-
Check out the relaunch of our general collection, with classic designs and new ones by our very own Pissog!
-
Welcome to Smogon! Take a moment to read the Introduction to Smogon for a run-down on everything Smogon, and make sure you take some time to read the global rules.
General News Discussion Thread
- Thread starter GatoDelFuego
- Start date
- Status
This isn't a freaking free speech issue, it's about the tolerance of violence which my friend is bloody disgusting. No, Antifa is not just communities organizing, they're literal terrorists. We literally went through an entire page discussing the brutal attack on Andy Ngo, and there have been countless other incidents of the being brutal savages. There is a massive difference between speech and violent action, and your inability to differentiate the two is pretty sad. If Antifa was all talk without the threats and calls to violence, I would still not like them, but I would not want their right to speech ripped away. In the constitution, the 1st amendment (freedom of speech) does not defend the following:
- Obscenity
- Fighting words
- Defamation (including libel and slander)
- Child pornography
- Perjury
- Blackmail
- Incitement to imminent lawless action
- True threats
- Solicitations to commit crimes
Also, let me repeat your own words here:
You are such a fucking hypocrite it's not even funny. Clearly, you don't care about violence against people you don't like. That's literally what Antifa does, and that's the shit you're defending.
Last edited:
i am seriously tired of moral equivalency in politics. it's comical to see people arguing about how antifa is a violent criminal organization when just a few hours ago you had a mass shooting by a white supremacist.
so i read his manifesto. explicitly, it says to "not blame president trump, like the fake news media will," but i find it hard to believe that around 3 years of inflammatory rhetoric did not validate this guy implicitly. i find it hard to believe that the fear stoked over immigration by numerous politicians are inconsequential. maybe it will be violent video games or television or the "socialist dems talking about corporations" (the manifesto talked about corporations) that the media will blame this time. not the irresponsible rhetoric propagated by republicans (and some democrats too).
despite mentioning corporations destroying the environment / people this remains a far-right document -- ecofascism or something like that. racial mixing etc. and somehow concluding that despite these self-mentioned grievances with corporations, the enemy remains the undocumented worker. more and more, these types of people highlight capitalism's failures to push towards fascism (i.e. tucker carlson). maybe president trump did not inspire these views within him, but it must be emboldening to see a figure espouse the same talking points on public television. the mentioning of his name in the document's disclaimer spells it all out for me: obviously these views share a mirror in the white house, but i came up with them on my own, and live in a vacuum, so don't blame him too! the fear of 'democrats pandering toward the growing hispanic population' is just about as fundamental as misunderstanding of politics and elections can be.
so i read his manifesto. explicitly, it says to "not blame president trump, like the fake news media will," but i find it hard to believe that around 3 years of inflammatory rhetoric did not validate this guy implicitly. i find it hard to believe that the fear stoked over immigration by numerous politicians are inconsequential. maybe it will be violent video games or television or the "socialist dems talking about corporations" (the manifesto talked about corporations) that the media will blame this time. not the irresponsible rhetoric propagated by republicans (and some democrats too).
despite mentioning corporations destroying the environment / people this remains a far-right document -- ecofascism or something like that. racial mixing etc. and somehow concluding that despite these self-mentioned grievances with corporations, the enemy remains the undocumented worker. more and more, these types of people highlight capitalism's failures to push towards fascism (i.e. tucker carlson). maybe president trump did not inspire these views within him, but it must be emboldening to see a figure espouse the same talking points on public television. the mentioning of his name in the document's disclaimer spells it all out for me: obviously these views share a mirror in the white house, but i came up with them on my own, and live in a vacuum, so don't blame him too! the fear of 'democrats pandering toward the growing hispanic population' is just about as fundamental as misunderstanding of politics and elections can be.
this is a p good snapshot piece on the problems with mainstream economic discourses
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/aug/03/economics-global-economy-climate-crisis
"All models use a few simplifying assumptions, but those underpinning mainstream economics more often distort and detach from reality. It’s one of the reasons why students have rebelled, forming groups to demand that universities take a more pluralistic approach to teaching economics. Katie Kedward left a banking job in the City for ethical reasons and sought a degree that would make sense of economics. Despairing at the unreality of mainstream courses, she found a rare exception: a master’s in ecological economics at the University of Leeds. The course, though, isn’t even taught in the economics department but the School of Earth and Environment. That’s why new groups are emerging to promote heterodox economics, which draws on the insights of the study of complexity, neuro and behavioural science, ecology, feminism and the core economy of family, mutualism and community.
