Ace Nova

This thread is dedicated to whatever you're watching on Netflix, Amazon Prime and Hulu - Movies, shows, etc....what's hot and what's not.... There's also a site I found that lists the most popular (recent) Netflix streams.... http://instantwatcher.com/ So what are you watching?

But who are the fascists? Where is the fascist state? Capitalism/Conservatism/neo-liberalism does not equate to fascism; certainly not in the democracies of the West. If you're an anti-capitalist, anti-conservative, anti-neo-liberal, why not just say that? And calling everyone on the "right" of progessivism, a "fascist" seems a bit derogatory, no?

I was clarifying that "most people" living in the West don't support actual "fascism". So when they refer to "Antifa" as being "problematic" they are referencing the "organization/movement"...not the idea that it's wrong to be an antifascist. The way that people use the word "Antifa" now, imo, seems to be inclusive of the most aggressive and the most radical elements of communists, anarchists, etc...specifically the ones who resort to violence and/or destruction of property when protesting, etc.

The West and Russia led the largest campaign in modern history, defeating fascism in WWII. Upwards of 85 million people lost their lives in WWII fighting fascism (or because of fascism). So obviously being an "antifascist" is not a problem. But there are issues with Antifa as an "organization/movement". The fact that they call themselves "Antifa" and that they "protest/riot" against the entirety of U.S and the West; is a slap in the face to everyone who lost their lives in WWII. It's an insult to anyone (living in the West) who understands history. The U.S., by definition, is not a fascist state, it's not even close. Either is the European Union or anyone else in the West, for that matter. That's likely why the vast majority of the general public view them as either "communists" and/or "anarchists". It would be "one thing" if Antifa protested against actual fascism and/or fascist ideology. But "Antifa" doesn't do (just) that. Their "fight" is against (almost) all of the democracies governing the West and they have further escalated their ideology as being opposed to the entirety of Western Culture/Civilization. What's most unfortunate is that if your were to ask the average Antifa member, why they are called "Antifa", they would give you a canned response that they are "antifascists". The fact that they think the 'West" is a fascist state, is beyond troubling. The irony is that if the U.S. and the West truly were "fascist" states, Antifa would not exist.

I'm not going to start a "movement" against it, if that's what you mean, lol. But I think we should all "call out" cancel culture if/when we think something is "over the top", etc etc etc. Would you consider what happened with the G N'R videos/music being taken down, all over the internet, etc a "product" of cancel culture? Although it wasn't supported by a "mob" of people, the end result "Canceled" our ability to post G N' R music, concert videos,etc on the longest running and largest GN'R fan forum in the world. The "target " so to speak, wasn't "G N' R" but it was meant to "cancel" a huge part of this forum's culture. The "pressure" was put on Youtube, Google, this forum, etc etc to "remove" the videos/music or (possibly) face legal action, etc. And I apologize if I may have forgotten details about what happened. If we're not supposed to discuss it, let me know, I'll edit/erase this post.

You're both "right" in a sense. You both have valid arguments. There certainly is hypocrisy and political bias involved in this discussion. And it's by no fault of your own. The fault lies within the idiocy that is the current political climate of the U.S. and to a lesser extent; the West. In the most simplest terms, as I would explain it to my son... You have a person who thought, "Oh, this guy just "massaged" my shoulder and seemed to smell my hair." (It was caught on video) You have a person who thought, "Oh, wow, this guy just grabbed my genitalia." (It was admitted on voice recording) That is the evidence currently available; it can be proven in a court of law. Which one is the more serious offense? It's much too complex of an issue from a psychological perspective. The first could have potentially harmed the "person" more than the second; dependent on the mental state of the "person". (And the circumstances). The second could have potentially harmed the "person" more than the first; dependent on the mental state of the "person". (And the circumstances). There are a myriad of possible scenarios. We are dealing with conjecture. When two intellectuals (I consider you both intellectuals) deal in conjecture; nothing will get resolved. My 2 Cents.

@RussTCB ...starting the "Cancel Culture" thread, wondering about peoples' opinions.... @downzy @soon @Rovim @DieselDaisy @Swampfox @Oldest Goat @action @Dazey @Len Cnut @SoulMonster... and me....when we see the "Cancel Culture" thread pop up..... When @RussTCB checks in two days later....

