Home | Community | Message Board
You are not signed in.
Sign In New Account
Forum Index Search Posts Trusted Vendors Highlights Galleries FAQ User List Chat Store Random Growery


This site includes paid links. Please support our sponsors.

General Interest > Political Discussion
Threaded Mode Threaded  Previous topic Previous  View all topics Index  Next topic Next 

Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Jump to first unread post Pages: | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 |
Re: Is the left or the right more violent? [Re: BANANA.MAN] * 1
    #25577976 -

BANANA.MAN said:
Richard Spencer



idk if he considers himself a white supremecist or a white nationalist or what but hes what comes to mind when you think alt right more than anyone.




Richard Spencer is the one who coined the name "alt-right", so that is probably why he comes to mind.

Yes, Spencer is a self described Trump supporter.

Yes, Spencer is a self described white nationalist.

Yes, he definitely falls on the far right side of the political spectrum.

Unless he has murdered people or attempted to murder people, he is completely irrelevant to this thread, though.




This thread is about specific incidents of violence and quantifying the damage caused by that violence.

This thread is not for explaining modern US politics to Canadians, and if you think white nationalists or anti-Semites would EVER associate with the left in modern America, you clearly don't understand our political situation here.

If you really feel like you need to have a debate about the political affiliations of white nationalists and anti-Semites, please start your own thread




Either provide evidence of these left wing terrorist and include names, links to news articles, and # of fatalities, or please stop posting in this thread.

Edited by waves (10/30/18 06:49 AM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Is the left or the right more violent? [Re: waves]
    #25578064 -

if you beleive in socialism you are a leftist speaking strictly economically. richard spencer is a leftist.

hes an example of a white supremecist/white nationalist who is left winged. all i claimed was that racists and anti semites arent always right winged and falcon asked for an example. if not all anti semites and racist are themselves right wing then violence perpetrated by them shouldnt count as right wing unless you know the persons politics and not just their opinion on race.

trust me you dont need to explain the political situation to me. if anything i should explain it you you because you dont know the difference between right winged values like free enterprise capitolism and small government and left winged values like socialism.

Edited by BANANA.MAN (10/30/18 07:13 AM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Is the left or the right more violent? [Re: The Ecstatic]
    #25578066 -

The Ecstatic said:
Richard spencer is left wing?


did you watch the video?

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Is the left or the right more violent? [Re: BANANA.MAN] * 4
    #25578198 -

What you are describing is Third Positionism; it's an ideology that emphasizes opposition to both communism and capitalism. I encounter these types on the fringes of anarchist communities occasionally, plying their entryist tactics. They market themselves as "beyond left and right", but end up being a combination of reactionary right-wing cultural views and radical left-wing economic views. Usually attempt to mix neo-Nazism, antisemitism, and ultra-nationalism with whatever economic and social issues of the left they want to throw into their toxic stew, including anything from neo-paganism, feminism, animal rights, and radical environmentalism, all the way over to old-left ideologies such as anarchism and Marxism. Third Positionism is, essentially, nothing more than white nationalism with an economically leftist and/or countercultural spin.

If you use a single axis political spectrum then Third Positionism will fall on the left or right, depending on if you are looking at the economic or social aspects, respectively.  One of the many reasons that a single axis spectrum is insufficient.

But if you look into the actually theory behind the ideology, you will start finding that the similarity to left-wing ideology is mostly superficial. For example, take the concept of colonialism: the standard dichotomy would be opposition to colonialism has left-wing proponents, whereas support of colonialism has right-wing proponents. At the surface level it would appear that the third position, which is often opposed to colonialism and other forms of western imperialism, aligns with the left-wing view here; but what if we take a look at why Third Positionists hold this view?

While typical fascists tend to take a patriotic stance and romanticize European imperialism, Third Positionists instead view western imperialism and neo-colonialism as agents of multiculturalism and multiracialism (or, for those given to overt antisemitism, of Zionism) that allow non-white cultural influences to creep into white western nations from the colonies. Conversely, the left-wing criticism of western imperialism and neo-colonialism revolves around them being agents of oppression and inequality used to maintain white supremacy. I hope the incompatibility of these two critiques is apparent.