But there’s an awfully long way to go. Late last year, on the day that the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change released its starkest warning yet on the importance of holding global heating below 1.5C, William Nordhaus was awarded economics equivalent of the Nobel prize. Nordhaus is famous for applying conventional economic models to environmental issues. Using his toolkit on climate breakdown, infamously he came to the conclusion that an optimal economic approach would allow warming of at least 3C – the level that climate science shows would cause catastrophic, irreversible change."
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/aug/03/economics-global-economy-climate-crisis
"All models use a few simplifying assumptions, but those underpinning mainstream economics more often distort and detach from reality. It’s one of the reasons why students have rebelled, forming groups to demand that universities take a more pluralistic approach to teaching economics. Katie Kedward left a banking job in the City for ethical reasons and sought a degree that would make sense of economics. Despairing at the unreality of mainstream courses, she found a rare exception: a master’s in ecological economics at the University of Leeds. The course, though, isn’t even taught in the economics department but the School of Earth and Environment. That’s why new groups are emerging to promote heterodox economics, which draws on the insights of the study of complexity, neuro and behavioural science, ecology, feminism and the core economy of family, mutualism and community.
But there’s an awfully long way to go. Late last year, on the day that the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change released its starkest warning yet on the importance of holding global heating below 1.5C, William Nordhaus was awarded economics equivalent of the Nobel prize. Nordhaus is famous for applying conventional economic models to environmental issues. Using his toolkit on climate breakdown, infamously he came to the conclusion that an optimal economic approach would allow warming of at least 3C – the level that climate science shows would cause catastrophic, irreversible change."
For the love of God can we just agree both are really bad? I don't like white supremicists killing people either, it's disgusting, but it's equally as vile that yall insist on defending Antifa (who don't just "milkshake" people, even though they aren't just milkshakes; ik at least one had quick concrete in it, but that's beside the point). We can call out both of them, this isn't a one-sided situation where you need to pick one or the other. How about taking the moral route and call out when people do immoral crap, despite whatever end of the isle it's based upon? Personally, I'm not giving the shooter(s) any creedance, I refuse to know their names and make them known, and I refuse to give their manifestos any light or notoriety. They don't deserve it because, again, they're disgusting people.
Forgive me if what I post here has any ignorant or incorrect information, as I am only trying to analyze things from my own point of view.
This latest incident in El Paso was truly horrible, the survivors and the families of the deceased will be forever affected by this. The person who committed this atrocious crime was clearly out of his mind, there's no doubt about that. But now I ask myself, does it get us anywhere to merely point out the fact that he's a White Supremacist/Nationalist? Does this help to solve the problem? Why don't we look at the root causes that motivated this person to do this, how was his childhood, what kind of things was he taught during such childhood, what experiences did he live so he could end up building this mentality that is so disgusting? If the media and society in general put most of their focus on the basis that he's white and such, I don't think it will get us anywhere.
This will only serve for both sides of the political spectrum to further push their ideas, only cause more division. One side will be more convinced that only white people are fixated on doing these things, it will further increase the hatred towards both white people that commit crimes and those who are entirely innocent, the latter which divides into two groups, those who try to search for the root cause, and those who will become confused and/or frustrated because of how society keeps portraying them these days. The other side will continue to be convinced that we need yet more guns so people can defend themselves, it's a dead end. Nowadays it's super normal to see in social media people bashing against white males just because they are white and male, trying to combat hatred with more hatred, the opposite is also true (aka people bashing black people and such), trying to combat hatred with more hatred, and each side convincing themselves that what they engage to is not hatred, but rather "justice".