Yeah. 4 cases and possibly another one or two. New Zealand considers 4 cases a "surge" @Oldest Goat

Maybe. But the fact that Trump literately admitted to "grabbing them" on tape would make the general public (at least a large portion of it) assume that some of the allegations against him could have substance. That tape is "corroborating" his behavior in certain instances and that behavior would fall in line with some of the things he is accused of. It's like the saying goes, if it quacks like a duck, looks like a duck, then it most likely is a duck. (I'm not saying that's the case with Trump but that's the logic most people follow) The right won't do themselves any favors using Biden's accusers for political gain, imo. They would need to admit Trump has his fair share of accusers. Then they could go on to say that the Democrats are hypocritical for attacking Trump for those reasons by nominating Biden; who also has accusations against him. If the right comes out and tries to portray Biden as some sort of predator (without acknowledging Trump's words and/or accusations) most will laugh it off and think the right are acting as hypocrites. You can't have it both ways and the public will call you out on that type of stuff. In most cases, I don't pay much attention to it until formal charges are brought on. And even then, I would look at the evidence presented, etc, before coming to a conclusion. Unfortunately, in the year 2020, most of the public does not think like that. The vast majority of the public likes to play "Judge, Jury and Executioner" as soon as someone accuses another person (or entity) of wrong doing.

#metoo

I don't think either side does themselves any favors when they attempt to use "accusers" for political gain, especially when the alleged incidents occurred (in some cases) 20+ years ago. There's too much conflict of interest when these allegations (always seem to) surface when someone is running for president, etc. Trump has been a public figure for his entire life so for the majority of his accusers to come out now makes (at least) a portion of the public believe it's being done for political purposes vs. social justice purposes. Same thing goes for when Biden's accusers are used for political gain. A good portion of the public will only see it as a political ploy vs a social justice issue.

As someone who hasn't paid much attention to any of that stuff, it's easy to get those statements confused. (I pretty much did). If this gets any sort of traction on the right (not sure it will because of Trump's history) she may need to clarify her statements.

In reference to her statement saying she “believes his accusers”. I know she cleared up her statement later but she never stated anything along the lines that she “does not think Biden’s accusers are telling the truth.”

Err...slippery slope there, imo. She said she “believed them” but later went on to “clean up” her statement...alluding to that maybe the reason those allegations are getting traction now is because “society has changed”. Decent attempt at a save but still doesn’t quite change her original statement.

Pretty much, other than the back and forth tariffs with China, some back and forth with immigration....and some "miles added" to the border "wall". Illegal immigration issues and border security would have likely been dealt with by either a Democratic or Republican president, imo...prior to Trump. It's unfortunate that the Trump vs media war has lead to the optics that illegal immigration and border security is alt-right ideology now and it's somehow linked to racism...and looks like no one from either side really wants to deal with it for fear of political backlash. Democrats will no longer focus on it (Both Obama and Clinton were pretty tough on illegal immigration and border policy) and who knows how Republicans will deal with it....there seems to be a divide on those issues within the Republican Party as well.

Well, Biden just nominated a VP that thinks he might be a "sexual predator". How is that different?...possibly worse?

Indeed. Demings would have been a better pick, imo for that reason. Demings isn’t on the far left either. She was previously Captain of the Orlando Police Department and her husband was previously Sheriff of Orange County. Both of those Law Enforcement agencies have “pretty good” relationships with the communities here. Seldom do we “hear about” police brutality issues, etc. I would think someone like her would have been an ideal candidate; given the current social justice reform issues. But like I said, If Biden wins, I wouldn’t mind seeing her given the opportunity to become one of his cabinet members. Should be interesting to see how the nation reacts to Harris’ nomination in regards to polls, etc. Although most of those polls aren’t worth the paper they’re written on, imo.

Errr....pretty sure Cruz does not like Trump. But he’s a conservative so he’s falling in line with Trump in order to further conservative policy. And in terms of “policy” Trump has cut taxes, deregulated business, and has nominated 2 Supreme Court Justices.

Yeah, I took a look at his wiki after you posted. He was among the more serious talk shows hosts of the era. I remember now that he developed MS and that was one of the more serious topics that surrounded him. I remember "liking" his show (as much as I can "like" a talk show.) I never really got into most talk shows since I was usually working (or in school) when they were on. But yeah, I would consider him much closer to Oprah or Dr.Phill than shows like Springer, etc.

Nah. Montel was closer to an Oprah Winfrey type than a Jerry Springer type, imo. I don't remember his show being "outlandish". Although I could be wrong on that....it's been a while.

I don't know much about Harris other than a brief internet research. My local Congresswoman, Val Demmings was in the running but I'm guessing Harris got the nod since she seems to have more national exposure. If Biden wins, it would be nice to see a local Congresswoman like Demmings be a part of his cabinet. (I'm still not convinced Biden is going to win easily; unlike everyone else in this thread. lol). I will say though, from the brief research I've done, Harris seems to be pretty tough on crime....or at least she was when she was Attorney General of California. She also worked with Rand Paul on some bi-partisan issues...which is interesting, since Paul is (apparently) on the complete other side of the political compass.

