist the meaning and present it in a negative light. I.e. they don't make such things up. They just make sure that people like me learn them.
alhoon is not a member of the infamous Hoons: a (fictional) nazi-sympathizer KKK clan. Of course, no Hoon would openly admit affiliation to the uninitiated.
"Angry Uncle Gordon" describes me well.
_______________________________________________________
Beta-tester for Darthmod Empire, the default modification for Empire Total War that does not ask for your money behind patreon.
Developer of Causa Belli submod for Darthmod, headed by Hammeredalways and a ton of other people.
Developer of LtC: Random maps submod for Lands to Conquer (that brings a multitude of random maps and other features).
The problem is that among the beliefs of these people was their right to violently annihilate any opposition and they fought for (against, actually, right?) their countries to become dictatorships. Next time you feel tempted to say something positive about these people: "They fought for their country", think twice.
Last edited by mishkin; December 12, 2019 at 02:15 AM.
Yeah, but the guy broke down because a couple of senators of the other party were meanies + he wasn't just called "unqualified", he was called a lot of things. I am not sure he has the work ethic required by a judge.
Also, this breaking down in tears was IMO a publicity stunt or else the now federal judge is a snowflake.
I.e. he's not somewhat below bar, he's much below the bar, an empty suit that got the position because ???. Sure, the democrats probably have installed such people when they controlled the senate on the other side but two wrongs don't make a right.
It is a bad sign although still, as you said, it's not a too bad sign. It's a bit alarming though. 6/160 is not that great but 0/160 is better...
I mentioned those problems in my post Mishkin. And many of them turned their countries to devastated graveyards etc etc. I have no admiration for them.
As I said to Ludicus in the post you quoted, being a fanatic is not a good thing and I don't see how saying what I said can be considered any kind of apologism for them.
I would go to the black-and-white view of "you can't say anything good about bad people" but that's not the point here. Frankly, I don't see what made you and Ludicus to call me "close to Nazi apologist".
Now to the black and white view of "you can't say anything good about people progressives consider bad thing:
This comes back to the topic and Trump.
No, because Trump is a butthole and his jokes are more often than not inappropriate doesn't mean they are not funny. They are.
Also, just because the partisanship in USA has painted Trump as the new bad guy (frankly, he's better than Bush 2) doesn't mean I can't say his hilarious jokes aren't hilarious or that I can't agree with some of his actions.
It is a dangerous and divisive view to say "you can't say good things about Trump! You have to either condemn what you disagree with or stay silent about those things you don't disagree with!"
Those draw imaginary lines in the sand and give a "you're with us or against us" mentality.
Yes, Trump is a butthole. He is bad for the environment but good for business. He's bad for divisiveness, income equality and racial relationships but he doesn't start wars. His tweeting is much below the dignity of the office but his jokes are often funny. He is corrupt, an attention whore and a conspiracy theorist on top but ... [I ran out of good things to say the list of bad things goes on though.]
Last edited by alhoon; December 12, 2019 at 06:40 AM.
alhoon is not a member of the infamous Hoons: a (fictional) nazi-sympathizer KKK clan. Of course, no Hoon would openly admit affiliation to the uninitiated.
"Angry Uncle Gordon" describes me well.
_______________________________________________________
Beta-tester for Darthmod Empire, the default modification for Empire Total War that does not ask for your money behind patreon.
Developer of Causa Belli submod for Darthmod, headed by Hammeredalways and a ton of other people.
Developer of LtC: Random maps submod for Lands to Conquer (that brings a multitude of random maps and other features).
alhoon, yous said thar Franco, Hitler and Mussolini fought for their countries. Literally. Without any nuance or clarification
So funny.
Donald J. Trump (on twitter regarding the Times person of the year thing): So ridiculous. Greta must work on her Anger Management problem, then go to a good old fashioned movie with a friend! Chill Greta, Chill!
detestable that a public office makes these jokes, detestable that some people laugh.
Last edited by mishkin; December 12, 2019 at 06:57 AM.
All of them were soldiers who fought in wars their countries were involved in, so yes, they literally fought for their countries. I don't see why you think this is controversial.
Okay, fun police.Donald J. Trump (on twitter regarding the Times person of the year thing): So ridiculous. Greta must work on her Anger Management problem, then go to a good old fashioned movie with a friend! Chill Greta, Chill!
detestable that a public office makes these jokes, detestable that some people laugh.