When people focus on bashing others based on their race, gender or anything else, most of the time those who ends up bashed and blamed under this basis will become confused, frustrated, and depending on the gravity of their experiences, it will end up making them hate those who blame them irrationally. This results in the other side further convincing themselves of their ideas, creating yet more hatred. And then you have the other side vehemently defending groups like antifa that, despite they don't carry guns (mostly because...I guess they are anti gun? I don't know, I could be be wrong, I've heard of a few that actually carry). They still wreck havoc by employing other things such as rocks, bricks and whatever thing they can get their hands on (Milkshakes being quite popular these days, to the point where I'm pretty sure companies will start to get reluctant on selling milkshakes to people with hoodies...). I've seen videos of these people blocking roads, directing the traffic and in one particular video constantly calling a car driver form North Carolina a "White Supremacist" despite not knowing them at all? But yeah we'd have to look at the root cause of what motivates this group to behave like such, what experiences have they lived, do they get indoctrinated, why do most of them believe that violence and harassment towards a group they believe are the "enemies" is the solution? Situations like these only create more and more division between both sides.
Regarding the gun laws in the US, again, forgive my ignorance but, I honestly don't think that gun laws have much effect on the prevention of shootings. Coincidentally these tend to happen in zones where guns are forbidden to citizens, though I am pretty sure some have also happened in zones with guns. It doesn't make a big difference on how strict the gun laws in that country are, people will find a way to get a gun, any gun, and try to achieve their goal, and if they can't find a gun, they will resort to any other weapon for their objective. Ultimately there's a very strong gun culture in the US, most of them firmly that self defense can be achieved only with weapons (firearms most notably), it would take decades to change the mentality on how people employ guns there (sorry if this is a simplistic point of view, but I'm not too much of an expert regarding USA culture).
This latest incident in El Paso was truly horrible, the survivors and the families of the deceased will be forever affected by this. The person who committed this atrocious crime was clearly out of his mind, there's no doubt about that. But now I ask myself, does it get us anywhere to merely point out the fact that he's a White Supremacist/Nationalist? Does this help to solve the problem? Why don't we look at the root causes that motivated this person to do this, how was his childhood, what kind of things was he taught during such childhood, what experiences did he live so he could end up building this mentality that is so disgusting? If the media and society in general put most of their focus on the basis that he's white and such, I don't think it will get us anywhere.
This will only serve for both sides of the political spectrum to further push their ideas, only cause more division. One side will be more convinced that only white people are fixated on doing these things, it will further increase the hatred towards both white people that commit crimes and those who are entirely innocent, the latter which divides into two groups, those who try to search for the root cause, and those who will become confused and/or frustrated because of how society keeps portraying them these days. The other side will continue to be convinced that we need yet more guns so people can defend themselves, it's a dead end. Nowadays it's super normal to see in social media people bashing against white males just because they are white and male, trying to combat hatred with more hatred, the opposite is also true (aka people bashing black people and such), trying to combat hatred with more hatred, and each side convincing themselves that what they engage to is not hatred, but rather "justice".
When people focus on bashing others based on their race, gender or anything else, most of the time those who ends up bashed and blamed under this basis will become confused, frustrated, and depending on the gravity of their experiences, it will end up making them hate those who blame them irrationally. This results in the other side further convincing themselves of their ideas, creating yet more hatred. And then you have the other side vehemently defending groups like antifa that, despite they don't carry guns (mostly because...I guess they are anti gun? I don't know, I could be be wrong, I've heard of a few that actually carry). They still wreck havoc by employing other things such as rocks, bricks and whatever thing they can get their hands on (Milkshakes being quite popular these days, to the point where I'm pretty sure companies will start to get reluctant on selling milkshakes to people with hoodies...). I've seen videos of these people blocking roads, directing the traffic and in one particular video constantly calling a car driver form North Carolina a "White Supremacist" despite not knowing them at all? But yeah we'd have to look at the root cause of what motivates this group to behave like such, what experiences have they lived, do they get indoctrinated, why do most of them believe that violence and harassment towards a group they believe are the "enemies" is the solution? Situations like these only create more and more division between both sides.
