Steve Bannon at the Oxford Union

[Ten oz]

11 hours ago, Alex_Krycek said:

Not really.  When considering the current polarized political climate you have to understand all the factions at work, on both the right and the left.  You keep wanting to deny the existence of fringe groups on the left, because it contradicts your narrative perhaps?

Reconquista and the Nationalist Front of Mexico is not a left or right group which exists in with the U.S.. Steve Bannon had an office in the White House. Steve Bannon campaigns for Republican politicians and helps them get elected. Steve Bannon's opposition are Democrats. Some radical group in Mexico has nothing to do with the left wing of the Democratic party. I am not denying radical groups exist. I am simply pointing out that the groups you are naming (ANTIFA, Reconquista) have no support from or attachment to Democratic party. When White Supremacist wearing Nazis  paraphernalia chanting "Jews will not replace us" marched on Charlottesville their organizers made it clear they supported Trump. From Charlottesville in this video David Duke (KKK Grand Wizard) says he and his people are there to fulfill the promises of Trump and speaks to having voted for Trump. Nothing nuanced there. Straight up the KKK and other White Power groups directly associate  themselves with Trump and the Republican party. No such relationship exists between ANTIFA and the Democratic Party. 

[dimreepr]

one day we'll recognise the value of both, rather than condemning the antipode.

[Alex_Krycek]

10 hours ago, Ten oz said:

Reconquista and the Nationalist Front of Mexico is not a left or right group which exists in with the U.S.. Steve Bannon had an office in the White House.

Don't think those groups have allies in the United States, especially the southwest?  Think again. 

Quote

Steve Bannon campaigns for Republican politicians and helps them get elected. Steve Bannon's opposition are Democrats. Some radical group in Mexico has nothing to do with the left wing of the Democratic party. I am not denying radical groups exist. I am simply pointing out that the groups you are naming (ANTIFA, Reconquista) have no support from or attachment to Democratic party. When White Supremacist wearing Nazis  paraphernalia chanting "Jews will not replace us" marched on Charlottesville their organizers made it clear they supported Trump. From Charlottesville in this video David Duke (KKK Grand Wizard) says he and his people are there to fulfill the promises of Trump and speaks to having voted for Trump. Nothing nuanced there. Straight up the KKK and other White Power groups directly associate  themselves with Trump and the Republican party. No such relationship exists between ANTIFA and the Democratic Party. 

There's a logical fallacy in your argument.  You're basically arguing that because some fringe groups vociferously support certain elements of Trump's policies (such as immigration reform), then such support is necessarily reciprocal, i.e. that Trump and Bannon support the right wing fringe groups in return.  This isn't born out by the facts. 

'Ethno-nationalism – it's losers,' he [Bannon] said. 'It's a fringe element. I think the media plays it up too much, and we gotta help crush it.'

'These guys are a collection of clowns,' he added.  - Steve Bannon, speaking to the Daily Mail  SOURCE

Bannon again denounces the white nationalists in his Oxford Union speech.  Trump did the same with the KKK and David Duke. 

"David Duke is a bad person, who I disavowed on numerous occasions over the years," Trump said on MSNBC's "Morning Joe."

"I disavowed him. I disavowed the KKK," Trump added. "Do you want me to do it again for the 12th time? I disavowed him in the past, I disavow him now."  SOURCE

 

Just because white supremacist groups such as the KKK, National Vanguard agree with certain aspects of the Trump administration's policy, doesn't mean the Trump administration supports these groups, nor do establishment Republicans.  Quote me one elected Republican who is on record supporting the KKK or David Duke.  You can't.

 

With policy it's always a question of nuance, and there are always extremist elements on both sides who will push certain reasonable policy proposals to places that most people aren't comfortable with.  We can look to history to see many examples.  Friedrich Nietzsche's ideas, for instance, were hijacked by the fascists in the 1930s, while Karl Marx's ethos was hijacked by the Communists.  Are we to blame these two philosophers for the seizure and bastardization of their ideas at the hands of psychopathic megalomaniacs, and the resulting genocide that ensued?  If you are willing to blame them then you're essentially supporting a ban on free speech.  At the end of the day, both the right and the left have been vulnerable to extremist ideologies that seek power through violence.  

