Riots/Police/Social Justice Issues

[DieselDaisy]

Let's not ignore the racism.

Leader of the UK chapter,

Co-founder, Toronto,

The UK version is anti-zionist, descending into antisemitism: https://cherwell.org/2020/06/30/black-lives-matter-oxford-faces-anti-semitism-concerns/

Edited September 14, 2020 by DieselDaisy

[downzy]

3 minutes ago, soon said:

- Jordan Petersons 'post modern marxist (sic)' boogeyman is still out their trying to destroy the nuclear family. Even though in reality his boogeyman only destroyed Peterson himself (nervous breakdown triggered by inability to defend his positions

And people still wonder why I loath Peterson. He has spilt more fuel on this dumb ignorant fire than most. 

[Iron MikeyJ]

2 minutes ago, downzy said:

I guess understand how you would interpret that as calling for the end of the nuclear family, but anyone a little less prejudiced would read that and laugh at the accusation. 

But you’re still a GNR fan, right?  By virtue of being a fan are you not therefore aligned to the worst elements of the group?  This what you’re doing with the BLM movement. 

I'm a fan of gnrs music, but not them personally. If they came out with some things I have major problems with (like BLM being admitted Marxists), then I would reevaluate even enjoying their music. 

[soon]

7 minutes ago, Iron MikeyJ said:

He wouldn't support breaking down of the family unit. He wouldn't support violence. 

Apparently you and King would hate the Early Church who lived communally and shared life as one family.

Also, MLK had relationships with many other leaders in civil rights/liberation who promoted the use of violence. Stockely, X, etc

[downzy]

2 minutes ago, DieselDaisy said:

Let's not ignore the racism.

Leader of the UK chapter,

Co-founder, Toronto,

The UK version is anti-zionist, descending into antisemitism. 

So you’ve found two idiots who claim to speak for an entire movement. It doesn’t discount the broad based cause that brought tens of millions out to peacefully protest this past summer 

[Iron MikeyJ]

You can sympathize with what the cause is trying to accomplish but not align yourself with the movement/organization. The two are not mutually exclusive.

[downzy]

1 minute ago, Iron MikeyJ said:

I'm a fan of gnrs music, but not them personally. If they came out with some things I have major problems with (like BLM being admitted Marxists), then I would reevaluate even enjoying their music. 

Well, I guess I am expecting too much from someone who couldn’t get into the remake of kids movie involving dancing/speaking candle sticks because they included a few black people.

Sorry, that’s on me. 

[Iron MikeyJ]

1 minute ago, soon said:

Apparently you and King would hate the Early Church who lived communally and shared life as one family.

Also, MLK had relationships with many other leaders in civil rights/liberation who promoted the use of violence. Stockely, X, etc

I'm sorry, but you have very little understanding of the early church my friend. Even what you think you know, has so many incorrect aspects to it. To put it bluntly, you've been mislead. 

 

I'm not going down that rabbit hole in this thread though.

[downzy]

1 minute ago, Iron MikeyJ said:

You can sympathize with what the cause is trying to accomplish but not align yourself with the movement/organization. The two are not mutually exclusive.

Exactly. So why do you and others impugn the entire movement because of the actions of a few?  

[DieselDaisy]

Just now, downzy said:

So you’ve found two idiots who claim to speak for an entire movement. It doesn’t discount the broad based cause that brought tens of millions out to peacefully protest this past summer 

They are two leaders of their country's respective international chapters. Sasha Johnson is actually founding a BLM political party.

Returning to the Marxist claim,

She is literally one of the original founders! It could not get more blatant!

[soon]

1 minute ago, Iron MikeyJ said:

I'm sorry, but you have very little understanding of the early church my friend. Even what you think you know, has so many incorrect aspects to it. To put it bluntly, you've been mislead.

Umm... nah

[Iron MikeyJ]

Just now, downzy said:

Well, I guess I am expecting too much from someone who couldn’t get into the remake of kids movie involving dancing/speaking candle sticks because they included a few black people.

Sorry, that’s on me. 

Why is this even an issue here? It has nothing to do with the topic at hand. Typically liberal twattle speak, can't argue my points, so you resort to character attacks. Here is your wanting post for going off topic. 

By the way, you broke the forum rules the other day with DD. Where is your suspension? Oh that's right, you are above the rules.

[downzy]

Just now, DieselDaisy said:

They are two leaders of their country's respective international chapters.

And they are leaders because of why?  They say so?  

You do know enough history of the civil rights movement of the 1960s to know that there were many supposed leaders. Many who were self anointed that shared little to do with the broad base support behind the philosophical and political underpinnings of said movement.

Why would this fight be any different? 

[Iron MikeyJ]

3 minutes ago, downzy said:

Exactly. So why do you and others impugn the entire movement because of the actions of a few?  

But it's not just a few, it's MARXIST leaders that I have a problem with. 