Regarding the gun laws in the US, again, forgive my ignorance but, I honestly don't think that gun laws have much effect on the prevention of shootings. Coincidentally these tend to happen in zones where guns are forbidden to citizens, though I am pretty sure some have also happened in zones with guns. It doesn't make a big difference on how strict the gun laws in that country are, people will find a way to get a gun, any gun, and try to achieve their goal, and if they can't find a gun, they will resort to any other weapon for their objective. Ultimately there's a very strong gun culture in the US, most of them firmly that self defense can be achieved only with weapons (firearms most notably), it would take decades to change the mentality on how people employ guns there (sorry if this is a simplistic point of view, but I'm not too much of an expert regarding USA culture).
Also, I want to mention dice's point about "the line" of immigrants real quick. I said that in a theoretical sense, and that's my fault for not being specific. I meant it as, I find it incredibly unfair to give shortcuts to illegal immigrants, as I've mentioned numerously in these discussions before, I think it's the biggest f u you can give to legal immigrants who have been currently in/have since finished the process for years if not decades to become a full-fledged American citizen. I know people in my personal life, a couple of which who are latino (so no, I don't not care about "people" Myzozoa, and that was a shit personal attack to begin with), that do feel the same--they feel completely disrespected. I don't blame them. Once again, it really should not be controversial to come in the right way and apply for citizenship, asylum, visas for work, what have you. I completely encourage that, because I do believe strongly we're a country made up of immigrants at our core, and that mesh is what makes us uniquely American.
"They still wreck havoc by employing other things such as rocks, bricks and whatever thing they can get their hands on (Milkshakes being quite popular these days, to the point where I'm pretty sure companies will start to get reluctant on selling milkshakes to people with hoodies..."
burn your nikes too
anyway white supremacy is a root cause of this outburst of violence, big difference is the ppl throwing milkshakes at nazis are 'being violent' (read: defending themselves) to discourage these more heinously murderous outbursts.
ps: anti-fa isn't an organization it is just community orgs like Food Not Bombs and ppl that advocate for housing for homeless ppl and equal rights for queer people. antifa don't carry guns unlike neo-nazi groups because they are poorly funded, unlike rightwing extremists groups in America. anarchists love guns too, they just prefer to spend their money on vegan food.
burn your nikes too
anyway white supremacy is a root cause of this outburst of violence, big difference is the ppl throwing milkshakes at nazis are 'being violent' (read: defending themselves) to discourage these more heinously murderous outbursts.
ps: anti-fa isn't an organization it is just community orgs like Food Not Bombs and ppl that advocate for housing for homeless ppl and equal rights for queer people. antifa don't carry guns unlike neo-nazi groups because they are poorly funded, unlike rightwing extremists groups in America. anarchists love guns too, they just prefer to spend their money on vegan food.
Last edited:
Do you think it's working?
whats the alternative? letting them shoot you?
locally it mostly works, nationally anything can be spun to stoke the mobs' anxieties
No because being a centrist doesn't lead to anything productive. Sitting idly by while shit happens and just saying how bad everyone is leads to the current state of America.
i dont get how an unconfirmed tweet from a corrupt police twitter somehow beats out all the people that day drinking those milkshakes
Except it should be a one-sided situation. The right and wrong side of history are usually pretty easy to piece out. Is the moral route really just continuing to live in the current year and spout some nonsense about peaceful protests and talking it out? Or is the moral route actually standing up to the oppressive systems we live in and fight for our rights?
Sure lets just ignore how stuff like this happens and what social pipelines lead down to someone doing something abhorrent like this. I sense a very common trend with how you think. You just want to be able to ignore all the shit in this world. Please stop ignoring it.
A couple things.
1. Violence doesn't fix the "current state" of America, it actually makes things worse and polarizes it more, if it hasn't already.
1.5. What oppressive systems exactly? I find it pretty hard to be oppressed when (I'm assuming) you live in the freest country in the world.
2. It's people like you that contribute to polarizing it because of your 3rd paragraph alone. Perhaps the other side isn't out to get you and take away your rights? Perhaps conservatives vice versa are worried their rights are being ripped away by radical leftist policy that has led to the decline of major cities? It's ok to coincide with differences of opinions, because guess what, the other side is not out to get you as much as you want to think that.