 

What if the shoe were on the other foot?  Should Bernie Sanders be held accountable because radical leftist groups want to take his policy proposals too far?  Should Ocasio-Cotez or Elizabeth Warren?  There are plenty of Antifa members who support all three of these candidates, but want them to move their policy positions to the extreme.  Should we call all Democrats radicals because a handful of card carrying communists want to take away private property in their name?  No, of course not, that wouldn't be reasonable.  And nor is it reasonable to do the same to people on the right. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited December 3, 2018 by Alex_Krycek

[dimreepr]

14 minutes ago, Alex_Krycek said:

Don't think those groups have allies in the United States, especially the southwest?  Think again. 

There's a logical fallacy in your argument.  You're basically arguing that because some fringe groups vociferously support certain elements of Trump's policies (such as immigration reform), then such support is necessarily reciprocal, i.e. that Trump and Bannon support the right wing fringe groups in return.  This isn't born out by the facts. 

'Ethno-nationalism – it's losers,' he [Bannon] said. 'It's a fringe element. I think the media plays it up too much, and we gotta help crush it.'

'These guys are a collection of clowns,' he added.  - Steve Bannon, speaking to the Daily Mail  SOURCE

Bannon again denounces the white nationalists in his Oxford Union speech.  Trump did the same with the KKK and David Duke. 

"David Duke is a bad person, who I disavowed on numerous occasions over the years," Trump said on MSNBC's "Morning Joe."

"I disavowed him. I disavowed the KKK," Trump added. "Do you want me to do it again for the 12th time? I disavowed him in the past, I disavow him now."  SOURCE

 

Just because white supremacist groups such as the KKK, National Vanguard agree with certain aspects of the Trump administration's policy, doesn't mean the Trump administration supports these groups, nor do establishment Republicans.  Quote me one elected Republican who is on record supporting the KKK or David Duke.  You can't.

 

With policylegacy, it's always a question of nuance, and there are always extremist elements on both sides who will push certain reasonable policy proposals to places that most people aren't comfortable with.  We can look to history to see many examples.  Friedrich Nietzsche's ideas, for instance, were hijacked by the fascists in the 1930s, while Karl Marx's ethos was hijacked by the Communists.  Are we to blame these two philosophers for the seizure and bastardization of their ideas at the hands of psychopathic megalomaniacs, and the resulting genocide that ensued?  If you are willing to blame them then you're essentially supporting a ban on free speech.  At the end of the day, both the right and the left have been vulnerable to extremist ideologies that seek power through violence.  

 

What if the shoe were on the other foot?  Should Bernie Sanders be held accountable because radical leftist groups want to take his policy proposals too far?  Should Ocasio-Cotez or Elizabeth Warren?  There are plenty of Antifa members who support all three of these candidates, but want them to move their policy positions to the extreme.  Should we call all Democrats radicals because a handful of card carrying communists want to take away private property in their name?  No, of course not, that wouldn't be reasonable.  And nor is it reasonable to do the same to people on the right. 

6

Trump is seeking a legacy, not peace.

[Raider5678]

35 minutes ago, dimreepr said:

Trump is seeking a legacy, not peace.

Well that's a good way to just ignore everything he said.

Say something completely off topic, completely random, completely unrelated, and completely opinionated.

[dimreepr]

7 minutes ago, Raider5678 said:

Well that's a good way to just ignore everything he said.

Say something completely off topic, completely random, completely unrelated, and completely opinionated.

1

if you say so... 

[Ten oz]

1 hour ago, Alex_Krycek said:

Don't think those groups have allies in the United States, especially the southwest?  Think again. 

There's a logical fallacy in your argument.  You're basically arguing that because some fringe groups vociferously support certain elements of Trump's policies (such as immigration reform), then such support is necessarily reciprocal, i.e. that Trump and Bannon support the right wing fringe groups in return.  This isn't born out by the facts. 

'Ethno-nationalism – it's losers,' he [Bannon] said. 'It's a fringe element. I think the media plays it up too much, and we gotta help crush it.'

