The Politics Thread (PLAY NICELY!)

I hate to tell you, but that's just two people.

The popular of the USA is slightly higher. "America" is different again, sorry.

Also, gorbles, by your personal logic, the practice of Islam has a non-zero percent, has killed people, and cannot be tolerated. The percentages, especially among their own countries, make neo-nazi influence undetectable by anything less than an electronic microscope by comparison.

Just in America alone, between all the causes of violent deaths, neo-nazis should get special legislative focus, when Islam, domestic street gang, cartel, and various "activist groups" including neo-nazis and antifa, receive focus.

That's the statistical order, you can't focus on the very last thing because **** conservatives specifically, then open up the definition of neo-nazis to include any Republican voter. We can't make BLM illegal and then make it illegal to even be black or Democrat either, it's wrong in much the same way.

Except, antifa does just that when they assault and vandalize. Any non-liberal target will do, widen the definition where neo-nazis means existing in the collision path with one of their baseball bat or cinder blocks.

Thus, we just enforce the crime that the individual commits, rather than outlaw opposing political parties. Enforce crime equally.

That picture is how the majority act. Do you have statistics portraying anything even resembling a 20% racist population?

No, statistics support that racism is sensationalized, and the norm is diversity and community. Gtfo with your division, you don't even interact with all this toxic racism you claim exists, we're some wild-west tv show to you, your political observation of us is merely fanfiction.

Your musings are literally not canon. Submit your fanfiction to the nearest trash can like all the other lewds and softporn anime tiddys go.

Probably more people get hurt or die from falling down stairs or similar stupid reasons (never mind road accidents or smoking or drinking, etc.) than from the kind of violence neo Nazis or antifas perpetrate, at least in advanced nations like ours, but people enjoy hating other people far more than hating stairs or accidents, and that's why the media blows this bs to such ridiculous proportions (and that's why you all are posting in this thread instead of a thread about airbags or whatever). It's not the media's fault. In fact it's no one's fault at all. It's human nature. Y'all are just bored and looking for entertainment. And as long as this thread, and the rest of the media deliver it, you'all are going to keep posting, and clicking, and refreshing, and getting worked up and riled, because you love it.

I'd rather just play PA. It's about a billion times more fun and interesting to me, but hey, I am just one person with weird tastes, so carry on and don't mind me.

So if an illness has less victims than leukaemia, we shouldn't treat it?

This is how absurd that comparison is.

Bonus points for pretending problems don't exist. It must be nice to have that luxury

It is. It truly is. And I am grateful to my family and my ancestors for buying that luxury for me with their sacrifices, so that I can have the peace of mind to study and think things through, and arrive at conclusions like the following which neatly solve the philosophical problem of left versus right ideologies:

Both neo Nazi and antifa ideologies are stupid, and so marginal as to influence almost nothing in our advanced societies. The only function they perform is to entertain uneducated people who lead boring lives. Hence why the media focus so much on them, and hence why this is probably the biggest thread in this forum.

You still didn't read my bloody post. If you did, you'd see the solution I presented, and you'd realize I also explained the nuke thing. Until you move on, I will ignore you.

Also, PSA: no one reply to icycalm. Please, for the love of all that you hold dear, do not engage or otherwise admit he exists. Thank you.

http://www.rawstory.com/2017/09/pro...ownplaying-white-supremacist-violence-report/

????

????

?!?!

What a surprise!

Where did anyone say Islam didn't have problems?

Yeesh man. At least try to think before posting.

Which post did I not read?

The one where you talked about history classes taken? No solutions proposed that I'm able to read. No admittance that Nazis were not, in fact, nuked. In fact, the US took in most of their scientists to make nukes happen.

The one before that, where you called my posts meaningless? No solutions proposed (that I can see). No admittance that Nazis were not, in fact, nuked. In fact, this is the post where you claimed that.

So there's only one post between that and this. One post. If I need to go further back, maybe you need to link it.