Yes, he certainly meant that they fulfilled their obligation to the army like any other citizen and not that it is commendable that they were real nationalists ready to "fight for their country" (also known as torture, take a coup d'etat, provoke internal and external wars, kill entire groups of the population etc).
Last edited by mishkin; December 12, 2019 at 12:00 PM.
Last edited by mishkin; December 12, 2019 at 02:52 PM.
For example, anyone who feels it appropriate to try to shame others on the internet for what they find funny.
For the most part, US elections aren't decided by those who are solidly in one camp or the other. Sar1n's analysis is pretty spot on. For a lot of Americans, one of the most (or even only) appealing qualities Trump has, is his ability to upset the right people. I remember a time when the left had close to a monopoly on pissing off self-righteous public moralizers, but those days seem to be long gone. I'm pretty sure Trump rode to victory largely on the "F... you" vote, and it wasn't just contempt aimed at one end of the political spectrum, it was against the whole establishment. Trump's unrefined dickishness is exactly how he sells himself as an outsider, and his most emotive critics do the bulk of the footwork for him, disseminating it all across social media.
I agree to an extent. At the same time, I haven’t seen actual data indicating that Trump won due to protest voters, nor do I think people who vote Trump just to “own the libs” somehow have a more coherent position than others who consider “wokeness” to be a qualification for public office. Also, let’s not forget Hillary won the popular vote by a few million, so the idea that Trump succeeded in presenting himself as a hero of the common man is suspect on its face.
Of these facts there cannot be any shadow of doubt: for instance, that civil society was renovated in every part by Christian institutions; that in the strength of that renewal the human race was lifted up to better things-nay, that it was brought back from death to life, and to so excellent a life that nothing more perfect had been known before, or will come to be known in the ages that have yet to be. - Pope Leo XIII
The fact that he won by tipping a few crucial places by a narrow margin, thus winning despite the popular vote does indicate that he wasn't relying on entrenched voters, but swinging the undecided and passive crowd in some way. He did not succeed in swaying many, yet. But those few were enough to tip the balance in crucial places. He succeeded to present himself as anti-establishment, hero of the common people to them.
You're showing typical issue with US politics, and that is the two party dichotomy entrenched in the thinking about it. Trump's main appeal wasn't being "anti-lib" or "anti-dem" or even conservative, though he did include these tendencies to pander some parts of his audience. It was anti-establishment. He openly gave finger to the people on top, those that drove people away from politics and so on. He'd have the same success and put on the same show if he'd been with Democrats instead.
One part of his success is that he's really a brilliant speaker, at least in the context of US politics and language. Yes, he talk a lot of . But really, people are too used to politicians lying to them that the substance of the speech becomes secondary. Trump works the tone, fluency, stress, the emotion behind the speech and is able to deliver absolute crap with utter conviction.
Again, we are talking about a billionaire born to money who lost the popular vote by a considerable margin. His own White House budget proposes cuts to Medicare and Medicaid, something opposed by most Americans. His tax cuts favored the wealthy and corporations over lower income Americans, per more of the same trickle down gospel the political establishment has adhered to since Reagan. His denial of the existence of climate change and rollback of environmental regulations are also at odds with the sentiments of most Americans. To claim Trump is anti-establishment or pro-common man is dubious on its face, and I haven’t seen compelling data to support that claim.
Of these facts there cannot be any shadow of doubt: for instance, that civil society was renovated in every part by Christian institutions; that in the strength of that renewal the human race was lifted up to better things-nay, that it was brought back from death to life, and to so excellent a life that nothing more perfect had been known before, or will come to be known in the ages that have yet to be. - Pope Leo XIII
There's a bit problem you're ignoring, one that Trump exploited to the fullest.
American politics have a long history of polarization. The result is that politics are opaque, with too much hidden crap, contradictory information being fed by different media, and in the end, rational thinking has been almost completely removed from the process. In American politics, swing voters who decide rationally and check the facts are now even smaller minority than in other countries. Most people are either entrenched or biased voters, or a passive, disillusioned crowd.
With those, fact don't really matter. They either discard them as the other side's propaganda, or because "politicians keep f*king us over anyway, what's the difference". Trump managed to play not the facts, but the emotions present in the passive, previously nonvoting crowd. Like I wrote, he did not appeal to many. But with Democrats pandering to their own echo chamber and presenting the worst possible candidate to counter such tactics-a consummate politician, already involved in some shady stuff and dragging US into wars, especially after the validity of the primaries was questioned-it did not take much, and even then it was close.
