Nov 2023 Mod notice:
There may be other, more specific, threads about some aspects of US politics, but this one tends to act as a hub for all sorts of related news and information, so it's usually one of the busiest OTC threads.
If you're new to OTC, it's worth reading the Introduction to On-Topic Conversations
and the On-Topic Conversations debate guidelines
before posting here.
Rumor-based, fear-mongering and/or inflammatory statements that damage the quality of the thread will be thumped. Off-topic posts will also be thumped. Repeat offenders may be suspended.
If time spent moderating this thread remains a distraction from moderation of the wiki itself, the thread will need to be locked. We want to avoid that, so please follow the forum rules
when posting here.
In line with the general forum rules, 'gravedancing' is prohibited here. If you're celebrating someone's death or hoping that they die, your post will get thumped. This rule applies regardless of what the person you're discussing has said or done.
Edited by Mrph1 on Nov 30th 2023 at 11:03:59 AM
I've been treating this as a discussion on what the laws should be, not on whether or not they should be followed.
I don't think that violence outside of self-defense is bad because it's illegal, I just think it's bad, period.
Still a great "screw depression" song even after seven years.You'd probably find yourself opposed and reviled by many of those who were victimized by these very same undesirable ideologies in horrific ways and yet managed to survive their ordeals with their lives as well as a modicum of sanity, and decided that preemptive measures against these ideologies and their adherents are far preferable than to risk having anyone else going through the same suffering.
Like, remember the judge who recently opined about the sad irony that male politicians are the ones trying to decide for women whether or not they have a right to decide what to do with their bodies (including abortion)? The logic is more or less the same when it comes to this subject; AFAIK none of us have been personally victimized by racists in the same manner that survivors of the Holocaust have (or even any manner).
Edited by MarqFJA on Nov 23rd 2018 at 1:35:39 PM
Fiat iustitia, et pereat mundus.And if the path you're insisting on taking ultimately leads to a second Holocaust happening because you refused to preemptively crack down on an obvious Neo-Nazi group?
Fiat iustitia, et pereat mundus.![]()
Thats a fairly ridiculous slippery slope.
I don’t really have any objection to violence, I have an objection to things that don’t work. Preemptively trying to wipe out an ideology through violent means is 100% guaranteed to not work, and very likely to make things worse. If your end goal is for that ideology to be discredited and diminished and its targets free to live their lives without fear, then that’s not the way to do it.
Of course, if your end goal is the temporary satisfaction gained from revenge I could see why you’d advocate for that.
Edited by archonspeaks on Nov 23rd 2018 at 2:43:15 AM
They should have sent a poet.![]()
Now? No. But two years ago I would've told anyone that it would be inconcievable for someone as openly and proudly vile a person as Donald Trump would become POTUS even with as much tampering as Russia did with the election, and that the GOP would throw all sense of rationality and what little morals they may have still had in favor of clutching onto petty political power.
Edited by MarqFJA on Nov 23rd 2018 at 1:44:04 PM
Fiat iustitia, et pereat mundus.Seeing as undertaking violent purges to remove groups seen as potential political opposition was a big part of what made the Nazis so nefarious, as well as many Communists during the 20th century (the Cultural Revolution was heavy on the whole message of "kill them first before they kill you", often to literal levels), you can see why I don't think too kindly of this tactic. It's not immoral just because they're Nazis, it's immoral period.
Edited by AlleyOop on Nov 23rd 2018 at 5:49:26 AM
A couple of news bits:
Trump takes bid to restrict transgender troops to Supreme Court
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-court-transgender-idUSKCN1NS292
The flag of diversity flutters at the U.S. Embassy in San Jose, Costa Rica, as a show of support for the lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) community in Costa Rica, June 3, 2016. REUTERS/Juan Carlos Ulate/File Photo Trump announced in March that he would endorse a plan by Defense Secretary Jim Mattis to restrict the military service of transgender people who experience a condition called gender dysphoria. The policy replaced an outright ban on transgender service members that Trump announced last year on Twitter, citing concern over military focus and medical costs.
But judges in federal courts in Washington state, California, and Washington, D.C., refused to lift injunctions that they had issued against Trump’s original ban to allow the updated policy to be enforced.
The judges said the new policy was essentially the same as the original ban, or was merely a plan to implement the original ban, which they had ruled would likely run afoul of the U.S. Constitution’s guarantee of equal protection under the law.
The government’s appeals of those rulings had been moving forward. The San Francisco-based 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals heard oral arguments in one case it is handling in October.
But by seeking high court review before the appeals courts have ruled, which has been a hallmark of the administration’s litigation strategy, the government said it wanted to ensure that the Supreme Court would be able to review the dispute before its term ends in June 2019.
Associate of Roger Stone in plea talks with Mueller
https://apnews.com/83a7e797f6eb48399bbe9530e4bce9a3
Jerome Corsi told The Associated Press he has been negotiating a potential plea but declined to comment further. He said on a You Tube show earlier this month that he expected to be charged with lying to federal investigators, though he said at the time that he was innocent of wrongdoing.
Mueller’s team questioned Corsi as part of an investigation into Stone’s connections with Wiki Leaks. American intelligence agencies have assessed that Russia was the source of hacked material released by Wiki Leaks during the 2016 election that damaged Hillary Clinton’s campaign. Mueller’s office is trying to determine whether Stone and other associates of President Donald Trump had advance knowledge of Wiki Leaks’ plans.
Edited by sgamer82 on Nov 23rd 2018 at 3:56:10 AM
On using violence, how victims of atrocities would have preferred that had happened before their tragedies, that seems like a hindsight situation.