In practice, although you will find Third Positionists attempting entryist strategies on both sides of the political spectrum, it is with the far-right that most inroads have currently been made. Richard Spencer (at least used to) participates in conservative, not liberal, events. National-anarchists are more likely to be well-received at a 'patriot rally' than an anarchist bookfair. Sure, you can manipulate a single-axis political spectrum to define something as 'left' or 'right' as you prefer, but if you look at the actual ideology spewed by Richard Spencer and many other white nationalists in the USA, you will see that it is fundamentally incompatible with ideologies such as anarchism and communism, which demand a classless society free of imposed social hierarchies.



TL;DR

Third Positionists agree with the far-right on the problem, but differ on the proposed solution. Third Positionists disagree with the far-left on the problem, but (either coincidentally or through attempted entryism) agree (partially) on the proposed solution. An oversimplification, but should help to understand why the difference between the far-right and Third Positionists is mostly cosmetic.


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

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Is the left or the right more violent? [Re: shivas.wisdom]
    #25578271 -

"Third Positionists agree with the far-right on the problem, but differ on the proposed solution. Third Positionists disagree with the far-left on the problem, but (either coincidentally or through attempted entryism) agree (partially) on the proposed solution. An oversimplification, but should help to understand why the difference between the far-right and Third Positionists is mostly cosmetic."

what do you mean they agree on the problem? racism is not a right winged idea. plenty of right wingers strongly oppose racism. what makes racism right wing? i can clearly see how they are leftist. support for socialism and opposition to the free market. racism isnt a right winged value. free enterprise capitolism and limmited government are right winged values. you are saying "they agree with the far right" but you arent articulating what about racism is right winged.

i just havent been able to draw that connection. but i appreciate your civility and willingness to have a discussion without implying that im stupid.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Is the left or the right more violent? [Re: BANANA.MAN] * 4
    #25578421 -

You are correct in stating that nothing about racism makes it an inherently right-wing idea; a large portion of influential leftists throughout history have also held racist views. That a 19th century anarchist was also an antisemite doesn't necessarily reflect in their anarchist theory, in the same way that a white supremacist who supports free enterprise capitalism doesn't mean the theory is racist itself.

But we should remember that another important aspect of political identity, equal to economic theory, is social beliefs. In this aspect, the social progression that is associated with the left-wing has, quite resoundingly, renounced racism as acceptable. Meanwhile, the right-wing, associated with conservatism/traditionalism, has at least partially attempted to hold onto racism as a valid social belief. So, while racism may not have anything to do with economic theory (except perhaps in explicitly racist systems like nazism), when it comes to social beliefs, racism has become a 'traditional' belief no longer supported by the more progressive elements of society.

This is why ethno-nationalists like Richard Spencer are not accepted within left-wing circles. His social views regarding racism are incompatible with current left-wing progressive views, regardless of any similarity that may exist economically. Meanwhile, while traditional conservatives may not entirely agree with the Third Position on economic issues, there is nothing that currently makes it completely unpalatable to the right-wing either. The biggest taboo for the right-wing, in todays political climate, is communism not racism, and the vast majority of third positionists are explicitly anti-communist.

To summarize, in our current society racism is not a socially progressive value and as a result racism has become a socially conservative position - which is what connects it to the right-wing these days.


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

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Is the left or the right more violent? [Re: shivas.wisdom]
    #25579011 -

the republicans freed the slaves, Eisenhower supported desegregating public schools, they passed the civil rights act of 1964, a higher percentage of republicans than democrats supported the voting rights act of 1965. and i already debunked the "southern strategy" in another thread not too long ago.

some leftwingers dont consider themselves progressives. some conservatives do consider themselves progressive. the progressive conservative government is in power in Ontario right now.

while i consider myself a social conservative aswell as a fiscal conservative and dont consiser myself a progressive, race makes no difference to me. id rather have kids with a woman of colour who shares my values than a white socialist. there is no question. i fony see any reason 3hy that conflicts with my values and i would consider myself very far right. not only do i detest redistribution of wealth i wabt as little government intervention as possible in the market. thats what far right means to me. but with the way its being used i geuss "far right" can suddenly mean leftism + racism.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Is the left or the right more violent? [Re: BANANA.MAN] * 2
    #25579029 -

BANANA.MAN said:
the republicans freed the slaves, Eisenhower supported desegregating public schools, they passed the civil rights act of 1964, a higher percentage of republicans than democrats supported the voting rights act of 1965.



how much of the above do you think is actually relevant wrt today's american conservative?





