bimble
floofy
Thought i was over the big emotional reactions to anything he says by now but no, boiling rage watching that. Fuck that man i would enjoy seeing him suffer, physically.
What stupid shit has Trump done today?
- Thread starter Yossarian
- Start date
Thought i was over the big emotional reactions to anything he says by now but no, boiling rage watching that. Fuck that man i would enjoy seeing him suffer, physically.
8den
No I'm pretty sure that was 8ball...
I tried to watch the full interview but couldn't get past his opening remarks about his new Labour sec. Almost makes you long for Dubya.
ohmyliver
poppin' like a cork
Well, yes, they were slave owners. Slavery is evil. But there's a difference between a person who commits evil when it's an accepted part of most societies all over the world (as slavery was in the 18th century), and a person who goes to war to kill and maim to preserve the right to carry on committing evil, when the rest of the world is seeing the evil for what it is.
*eta*
Not that I'm absolving Washington, Jefferson of their guilt, but it's clearly different.
*eta*
Not that I'm absolving Washington, Jefferson of their guilt, but it's clearly different.
Last edited:
butchersapron
Bring back hanging
Their is an argument that Washington etc went to war with Britain precisely to save slavery.
tim
EXPLODED TIM! (Help me!!!)
Do you think those held in bondage and, in in the case of Sally Hemmings raped by Washington and and Jefferson would have seen it your
way? Anyway, I here's a a quote from Dr Johnson in 1775 who also doesn't share your view:
How is it that we hear the loudest yelps for liberty among the drivers of negroes?
ohmyliver
poppin' like a cork
OK, I was wrong on this. Should have googled before posting, rather than relying on failed memory. Yes, there's a good argument that the ruling in Somersett's Case and the abolitionist movement hastened the desire for independence, especially on the back of Smith v. Browne & Cooper much earlier. Also slavery was less prevalent, globally, in the 18th century than I had thought. And yes, Trump has a point on the moral culpability of some of the founding fathers with regards to slavery, although I still regard Lee etc as worse than Washington at least.
Last edited:
Ax^
Silly Rabbit
redsquirrel
This Machine Kills Progressives
By 'left' I take it you include Clinton, Obama and co?
Poot
My wife thinks I work too hard
It scares me is that Trump is still referring to them as the alt right. It's as though this is the new acceptable. Naming things is arguably the most important thing here, and as Manter asks, where does the alt-left come from? They're just the rest of us, right? It seems we've been put into teams. Oh good.
rekil
to menny cranks
From the article in the J Ed link.
That's not quite right. One of the earliest mentions of "alt-left" I could find was a racist blogger saddo called Robert Lindsay (not the Wolfie one) who claims to be a supporter of the greens, the CPUSA and the Dems but also says he's a "race realist", that "Donald Trump is an example of what happens when Jews take over your government", and is, surprise surprise, a pro-Assad headbanger, gas attacks are false flags etc.
But it looks like it started being used by liberal and conservatives around October and November last year as a byword for Bernie Sanders supporters.
Eg. Barbara Kay: A Marxist revolution by alt-left millennials?
Children of the Revolution
rekil
to menny cranks
It gets much much worse but you get the idea.
That was my suspicion too but he's around 60 (!) years old if his bio is to be believed.
butchersapron
Bring back hanging
It was developed precisely in order to suggest that false equivalence. That's why we're talking about it. That's why people are angry about it. That's why people opposed it's use and said what and where it would lead. And no, not everyone else would call those people protesting anti-fascists, some leading liberals and people who think they're left would call them alt-left, which is why we're talking about it.
edit: and further the points being made are to a) stop these people grabbing the moral high-ground and b) political leadership/political space after this.
Last edited:
bimble
floofy
ok, I understand that (why people would have seen it for what it is and opposed it when they first noticed it appearing) .
But it seems to be not true that it was first used by vanity fair this Spring, and tracing it to one single root is probably pointless.
Here's a load of Soros-nonsense by Josef Farah of trumpist World Net Daily writing in August last year for instance:
But it seems to be not true that it was first used by vanity fair this Spring, and tracing it to one single root is probably pointless.
Here's a load of Soros-nonsense by Josef Farah of trumpist World Net Daily writing in August last year for instance:
Similar threads
- Poll