3. Who said I was ignoring it? You're taking me out of context. I said I'm refusing to make the shooter infamous, because believe it or not that's what they want, to be known in this world whether it's for bad or good, because in their screwed-up heads that's the only option they think they have left. That doesn't mean ignore the act, if you noticed that's exactly what I didn't do. If you want one way to help lessen the amount of mass shootings, it starts with our news coverage of them. Don't make their final wishes come true. Let them rot in prison or sentence them to death.
Sidenote: There's something so ironic about Antifa, they try to be the Anti-Fascists when in reality they act almost exactly like the Brown Coats in Nazi Germany. If they're truly fighting against the "facists" (which ones?), they're doing an awful job at it lol
Last edited:
Another day another mass shooting. My heart breaks :(
Absolutely not because last I checked nobody died from being milkshaked. Last I checked Antifa weren't plotting mass murder. Last I checked Antifa didn't drag people out of their homes and string them from a tree or roll them behind a truck, tie them to a fence, and leave them to die.
Disavow all violence, sure, but all violent acts are not on par with each other. I'll never condemn Antifa at the same ferocity as white supremacists, neo nazis, and proud boys. It's baffling that you can't recognize the difference and insist on equating black eyes to bullet holes.
it's not that baffling, the 'i am a awhite man and i am the victim complex' is totally predictable, flare's entire response to this is rapid cycle thru all the iterations of 'i saw marginalized ppl bitching about white male privilege on twitter and it was the worst thing that ever happened to me, so now I empathize w white supremacists'
20 people just died in a racially motivated terrorist attack. Maybe you could have the common courtesy to pick a better time to preach to us how evil a bunch of people throwing milkshakes at some provocative jackass who calls himself a journalist is.
Ah, I see you've taken the "but what about the white male VICTIMS!?" approach.
I mean, this is just startling. How is the answer not, "Yes, it gets us somewhere." If a specific, ideological group shows a pattern of violent, murderous behavior on a mass scale, why the fuck not wouldn't you point it out?
"No no no no surely it's not the fault of the white supremacists writ large, it's those meddling SJWs brainwashing white boys into thinking they're terrorists."
????????
Do you realize how pathetic you sound? No, Antifa does not just freaking milkshake people, Andy Ngo had brain damage following the ruthless beating he had to endure. Ngo was not a unique situation either. It was completely fucked up, as with the recent shootings. What they're doing is digusting, using violence to silence, scare, and intimidate conservative voices. I'm calling against all violence period. It's one thing that the level of violence is not on par, sure I'll give you that creedance for the sake of argument, but it's equally as disgusting that ya'll seriously refuse to condemn them period, because, as the wise man Myzozoa once said: you don't care about violence against people you don't like (and that does not just apply to white supremicists and neo-nazis, it's been applying to pretty much anyone even the littest bit right of the far-left). What ya'll are are hypocrites. I'm condemning the shootings as much as you are, again I hope they get sentenced to the most brutal punishments available and an agonizing as all-hell death, but you're honest savages if you're seriously going out of your way to dodge defending Antifa let alone defend their fucked-up cause at all, you need to seriously consider getting your priorities straight. I'll repeat, you're being complete hypocrites. Sorry, I'm saying it as it is, they're fucked-up people. Defending these actions will not heal the deep wounds that's kept America staunchly divided, it's calling it out on BOTH sides. Get with it, because your so-called "moral supremacy" is not helping.
Last edited:
Enlightened centrist gang time.
Why do you think this? No matter what memes tell you, centrism isn't sitting still saying "everyone is equally bad". You in fact can have the capability to think things need to change while calling yourself a centrist.
and who itt is equating them? Who can't tell the difference between beating ppl up and killing them? There is a massive difference, but...that doesn't make roughing people up in the name of justice ok. Why does thinking antifa is bad/violent/unhelpful to "the cause" need to align you with the white supremacists...?
bro come the fuck on, you cannot think that everybody in the usa lives with as few institutional burdens as you do. You really just ask people to write you off as a loon to spout this
Uhm no, sorry. Please don't twist my words for your own benefits. I am not siding with anyone. This is the problem, instead of actually finding a solution to the problem, people like you prefer to resort to point fingers at people and regurgitating the same narrative. What do you get from this? At what moment I was talking about SJWs? Did I name them that way? As I said before, both extremes are bad, if anything, I despise the White Supremacy ideology, and those who indoctrinate people into thinking that way should be condemned. It is imperative to prevent more people from getting radicalized due to their mental vulnerability, I believe we can all agree on that. Same goes from the other side of the spectrum that keeps convincing themselves that the real issue only resides on one side, blaming society, only resorting to endless blaming without ever thinking "What can I do to prevent this? What can I do to ensure this can happen as little as possible?"