BANANA.MAN said:
while i consider myself a social conservative aswell as a fiscal conservative and dont consiser myself a progressive, race makes no difference to me. id rather have kids with a woman of colour who shares my values than a white socialist. there is no question. i fony see any reason 3hy that conflicts with my values and i would consider myself very far right. not only do i detest redistribution of wealth i wabt as little government intervention as possible in the market. thats what far right means to me. but with the way its being used i geuss "far right" can suddenly mean leftism + racism.



thanks for not being a racist, seriously, but the rest of that?  i guess no further comment is best.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Is the left or the right more violent? [Re: relic] * 1
    #25579068 -

well tbh i will grant that the civil right act isnt very right winged. i dont beleive anybody is entitled to anyone's labour and a private business owner should be able to refuse service to anyone they want. i dont think its right to discriminate based on race but who am i to tell someone what they have to do in the confines of their own private business? whether or not government intervention was nessecary in this case is a different discussion but government intervention in private business isnt exactly right wing. i would say the voting rights act is right wing.

public schools in general arent right wing but thats the law is set up so that education is a responsibility of the government so desegregating them isnt not right wing. freeing the slaves is right winged as everyone should have the rights to life liberty and property.

shiva said right wing also means conservative social values. i was saying i dont see how its a conservatuve social value when the republican party has been fighting racism so long.

Edited by BANANA.MAN (10/30/18 05:45 PM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Is the left or the right more violent? [Re: BANANA.MAN] * 1
    #25579084 -

Quote:
they passed the civil rights act of 1964, a higher percentage of republicans than democrats supported the voting rights act of 1965



Lol, so fucking what ? Two weeks later in SF the Republican Convention nominated Barry Goldwater who voted against that , two months after that a democrat , who also opposed civil rights switched parties and began the southern strategy and remaking the Republican Party to appeal more to white voters .
  The Republican Party wasn’t even the same by the time the 80s rolled around , most of the republicans that voted for the civil rights act got defeated or left .  The replican house minority leader ( who worked hard to get CR passed ) was actually deposed by his own Caucasus right after the civil right vote happened .
  Your bullshit is really dishonest .


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


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Is the left or the right more violent? [Re: Psilynut2]
    #25579136 -

i already debunked the southern strategy very recently and i really dont wanna type everything out again but heres what i said in the thread. if you want to check it out so you can see all the replies and get the context its called "Dear Dinesh D'souza." sorry for being lazy.

BANANA.MAN said:
didnt know Dinesh made a movie. ill have to check it out.

republicans had already gained alot of support in the south during Eisenhower's presidency in the 50s, before the civil rights act. and after Eisenhower had supported desegregating public schools. the younger southerners became republicans but the older ones stayed democrats and many of them are still democrats today. only one democratic senater out of 21 became republican after the civil rights act was introduced. the others either continued to be elected as democrats or were replaced by other democrats. republicans didnt get the majority of congressional seats in the south until 1994. richard nixon who is often accused of inventing the southern strategy lost in the south in 1968.

robert byrd (who acheived the rank of "exalted cyclops" whatever that is supposed to mean, in the KKK) died a democrat in 2010.








BANANA.MAN said:
koods said:
Robert Byrd was honored by the NAACP for rejecting his racist past.


the point isnt that the democrats are the racist party. the point is that racist, southern democrats didnt just get fed up after the civil rights act was introduced and run to the republican party. neither party's platform is racist in this day and age. but old southern democrats largely stayed democrats. you would need to be able to point to a flood of racist democrats turning republican for the theory of the southern strategy to make sense.


BANANA.MAN said:
1976


and 82% of republicans and 78% of democrats supported the voting rights act of 19965.

if the racist southern democrats were fed up because of the civil rights movement then why did they go to the party that was in favour of the civil rights act? 80% of republican lawmakers wanted the civil rights act as opposed to under 70% of democrats.

northern democrats were largely in favour of the civil rights act but the southerners werent. still doesnt explain why they would switch parties to the party who supported what made them want to switch parties in the first place. and they didnt. old southern democrats laregly remained southern democrats . a shift in the voting demographics of an AREA doesnt mean a significant amount of racist INDIVIDUALS changed their voting patterns.