Right. The issues I was referring to that should be handled in a "pragmatic way" are the issues in your 2nd paragraph. I'm not sure if you missed it but I've stated that the major criminal justice cases, "monsters", etc where there already is an overwhelming amount of evidence...those aren't the problem with "cancel culture". The major issues get handled at a faster pace in 2020 with the help of technology but those major issues have always been handled by society. When it comes to criminal and social justice reform, those major issues still need to go through the judicial system and/or congress....regardless of any movement. And even after it goes through the judicial system/congress, etc...society still needs to accept it as being a part of its new "culture". For example; there have been a myriad of "social movements" in the history of the U.S. A good portion of them would be considered "abominations" in 2020. Many of them were created, followed but eventually evolved or lost momentum. The most important ones helped form our current culture. We can even go back further into world history, etc. But for now, we can look at the U.S. as an example.... 9/11 Truth movement Alternative movement Animal rights movement Animal Rebellion Anti-Apartheid Movement Anti-capitalism Anti-consumerism Anti-corporate activism Anti-fascism Anti-globalization movement Anti-jock movement Anti-liberalism Anti-nuclear movement Anti-psychiatry movement Anti-war movement Anti-vaccination movement Asian American movement Autism rights movement movement advocating for the right of people who are considered neurally divergent (anti-psychiatry) Black Consciousness Movement Black Lives Matter Black Power movement Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions Brights movement Chicano Movement Children's rights movement Civil rights movement Conservation movement Counterculture movement Cooperative movement Cultural movement Decolonization Disability rights movement Earth First! Ecofeminism Ecomasculinity Economy for the Common Good Effective altruism Efficiency movement Environmental justice movement Environmental movement Esperanto movement Ethiopian movement Extinction Rebellion Fair trade movement Farm-to-table movement Farm Worker Movement Feminist movement Free culture movement Free love Free school movement Free software movement Gay rights movement Gerakan Harapan Baru (New Hope Movement in Malaysia) Global citizens movement Global justice movement Health at Every Size Health freedom movement Hippie movement Hizmet movement Human rights movement Identitarian movement Immigrant rights movement India Against Corruption Indigenous peoples movement Indigenous movements in the Americas 2017 pro-jallikattu protests Ku Klux Klan Labor movement Landless Peoples Movement (South Africa) Landless Workers' Movement (MST), the landless workers' movement in Brasil Lawyers' Movement in Pakistan Lebensreform LGBTQ social movements (lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender social movements) Mad Pride (psychiatric social movement) March For Our Lives movement Men's rights movement Me Too movement Mothers Against Drunk Driving Multiculturalism Namantar Andolan (Change Movement among Dalits in India) Narmada Bachao Andolan National Cleanup Day Non-cooperation movement Nonviolence movement Occupy movement Occupy Wall Street Organic movement Plogging Popular Assembly of the Peoples of Oaxaca Pro-choice movement Pro-life movement Psychiatric survivors movement Rape crisis movement Rastafari movement Reform movements in the United States Reproductive justice Right to health Right to life Rural People's Movement Scouting Movement Salt March (Salt Satyagraha movement) Skeptical movement Sex-positive movement Sex Workers' Rights Movement Slow Food movement Slow movement Situationist International Social democracy South African Unemployed Peoples' Movement Soviet Jewry Movement Student movement Sunrise Movement Tea Party movement Temperance movement The Zeitgeist Movement Time to Change Time's Up (movement) TrashTag Movement Treatment Action Campaign - movement struggling for HIV/AIDS treatment in South Africa Umbrella Movement Veganism Via Campesina - international peasants movement representing 150 million people, advocating food sovereignty. Voluntary Human Extinction Movement White Wednesdays Western Cape Anti-Eviction Campaign South African movement struggling against evictions Wikimedia movement Women Against War Woman's Exchange Movement Women's liberation movement Women's suffrage movement World Cleanup Day https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_social_movements As you can see, some of them are nothing more than conspiracy theories. But the most important ones developed into cornerstones of our current culture. And every one of them happened well before "cancel culture" (in its current form) was even a "thing".

That's awesome. We need more people like that. That said, the meme was making light of when people sneeze now. People get alarmed because of Covid and could give you a funny look instead of saying, "Bless you".

I agree it's not always the case, just like I stated in my other response to you...but you beat me to the punch. And yes, I think we are mostly in agreement.