We need to educate the younger generations without ingraining hatred on them, but all you can do is constant blaming and bash against those that are offering perspectives that don't side with your mentality (As I said before, I am not siding with anyone). These incidents only end up creating more division among people, reinforcing their irrational perspectives and making them only blame the opposite side, instead of actually trying to find a solution to the problem. Both the people that indoctrinate this "White Supremacy/Nationalist" ideology and the ones that promote violence against other people because they are convinced their skin color and gender has something to do with the way they act, they aren't contributing much. Violence against violence creates yet more violence (except for very very specific cases throughout history I guess?).
Everytime these events happen, I become more afraid, not only because there's the possibility these atrocious, inhuman incidents can happen a lot more often, but also because there's people that will purposely use this to strengthen their mentality and try to prove themselves right, while there are families endlessly suffering because of their losses, loved ones that they will never be able to see again.
I am deeply sad you used my post for your own convenience, but at the same time this sheds light into how some people think. Still, I firmly believe that at some point we will be able to find a way to reduce this problem to a minimum and maybe, just maybe prevent people from having such irrational perspectives.
I agreed with you up to there. Yes, it's such an unbelievably politicized issue. Prove me wrong and I'll gladly eat dirt. No one has institutionalized burdens, much of it is completely self-diagnosed.
Edit: I'll expand even, if there's, I stress, institutionalized burdens to those non-white and non-male, why is black and hispanic unenployment at an ALL TIME low under the "most racist, bigoted, and all the other shit" president in US history? Why is there an all-female law clerk under "the most savage gang-rapist" supreme court justice? Why is there all-black legislators in America, let alone a Black president for two terms? How much of these "institutionalized racism" under Democrats currently dominating Americas biggest cities, and how much under Republicans? If you can't disprove that or need to resort to the since multibly debunked wage gap and the prison population, please spare me your querries. Once again, check your priorities, some of these are self-diagnosed, others are problems created to justify false, politicized, one-sided narratives. Maybe people are tired of the boy who cried racist? Just a thought.
Last edited:
yah we are all so terrible for not condemning random citizens who fight back against organized murderous organizations, the way they defend themselves from violence is just so violent.
why don't they just roll over and die for the white men who want to murder them using state violence?
what is white privilege good for if you can't even organize a genocide without ppl fighting back? the missing part of your critique is examining the proportionality of events and acts, you keep equating self-defense with violence, which actually if you're paying attention is a suggestion that further violence is justified, since in this view are just 2 bad sides and who can make any sense of the tit-for-tat, after all? these ppl don't just 'disagree' with 'anti-fa', they think leftists should be jailed and executed. Meanwhile these same posters will talk all day about how much empathy they have for mass shooters.
if you cant see ppl making the equation itt, then ur illiterate or have the same users on ignore as me
why don't they just roll over and die for the white men who want to murder them using state violence?
what is white privilege good for if you can't even organize a genocide without ppl fighting back? the missing part of your critique is examining the proportionality of events and acts, you keep equating self-defense with violence, which actually if you're paying attention is a suggestion that further violence is justified, since in this view are just 2 bad sides and who can make any sense of the tit-for-tat, after all? these ppl don't just 'disagree' with 'anti-fa', they think leftists should be jailed and executed. Meanwhile these same posters will talk all day about how much empathy they have for mass shooters.
if you cant see ppl making the equation itt, then ur illiterate or have the same users on ignore as me
Really? Did I say that? I'm pretty sure I just said white supremacists, neo nazis, and proud boys.
The person I quoted. Who also said, "I don't like white supremicists killing people either, it's disgusting, but it's equally as vile that yall insist on defending Antifa "
and
- Status