[downzy]

1 minute ago, Iron MikeyJ said:

Why is this even an issue here? It has nothing to do with the topic at hand. Typically liberal twattle speak, can't argue my points, so you resort to character attacks. Here is your wanting post for going off topic. 

Myself and others do respond to your points as best we can. The problem is your points aren’t well thought out or defensible. 

3 minutes ago, Iron MikeyJ said:

By the way, you broke the forum rules the other day with DD. Where is your suspension? Oh that's right, you are above the rules.

I acknowledged I broke the rules. But I’m tired of this forum being used to promote utter nonsense.  It’s exhausting. Tell you what.  You spend thousands of dollars to own and operate a forum while putting in hundreds of hours a year to maintain it and see how much tolerance you have for utter asinine nonsense.

[soon]

8 minutes ago, downzy said:

And people still wonder why I loath Peterson. He has spilt more fuel on this dumb ignorant fire than most. 

Hes absolutely contemptible.

A book I was excited for about Peterson came out in April. Ive held-off reading it since Peterson is out of the game now. But Ill get to its soon enough anyways, since his teachings are still in play. Thought it might be worth a mention for your interest,

Myth and Mayhem, a leftist critique of Jordan Peterson by numerous authors including Burgis, McManus, Trejo

[downzy]

4 minutes ago, Iron MikeyJ said:

But it's not just a few, it's MARXIST leaders that I have a problem with. 

The violence is perpetrated by just a few. That’s a certifiable fact.

Moreover, you and others have not limited your derision to just the marxist leaders, but to the entire movement itself. To claim now that your criticism is narrow is to ignore everything you have previously posted about them. 

[DieselDaisy]

So let's summarise the evidence,

- The founder of BLM (NB., there was no such thing as ''BLM'', either as a movement or an organisation, until she founded it in the United States) said on video: ''we are trained Marxists'' - I mean JESUS, it doesn't get more blatant than that!

- Their website included stuff pertaining to a sort of anarchic-Marxism, relating to the nuclear family and communes. They even use the term ''comrade'.

- The UK's leader states that all white people will become their slave

- Toronto's leader says white people are ''sub-human'' and various other nice things.

- UK chapter, demonstrably ant-zionist (see their twitter feed) posts an antisemitic mural

- Then we have the stuff in the United States that has been recorded by cameras and phones, innocent diners being harassed by antagonistic mobs full of hateful bile. Businesses (some black owned) intimidated, ransacked and torched. The shooting! You are dishing out percentages here (how is that possible?) but these are gigantic mobs of people. It is literally evident, staring you the face,

There are many more that I could post.

The video exists. The tweets exist. The evidence exists.

Yet still...

Well if you are going to be biased, I suppose you may as well do a thorough job!! I once talked myself into believing the Phantom Menace was good.

[Basic_GnR_Fan]

38 minutes ago, DieselDaisy said:

So let's summarise the evidence,

- The UK's leader states that all white people will become their slave

 

Hey there are white liberals who might get off on that!

[DieselDaisy]

9 minutes ago, Basic_GnR_Fan said:

Hey there are white liberals who might get off on that!

[Iron MikeyJ]

1 hour ago, downzy said:

Myself and others do respond to your points as best we can. The problem is your points aren’t well thought out or defensible. 

I acknowledged I broke the rules. But I’m tired of this forum being used to promote utter nonsense.  It’s exhausting. Tell you what.  You spend thousands of dollars to own and operate a forum while putting in hundreds of hours a year to maintain it and see how much tolerance you have for utter asinine nonsense.

Just because people don't share your political ideology does not make them full of "asinine nonsense," Or promoting "utter nonsense." This is the kind of thing I was talking about. I'm simply trying to have a civil dialogue. I haven't attacked your character, yet you have resorted to attacking mine. I did talk about how you run the forum (but that doesn't pertain to the topic at hand). I'm not trying to get you or anyone else to agree with me, I'm just trying to give an alternate view of the current landscape. We don't have to always agree, but civility should be the rule of the day.

[downzy]

58 minutes ago, DieselDaisy said:

So let's summarise the evidence,

- The founder of BLM (NB., there was no such thing as ''BLM'', either as a movement or an organisation, until she founded it in the United States) said on video: ''we are trained Marxists'' - I mean JESUS, it doesn't get more blatant than that!

- Their website included stuff pertaining to a sort of anarchic-Marxism, relating to the nuclear family and communes. They even use the term ''comrade'.

- The UK's leader states that all white people will become their slave

- Toronto's leader says white people are ''sub-human'' and various other nice things.

- UK chapter, demonstrably ant-zionist (see their twitter feed) posts an antisemitic mural

- Then we have the stuff in the United States that has been recorded by cameras and phones, innocent diners being harassed by antagonistic mobs full of hateful bile. Businesses (some black owned) intimidated, ransacked and torched. The shooting! You are dishing out percentages here (how is that possible?) but these are gigantic mobs of people. It is literally evident, staring you the face,

There are many more that I could post.