'These guys are a collection of clowns,' he added.  - Steve Bannon, speaking to the Daily Mail  SOURCE

Bannon again denounces the white nationalists in his Oxford Union speech.  Trump did the same with the KKK and David Duke. 

"David Duke is a bad person, who I disavowed on numerous occasions over the years," Trump said on MSNBC's "Morning Joe."

"I disavowed him. I disavowed the KKK," Trump added. "Do you want me to do it again for the 12th time? I disavowed him in the past, I disavow him now."  SOURCE

 

Just because white supremacist groups such as the KKK, National Vanguard agree with certain aspects of the Trump administration's policy, doesn't mean the Trump administration supports these groups, nor do establishment Republicans.  Quote me one elected Republican who is on record supporting the KKK or David Duke.  You can't.

 

With policy it's always a question of nuance, and there are always extremist elements on both sides who will push certain reasonable policy proposals to places that most people aren't comfortable with.  We can look to history to see many examples.  Friedrich Nietzsche's ideas, for instance, were hijacked by the fascists in the 1930s, while Karl Marx's ethos was hijacked by the Communists.  Are we to blame these two philosophers for the seizure and bastardization of their ideas at the hands of psychopathic megalomaniacs, and the resulting genocide that ensued?  If you are willing to blame them then you're essentially supporting a ban on free speech.  At the end of the day, both the right and the left have been vulnerable to extremist ideologies that seek power through violence.  

 

What if the shoe were on the other foot?  Should Bernie Sanders be held accountable because radical leftist groups want to take his policy proposals too far?  Should Ocasio-Cotez or Elizabeth Warren?  There are plenty of Antifa members who support all three of these candidates, but want them to move their policy positions to the extreme.  Should we call all Democrats radicals because a handful of card carrying communists want to take away private property in their name?  No, of course not, that wouldn't be reasonable.  And nor is it reasonable to do the same to people on the right. 

Quote

 

"President Donald Trump has retweeted a statement written by one of the alt-right’s leading figures, who has defended white supremacists. 

On Monday the president denounced violence at a rally in Charlottesville, Virigina, over the weekend. “Racism is evil—and those who cause violence in its name are criminals and thugs, including KKK, neo-Nazis, white supremacists, and other hate groups are repugnant to everything we hold dear as Americans,” Trump said Monday in a statement about the rally."

"After his second statement Monday Trump tweeted that the media would never be satisfied with his condemnation of racist groups. Later he retweeted leading alt-right figure Jack Posobiec, "

"Posobiec, a Trump activist who writes for Rebel Media, a Canadian-based online political news commentary publication, is currently helping organize multiple alt-right rallies similar to the one in Charlottesville in cities throughout the U.S. this coming weekend. He has in the past defended white supremacist Richard Spencer."

Link

"In late January, Donald Trump did something that would have sunk almost any other presidential campaign: He retweeted an anonymous Nazi sympathizer and white supremacist who goes by the not-so-subtle handle @WhiteGenocideTM. Trump neither explained nor apologized for the retweet and then, three weeks later, he did it again. This subsequent retweet was quickly deleted, but just two days later Trump retweeted a different user named @EustaceFash, whose Twitter header image at the time also included the term “white genocide.”"

Link

White Supremacists openly support Trump and despite his comments post Charlottesville Trump appears to encourage their support on social media by throwing the weight of his office and brand behind them by helping to distribute their accounts. The relationship seems to be reciprocal. 

Can you provide a citiation for an ANTIFA member endorsing Warren, Cortez, or any other Democrat? Or a citation for an elected Democrat responding positively to anything associated with ANTIFA? I have already provided both for White Supremacists and Republicans. To my knowledge ANTIFA are anarchist. I don't think they support any established political ideology or elected politicians.  

[John Cuthber]

2 hours ago, Raider5678 said:

Well that's a good way to just ignore everything he said.

Say something completely off topic, completely random, completely unrelated, and completely opinionated.

Well, it's an opinion.
But I can see the link to the topic so it's not random, not unrelated and not off topic.

 

But apart from that..."that's a good way to just ignore everything he said."