And also maybe clarify the whole "America nuked the Nazis thing". Perhaps with actual sources.

I think this should tell you enough about Icycalm's political opinions.

Icycalm, get the **** out of this thread.

I don't moderate much here, but please don't try to push away people from the discussion like that.
If you don't want to talk with certain people about certain topics then ignore them.

The points I raised in the previous page are pretty uncontroversial, and that's why I posted them here. The passages from my philosophy site that Stuart quoted are not the kind of thing I would discuss or quote here, and I am not comfortable with these quotes appearing in this thread. If a moderator can remove them, I would appreciate it.

Yes, you found a media report that Russia, not even a major influence to American media ffs, nor internet influence (Google has the largest impact on internet information), influenced American media somehow to some effect with some attempt and reported with some accuracy.

What a surprise. /Sarcasm

Numbers, gorbles. You know they're pathetic and prove that thousand times more people die for monetary gain or from a personal longtime friend in domestic violence, than do for their skin color.

This same argument supports defending Islam from Extreme Islam, how can't it support prosecution of an extreme right and left, but not the entire right and left, ffs?

It's strawman? Then HOW. They are all extremists in miniscule numbers, police outnumbers all extremists put together by a hundred to one. All extremists should be judged by crimes individually, no group should be prosecuted on the spot without due process.

Also, historically, slavery acculturated Africa to technology. Which is assanine, the West should have gifted technology and not resorted to slavery of a foreign people. We had our own manpower, we could have immigrated foreigners with fair pay and liberty. We fucked up as a society back then.

I will chime in briefly here because I feel there is a pattern going on with a lot of the members.

There appears to be a strong "libertarian" perspective present on this thread. Every libertarian knows how difficult it can be to hold any constructive debate pertaining to issues within public policy, society and ethics, which is likely why there is a lot controversy present on this thread. Based upon the two current issues presented, nazis and net neutrality, I will try to highlight these points and emphasize the reasoning behind some of these controversial perspectives. I hope such a discussion will inform and possibly educate those why some members appear obtuse in libertarian reasoning.

---

Nazism: From a libertarian standpoint, the presence of Nazi's in a society may not appear to be an issus. Because of the ideas behind libertarianism fall within the idea of free will, there is a general consensus that people are allowed to believe and think in what they want as long as it isnt interfering with another person's well being. Also, because libertarians take the perspective of a minimal state, something that philosopher R.Nowzick discuss in detail within his book -Anarchy, State, and Utopia-, government shouldnt take issue with the existence of nazis as long as they dont jeapordize their existence (Think of alien invaders pillaging everything).

Alot of the controversy with Nazis is .... well they pillaged everything..... so they could be considered a threat to the state. However, a libertarian could make the argument that there arent enough to cause a threat to the state.... This, I feel, is why there is sooooooo much discussion on dem nazis within this thread. Under a libertarian perspective, an organization whose entire existence is to exterminate everything but their own is allowed to exist; ideas like racism are no different.

----

As for net neutrality, I feel my understanding from a libertarian perspective may be misleading. Ultimately, the argument of net neutrality is based behind numerous factors that I believe go beyond what the FCC is doing at this time.

For example, one poster made the argument that his internet only costs him 30$ for X,Y and Z. While this may seem amazing, especially in the USA, a libertarian can have multiple issues with these regulations. One reasoning could be that the internet isnt considered a utility, like water and electricity, so government regulation on the "internet" doesnt meet the minimal state requirement. There are likely many more arguments for and against that go beyond the libertarian framework so this may not be a good enough argument for such a sensitive issue.

I most likely didnt do the libertarian argument any justice, so I apologize for any misrepresentation of the ideas presented here. Personally, I believe the libertarian perspective is often one of the most misunderstood things within society and politics. Its unfortunate too; I believe there is some good in a minimal state approach. I understand the concerns with the perspective though; libertarians could also perceive slaves as private property; a scary thought!