The video exists. The tweets exist. The evidence exists.

Yet still...

Well if you are going to be biased, I suppose you may as well do a thorough job!! I once talked myself into believing the Phantom Menace was good.

Another fine example of how wooden your thinking is on the topic.

You're taking the words of a few and applying it to a grass roots movement that doesn't take its cues from any one person.  Do honestly think that of the tens of millions who marched in support of the movement that more than 0.1 percent could name one of the leaders you referenced?

As others have pointed out, the fanatical and deranged can be found in any movement, group or association.  It should not to anyone who views these issues without a cynical attitude denigrate the cause or the spirit of the movement.  

Again, you take the most superficial aspects of a movement that has sought to respond to police brutality directed towards one particular group of people as a means of denigrating it.  And you wonder why I have no qualms with calling you a racist.  

[downzy]

13 minutes ago, Iron MikeyJ said:

Just because people don't share your political ideology does not make them full of "asinine nonsense," Or promoting "utter nonsense."

No it doesn't.

Putting forward absurd and uneducated bollocks (to use @Dazey's term) justifies the labels.

13 minutes ago, Iron MikeyJ said:

I'm simply trying to have a civil dialogue.

No you're not.  You're trying to talk about something you have little to no education on and dismiss a very real social movement because you're uncomfortable with it.  

13 minutes ago, Iron MikeyJ said:

I haven't attacked your character, yet you have resorted to attacking mine.

No.  I have attacked your willingness to have a genuine discussion on this matter.  There has been little to no consistency in anything you have written on this topic.  You claim on the one hand that your issue isn't with the movement, that you only really take issue with the supposedly marixst agenda of its self-appointed leaders, and on the other you're in the US politics thread claiming systemic racism isn't a real thing or a problem.  It's quite clear what your problem is with BLM and it isn't limited to some self-anointed pinhead black marxist.  

13 minutes ago, Iron MikeyJ said:

I'm not trying to get you or anyone else to agree with me, I'm just trying to give an alternate view of the current landscape. We don't have to always agree, but civility should be the rule of the day.

Yes, and your alternative view is one that undermines a movement that seeks to promote racial equality by constantly needing to characterizing it with its worst elements.  Your approach here is painfully transparent.  It's possible to both denounce the violence and support the overall cause.  But that's not what you're doing.  For DD and yourself, the violence is inseparable from the cause because, hey look, here are two or three marxists amongst their ranks.  It's just tiring listening to this and expect myself and others to show this attitude any level of respect.  

[Dazey]

16 minutes ago, downzy said:

Another fine example of how wooden your thinking is on the topic.

You're taking the words of a few and applying it to a grass roots movement that doesn't take its cues from any one person.  Do honestly think that of the tens of millions who marched in support of the movement that more than 0.1 percent could name one of the leaders you referenced?

As others have pointed out, the fanatical and deranged can be found in any movement, group or association.  It should not to anyone who views these issues without a cynical attitude denigrate the cause or the spirit of the movement.  

Again, you take the most superficial aspects of a movement that has sought to respond to police brutality directed towards one particular group of people as a means of denigrating it.  And you wonder why I have no qualms with calling you a racist.  

A report published in 2002 showed that approximately 4.3% of catholic priests over the previous 50 years had been habitually fucking kids. The leadership covered it up and refused to report them to the authorities. I'm guessing  we can expect Mikey's rosary in the mail pretty soon?   

https://www.vox.com/2018/9/4/17767744/catholic-child-clerical-sex-abuse-priest-pope-francis-crisis-explained

Edited September 14, 2020 by Dazey

[Iron MikeyJ]

2 minutes ago, downzy said:

No it doesn't.

Putting forward absurd and uneducated bollocks (to use @Dazey's term) justifies the labels.

No you're not.  You're trying to talk about something you have little to no education on and dismiss a very real social movement because you're uncomfortable with it.  

No.  I have attacked your willingness to have a genuine discussion on this matter.  There has been little to no consistency in anything you have written on this topic.  You claim on the one hand that your issue isn't with the movement, that you only really take issue with the supposedly marixst agenda of its self-appointed leaders, and on the other you're in the US politics thread claiming systemic racism isn't a real thing or a problem.  It's quite clear what your problem is with BLM and it isn't limited to some self-anointed pinhead black marxist.  

Yes, and your alternative view is one that undermines a movement that seeks to promote racial equality by constantly needing to characterizing it with its worst elements.  Your approach here is painfully transparent.  It's possible to both denounce the violence and support the overall cause.  But that's not what you're doing.  For DD and yourself, the violence is inseparable from the cause because, hey look, here are two or three marxists amongst their ranks.  It's just tiring listening to this and expect myself and others to show this attitude any level of respect.  

Oh, my... The amount of ASSUMPTIONS in this post.