And now, four years later, not only did the Democrats fail to formulate a counterstrategy to that, allowing him to entrench his position, they apparently can't even recognize his approach and their own failures that are helping him. If defeating Trump in next election is really what their leadership wants...
Last edited by Sar1n; December 12, 2019 at 06:56 PM. Reason: typos...
I did.
I also didn't think it needs a clarification that "fighting for your country" is not a carte blanche that excuses launching bloody civil wars or installing brutal dictatorships.
I also don't think that me saying they fought for their country (fact) is in any way apology for their crimes and I don't understand how "You said thing XXX that I consider as good about people we consider bad" is apology or something that should never happen.
Shouldn't I refrain from saying "Hitler was a vegetarian" because vegetarians would take this as an apology for Hitler killing millions? Should I refrain from saying George Papadopoulos (Greek dictator) helped the farmers with some of his reforms (that weren't voted for, we had a junta that killed people). Should I refrain from saying Assad is a well educated and competent doctor because well educated opthalmologists may be insulted?
No. There's no reason to refrain from any of this.
And there's no reason to refrain from saying "Trump makes funny jokes occasionally"
It is a very lame joke, it's not funny. It is also one of the tamest attacks Trump ever did, if it even counts as one. Calling Greta to "chill" is not an attack. Saying she's got to work on her (imaginary) anger issues is an attack but nothing major.
It's not funny either though.
About detestable: To be honest I agree with you that the PotUS should not go to that level and I would prefer if people didn't insult children. It is not proper. It is... distasteful not detestable (since it wasn't a big attack). Had he mocked Greta's disabilities (like he did with that reported in 2015) that would have been detestable.
alhoon is not a member of the infamous Hoons: a (fictional) nazi-sympathizer KKK clan. Of course, no Hoon would openly admit affiliation to the uninitiated.
"Angry Uncle Gordon" describes me well.
_______________________________________________________
Beta-tester for Darthmod Empire, the default modification for Empire Total War that does not ask for your money behind patreon.
Developer of Causa Belli submod for Darthmod, headed by Hammeredalways and a ton of other people.
Developer of LtC: Random maps submod for Lands to Conquer (that brings a multitude of random maps and other features).
It seems pretty obvious to me.Well, Trump is pro-Trump.
------
Well, to be fair, the right also loves the "Ironic Usage of the Nazi Salute" and even the "Ironic anti-Semitism" Digital Anti-Semitism: From Irony to Ideology - Jewish Review
I guess we (the left) don't have a broad sense of humour. So, here it goes. Donald Trump Insult Generator Link It's..hmm...funny?
Last edited by Ludicus; December 12, 2019 at 07:29 PM.
Il y a quelque chose de pire que d'avoir une âme perverse. C’est d'avoir une âme habituée
Charles Péguy
Every human society must justify its inequalities: reasons must be found because, without them, the whole political and social edifice is in danger of collapsing”.
Thomas Piketty
What does any of that have to do with Trump being anti-establishment or pro-common man? Trump didn’t have the support of the majority of the voters to begin with, and has struggled to crack 50% approval, while actually having net disapproval, throughout his presidency. These and the previous presented are basic facts which contradict your claim. For someone who has couched his argument in parsing pro or anti-establishment trends from the “two party dichotomy,” you sure talk alot about Democrats, and haven’t presented any data to back up your opinion.
As for Democrats “pandering to their echo chamber,” core issues in the party platform, including increased taxes on the wealthy, Medicare for All via a public option, raising the minimum wage, and prioritizing government action to protect the environment, are supported by the majority of Americans. Here again, the facts don’t line up with your assertions, and simply asserting that “people don’t care about facts” doesn’t absolve you of them.
If the shoe fits....
Last edited by Lord Thesaurian; December 12, 2019 at 07:40 PM.
Of these facts there cannot be any shadow of doubt: for instance, that civil society was renovated in every part by Christian institutions; that in the strength of that renewal the human race was lifted up to better things-nay, that it was brought back from death to life, and to so excellent a life that nothing more perfect had been known before, or will come to be known in the ages that have yet to be. - Pope Leo XIII
Chaplin's speech as it relates to Trump...that makes me smile. Who else agrees with me?
Il y a quelque chose de pire que d'avoir une âme perverse. C’est d'avoir une âme habituée
Charles Péguy
Every human society must justify its inequalities: reasons must be found because, without them, the whole political and social edifice is in danger of collapsing”.
Thomas Piketty