Also, I found this comedian: J.Pie. He holds a weekly rant about the news and many of his talking points are very entertaining. Take 5 minutes out of your time to watch a video; you wont be disappointed.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...-attack-right-wing-demonstrators-in-berkeley/

Dahm, looks like the russia bots have taken over washington post! The nazis are spreading everywhere! Breitbart must be stopped at all costs! Does their evil plan to do evil far right things have no limit?!

The majority presence here is some kind of neomarxist left - a differing amalgam of SJW authoritarianism and economic interventionism. It's hard to put a descriptive label on it because it severely lacks a structured, internally coherent first principle foundation.

Probably best to think of it as an echo of whatever happens to be deemed to be mainstream socially acceptable. Of which you can generally discover/generate ideological positions by asking what idea will give the advocate of said idea the most social benefit while incurring the least social risk.

That's exactly right, although with some of the posters in here it's gone beyond the point of a simple misunderstanding. The small government, classical american conservative/british liberal perspective has been explained to these people in great detail.

I'm much more acidic and trolling in my posts now adays because of this. You can't reason with people who don't want to reason, and trust me I tried in good faith for a fair amount of time. A certain individual for example still hasn't attempted in any sense to grapple with the question of defining Communism.

Some people here still act out their belief in this false notion through their support of socialism/communism, minimum wage and any other number of economic regulations and redistributive policies. It's all the same thing whether it be in the economic or social realm. "People are being violently exploited under voluntarism, therefore we must use the guns of the state to bring about justice". Not realising the contradiction that initiating force to take the economic product of people's time is itself slavery.

You've got it somewhat right. The libertarian argument on net neutrality pivots around a nuance - that the US ISP market is hardly free market to begin with and NN is just regulation fixing problems created by prior regulation, as is what happens when you use static low resolution solutions (regulation) to fix dynamic high resolution problems (resource allocation and management). So there are two endpoint libertarian positions though most will fall into the first,

1. Against net neutrality. The bandaid might help but it's also playing sleight of hand and making us think we don't have to deal with the real problem anymore.
   
2. For net neutrality as it's better than nothing. Although I'd rather just abolish the FCC/monopolistic state regulation and solve this problem root and stem.

The NN debate is filled with all kinds of corporate lobbyist misdirection. Some people have been tricked into thinking bandwidth is a limitless resource, while others seem to think ISPS's are going to spend $$ building x capacity and then charge high prices such that only half of that capacity gets used because "profit"(??). Both are illogical, the latter illogical scaremongering. Bottomline, net neutrality has the effect of forcing small bandwidth players to subsidise big bandwidth players because you can no longer practice price discrimination. There are corporate interests in sheeps clothing behind this, make no mistake.

Think about it like this. Should postal companies be allowed to offer premium/express parcel delivery services where you pay more for quicker delivery? Should we pass a parcel neutrality law? Tiered delivery speeds are only bad if the company has the power of monopoly exploitation. And you can only gain that power through co-opting state force via regulatory capture etc. That is the root of the problem. You can replace [tiered delivery speeds] with anything else under the sun and it would also hold true.

It's kinda funny too how scatterbrained some "liberals" are, because advocating for regulatory measures is actually motivated from a psychologically conservative position (safety and security over the "unknown").

Neomarxist left



Look at the Rational Man™, folks, for He has returned to grant the thread His Blessings. He knows all, He sees all. He is infallible.

Gorbles, great arguments as always.

Writing more words and making it sound a bit fancier doesn't make them better arguments. I put in as much effort as others do in this thread, tit for tat.

But you do you, go and stick up for the Rational Man™. He obviously needs the help

So you say things the Washington Post is writing are reliable now? I thought they were part of the "msm" that ignores the antifa problem? So the "msm" is not ignoring the problem anymore? Good for you.

Let's have a link about the cultural impact of Neo-Nazis and the demographics that tolerate or otherwise diminish their importance and actions.

https://rewire.news/article/2017/08...public-profile-grave-concern-disabled-people/