BANANA.MAN said:
koods said:
Because the president was a Democrat. Democrats were the party that was viewed as infringing on the rights of southerns to be racist.


i support capitolism and therefore i expect the conservative party to advance my cause. if anti capitolist laws get passed when we have a conservative prime minister, im not going to suddenly go to the liberals or new democrats who are already anti capitolist. and if i did that i would have no reason to expect either party to do a better job than the cons.

if a bunch of southern democrats switched even if your claim that they decided to switch parties because they were fed up by the passing of the civil rights act and wanted to stick it to democratic politicians then surely it couldnt be because they expected the republican party to uphold their racist interests better and become the party of racists. that wouldnt make sense.

and why did the democrats win the southern states in 1976? fid they decide they werent racist anymore and left the racist republicans then decide they are racist again and switch back?

can you point to some examples of southern democratic lawmakers who switched parties abruptly after the civil rights act was introduced?


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Is the left or the right more violent? [Re: BANANA.MAN] * 2
    #25579527 -

BANANA.MAN said:
well tbh i will grant that the civil right act isnt very right winged. i dont beleive anybody is entitled to anyone's labour and a private business owner should be able to refuse service to anyone they want. i dont think its right to discriminate based on race but who am i to tell someone what they have to do in the confines of their own private business? whether or not government intervention was nessecary in this case is a different discussion but government intervention in private business isnt exactly right wing. i would say the voting rights act is right wing.

public schools in general arent right wing but thats the law is set up so that education is a responsibility of the government so desegregating them isnt not right wing. freeing the slaves is right winged as everyone should have the rights to life liberty and property.

shiva said right wing also means conservative social values. i was saying i dont see how its a conservatuve social value when the republican party has been fighting racism so long.


Can you please stop with this ridiculous notion that the Republican Party of the the late 1800s and early 1900s has any resemblance to the current party. Republicans USED TO BE SOCIALLY PROGRESSIVE. I don’t understand why you keep repeating this.

In 1964, the racist supporters of southern wing of the Democratic Party were betrayed by the National party’s support of civil rights. Many Southern democrats were swept out of office in 1964. They didn’t switch parties. They never had the chance. The racist southern voters punished the democrats for their support of racial integration. While that year the democrats had major national gains, they lost big time in the south. racist southerners abandoned the Democratic Party in favor of republicans.


--------------------
NotSheekle said
“if I believed she was 16 I would become unattracted to her”

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Is the left or the right more violent? [Re: koods]
    #25579644 -

you have no evidence koods. southern democrat lawmakers largely stayed democrat. and many are democrats today so its not that they "didnt have a chance to switch parties". and you sound so sure of why the south is now republican, but you cant explain why the south was democrat in '76 did they decide they arent racist then decide they are racist again and go back to the racist republicans?

changes in the voting demographics of an area arent always the result of changes in the voting patters of individual residents of that area.

switching to the party that passed the peice of legislation that made you leave your own party makes no sense.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Is the left or the right more violent? [Re: BANANA.MAN] * 1
    #25579786 -

Wait wut now? Who do you think passed the civil rights act? The president was
A Democrat. The house was democratic control. The senate was democrats. Are you really that obnoxious that you’re giving the republicans credit? Jesus Christ you people are living in an alternate universe.

You can’t explain why the south voted Democrat in 1976? I didn’t realize that required an explanation, since the reason is obvious. The Democrat was a southerner. The republicans were generally rejected nationwide that year, the first election after watergate.


1960


Deep South rejection of democrats is plainly obvious
1964


--------------------
NotSheekle said
“if I believed she was 16 I would become unattracted to her”

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Is the left or the right more violent? [Re: koods]
    #25579810 -

i meant a higher percentage of republicans were in favour of the civil rights act than democrats my mistake.

ok so its more complicated than you made it sound and people change their voting patterns based on more than the civil right act. why was the drmocratic candidate a southernerwith southern support if southerners went to the republican party? then why did the south switch back? it doesnt add up. they made the republicans the party of racists then did they make the democrats the party of racists again then switch back to making the republicans the party of racists again? or did they decide they werent racist anymore then decide they are racist again and go back to the republicans? which is it?

the republicans were not rejected nation wide. look at the map i posted. there is a pretty good amount of red.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Is the left or the right more violent? [Re: koods] * 3
    #25579832 -

Look at it another way. The elected representatives from southern states almost universally voted against the civil rights act, while the opposite is true else where



Southern whites started to peel off from their traditional democratic support when the national democrats started to overtly support civil rights.