Since it seems like we're all on the same page about preventing things from even getting to that point, and differ on what an effective (and also moral) way of doing so, I also have to say I find myself uncomfortable with the whole "preemptively suppress horrible views with violence" thing, and I imagine it's possible to make things better without having to do so.
Edited by LSBK on Nov 23rd 2018 at 5:54:36 AM
We can agree to disagree, then. (In all honestly, I'm not certain that the way I'm suggesting is the best way. I guess part of it is that I'm so tired and pissed off at seeing all the "civilized" ways either apparently failing time and again or only making progress at a glacial pace.)
... Has anyone kept a list of all the times that Trump tried to order something be done, only to be told by his advisors that the POTUS explicitly lacks the power to do so? (e.g. Posse Comitatus Acts prohibits him from ordering troops to the border for the express purpose of blocking the approaching caravan of immigrants with lethal force) Better yet, has there been any leaks of him throwing a tantrum over the vast amount of restrictions on presidential power that he only discovered to exist after taking the office?
Edited by MarqFJA on Nov 23rd 2018 at 3:09:58 PM
Fiat iustitia, et pereat mundus.@sgamer: Why the hell is Trump so obsessed with this issue? Do transgender troops make him uncomfortable beyond imagination (it wasn't even a thing in his campaign)? Even Mattis told him to let it go, but I guess he just cannot let go of better LGBT rights without putting up a fight.
Life is unfair...Unfortunately this is kind of just how progress goes, it’s a slow and fitful thing. Sometimes you make a huge leap, sometimes you’re set back, and sometimes not much happens at all. I’ll point out that we’re still battling institutionalized racism against black Americans 150 years after slavery was abolished.
To quote MLK, “The arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends toward justice.”
They should have sent a poet.I thing people are conflicting a lot of stuff in this idea of speaking with nazis.
Let start: first not all radical are like nazis, they are plenty of people with horrible views that can go along because they dont preach extermination: anti vaxer(who fault have let to measle and other preventable diseables outbreak), religious nutjobs, etc.
If you are going to talk with a nazi(or other uber radicals), you have to follow diferent rules, in part because most of them are going to cheat: ether by lying, ether by trying to find your gotcha moment and so own, so you need to be quite a dick and put some zingers in it because they will try to get the best of you, this is specially truth in the age of the internet were many think "debating" is just "own with LOGIC and FACTS!"(A fact that it end filling the new atheism movement with douchebags), they are going to cheat and one need to know it.
If you talk in a public space, we need someone who need to put the foot down, otherwise you wend with confuse centrist who end agreeing with the nazis because he was pleasen with it, which is a problem here because some of those people KNOW how to be pleasent and throw people off because the jackboot isnt kicking people or demanding camps around the corner.
And about violence...is hard to said, is less about the violence itself but power: nazi like group understand more about showing of force than violence, there is a reason Pol and other forum talk about "not showing your power levels", this group ger around for the power trip, take that and the emperor is without cloths.
"My Name is Bolt, Bolt Crank and I dont care if you believe or not"I'm surprised at the Religious Hardliners saying they're doing it out of compassion and faith.
There is no compassion in ill-treating those who are serving their Country in it's Armed Forces, simply because they happen to have a different gender or different perspectives. No excuse for it either.
So much for "Support the Troops" I suppose. The extra statement being tacked along on the end being "As long as you are exactly like us in looks, mind and rigidity of thought."
I hold the secrets of the machine.Trans people have become one of Trump’s default targets. He can’t target gay people without being called out for it, since even a decent number of Republicans support gay marriage at this point. But trans people have been entering the public eye more and more in recent years, and the majority of people either dislike or don’t care about us, which makes us an easy target, like immigrants.
A lot of the "ME AND MY GUN" crowd are just posturing. It's a Toxic Masculinity thing. They want to look cool and intimidate minorities to prove how manly they are. It's like Racist LARPing.
You can tell the ones who are really serious about shooting up all the enemies of White Nationalism because they show up on the news after eliciting some thoughts and prayers.
Same reason he's "so obsessed" with building that wall of his. He doesn't like minorities.
Trump does not need any other reason than not liking a person or group to justify attacking them, whether verbally or politically. He's not doing it for brownie points with his base. He's not trying to distract us from a larger issue. He's not enacting a Machiavellian seventeen-stage master plan.
He's attacking people because he hates them. Trump is a very simple creature.
Edited by TobiasDrake on Nov 23rd 2018 at 7:33:11 AM
My Tumblr. Currently side-by-side liveblogging Digimon Adventure, sub vs dub.Has this been posted yet?
"Somehow the hated have to walk a tightrope, while those who hate do not."

The problem with that line of argument is, while it's true enough, it's really hard to come up with a solution other than following the law that doesn't give power to the people with the guns and even less respect for the law.
So you start punching neo-Nazis. Are you going to punch the cops when they come to protect the neo-Nazis? They'll shoot you. Are you going to punch sovereign citizens carrying AK-47s? ...No. No, you are not. You're going to call for aggressive law enforcement to take them down, if you know what you're doing.
And I really wouldn't equate MLK and Gandhi with Antifa. Completely opposite tactics. And while sometimes breaking the law is the right thing to do, punching Nazis is, in fact, not the appropriate tactical measure if you're not willing to follow when and if such a tactic leads to violent escalation.
EDIT: Though I did just notice something that may devalue my argument. We haven't seen nearly as much protesting by the actually-armed twits since Trump's election. Is it possible that the sovcits aren't fans of the alt-right? ("Pfft. Amateur hour.")
Edited by Ramidel on Nov 23rd 2018 at 11:08:41 AM