One thing is clear from that voting data... southerners and their representatives were racist as fuck.


--------------------
NotSheekle said
“if I believed she was 16 I would become unattracted to her”

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Is the left or the right more violent? [Re: koods]
    #25579856 -

BANANA.MAN said:
i meant a higher percentage of republicans were in favour of the civil rights act than democrats my mistake.

ok so its more complicated than you made it sound and people change their voting patterns based on more than the civil right act. why was the drmocratic candidate a southernerwith southern support if southerners went to the republican party? then why did the south switch back? it doesnt add up. they made the republicans the party of racists then did they make the democrats the party of racists again then switch back to making the republicans the party of racists again? or did they decide they werent racist anymore then decide they are racist again and go back to the republicans? which is it?

the republicans were not rejected nation wide. look at the map i posted. there is a pretty good amount of red.


1976 republicans really started to lose seats in the northeast and Midwest. You would think that 1976 looks like a lot of red but it was a huge loss compared to 1972



--------------------
NotSheekle said
“if I believed she was 16 I would become unattracted to her”

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Is the left or the right more violent? [Re: koods]
    #25579877 -

ok so you are saying the democrats were the party of racists, then the republicans were, then the democrats were again, then the republicans were again. wouldnt it make more sense to say that neither party is racist seeing as it was more a matter of south vs north regardless of party? and that since both parties have had southern support and both parties have been in favour of anti discrimination laws there is no party of racists? i have said from the beggining that neither party is racist.

what piece of racist legislation did the republicans ever introduce? if they are supposedly the party of racists then surely the records will show that racism was one of their causes. if richard nixon supposedly pandered to southern racists for votes then what were some examples of racist, republican policy?

and it still doesnt make sense that nobody can point to a flood of southern, democratic, lawmakers switching parties. did they not get the memo that the plan was to make the republicans the party of racists? did they want to lose what they stood for just because of party loyalty for no cause? werent they also upset by the passing of the civil rights act?

"One thing is clear from that voting data... southerners and their representatives were racist as fuck."

no disagreement there.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Is the left or the right more violent? [Re: BANANA.MAN] * 3
    #25579896 -

I think I’m done explaining this. You are either being intentionally obtuse or you are actually obtuse.


--------------------
NotSheekle said
“if I believed she was 16 I would become unattracted to her”

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Is the left or the right more violent? [Re: BANANA.MAN]
    #25579901 -

whether or not the racist southerners switched parties doesnt really matter. i was just saying i dont think racism is a conservative social value.

what im saying is i dont see how racism is associated with right wing values. and also that there are left wing anti semites and white nationalists. so i dont see why white nationalist/supremecist or anti semitic violence should be considered right wing without knowing about the individuals personal politics.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Jump to top Pages: | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 |

General Interest > Political Discussion
Threaded Mode Threaded  Previous topic Previous  View all topics Index  Next topic Next 

Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* Arab citizens of Israel fear being targeted again RandalFlagg 834 5 08/29/05 04:20 PM
by Los_Pepes
* PROOF ISRAEL IS KILLING PALESTINEAN CHILDREN!!!
( 1 2 3 all )		 Teiro 6,769 51 10/29/02 10:16 AM
by Innvertigo
* Israel's Democracy Dilemma
( 1 2 all )		 Zahid 4,571 22 11/08/03 10:19 AM
by Psilocybeingzz
* Israel-US Approved Ethnic Cleansing
( 1 2 all )		 headphone 5,133 20 09/03/01 08:05 PM
by zetek
* How Israel Helped to Spawn Hamas zouden 573 2 01/28/09 03:41 PM
by Luddite
* Israel violates cease fire
( 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 all )		 Hank, FTW 7,067 127 09/06/06 05:09 PM
by Redstorm
* Are Jews Who Fled Arab Lands to Israel Refugees, Too? wingnutx 592 0 10/13/03 02:52 PM
by wingnutx
* Jew Banned from Israel for Supporting Palestinian Rights
( 1 2 3 all )		 zahudulallah 4,805 47 12/03/04 09:02 PM
by Krishna

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Enlil, ballsalsa
4,102 topic views. 5 members, 0 guests and 84 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Show Images Only | Sort by Score | Print Topic ]
Search this thread:

Copyright 1997-2026 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.026 seconds spending 0.006 seconds on 16 queries.