Submitted by Blowin on Fri, 06/21/2019 - 08:01
Have it cunts
"You're quite big on the hypotheticals aren't you Vic."
No, this is the first time I've put up a hypothetical in years. Go back and look.
I'm interested in where blowin stands on this either / or case. Given blowin complains about the ad being pulled, it tends to indicate he thinks the ad should run. Is this the case blowin?
"angry online, smiley in the brine"
for a 'facts' and 'evidence' guy...
I'd like to add predictable too.
"Nah Blowin's not a righty, he is super central he just has left and right leaning views and tendencies, he is also the only person here that is likely to flip a coin between voting One Nation or Labor or One Nation and a party like Sustainable population party..
Sypkan is pretty central too in his social and even political views but still would always vote to the left.
Im the only real regular conservative here but I've actually never voted LNP so go figure, a few other righty's drop in for the odd comment though."
I agree with parts of this, but I would argue we are all actually quite left in a traditional sense of the word
yet day after day, year after year, we are painted as RWNJ, alt right agitators, white supremmicists, racists, stupid, wrong minded etc. etc.
but none of us have ever ever voted lnp. ...thats never ! ever!
now if I was a 'left wing' advocate, I'd be thinking to myself, we haven't won anything for about 6 years, including a number of 'unloseable' elections, we are shedding voters like nothing before, big issues like cc seem alarmingly irrelevant, our parties are a divided shambles, and the world is generally turning to shit
why are we losing? everything!!
and, why don't these guys vote labor? (anymore...)
but nah, the answer to the advocates, ...the solution to the die hards, is to double down on everything self-righteous and twisted, and continue their dismissive belittling MO that has not been successful for about 15 years or more...
No, I'm the only conservative in the village.
I reckon the ads should've been pulled, though not for the symbolism which was in appaling taste by any other yardstick except Trump's.
Only a week or so ago, Trump mentioned outlawing Antifa as a terror organisation, which is both ridiculous - they're not an organised group anymore than anti-Vietnam or anti-Iraq war protestors - and unconstitutional: He simply can't do it because of America's First Amendment.
Unless that is, he passes laws to quash free speech involving political dissent, and these ads appear another step in making those changes.
He's already demonised them, and now he's lining them up for the hit job, but American's protective of their freedom of speech and freedom of assembly should be very wary of collateral damage if any legislation is passed. They're potentially trading away something much greater than the removal of Antifa (which is only an idea and will reappear under other names regardless).
Never mind Antifa or the Chinese bloke who's name I can't spell, Trump is the greatest danger America faces today.
EDIT: Someone here mentioned the erosion of GOP values under Trump. The old Republican guard would've screamed from the hilltops had someone threatened the First Amendment. But now..?
Nah, second amendment is where you'll hear them screaming.
You can't take away anything they can holster.
Sure, the right to carry a Howitzer to the 7-11 is a big one, but they've also been known to say a thing or two about their right to free speech.
What explicit danger does Trump pose ?
How is outlawing Antifa a threat to free speech ?
You really think there’s literally no organisational structure whatsoever behind a group which spans continents , has its own flag and has a formal handbook ? I realise it’s probably a pleasant fantasy to imagine an organic and spontaneous collective of like minded people who just happen to all arrive together in the same place at the same time to stage their rallies , but it seems a bit naive to me.
Antifa would be more than welcome to practice their communal gatherings if there wasn’t the verbalised and enacted threat of violence. I am very sympathetic to much of their thinking , but my hesitancy to go full revolution retard means I’m probably just as liable to be subject to their narrow interpretation of acceptable morality as anyone.
They have no leader, no charter, no hierarchy, no offical members, so the only way he can outlaw them is by a generalised purge on political opposition. It remains to be seen how any legislation is drafted but if silencing opposition in a democracy doesn't worry you then...well, I don't even know how to end that sentence, but safe to say further input here isn't required.
"the right to carry a Howitzer to the 7-11"
Had to laugh at that one.
A generalised purge on political opposition.....
Where has this come from ? From what basis do you suggest this comment is anything but hyperbolic ?
The potential banning of Antifa stems from alleged violent anarchy , not from their political leanings. Half of the USA hates Trump to the point of irrationality and they do so with impunity, yet you want me to believe that Trump is “ purging“ political opposition ?
Tell me how else you ban a group that has no leader, no charter, no hierarchy, no offical members, and no common goals except for an idea shared by a great many people?
How do you draft legislation for that?
Dunno why it's hard to believe. Dutton and the Libs have been doing a similar thing here with the press. Using executive powers to 'legally' silence anyone who'd dare hold them to account.
Isn't he not just reacting to the constant efforts to silence conservatives?
antifa are just usseful idiots
this week the big hoo haa is google and a news network trying to shut down zerohedge and the federalist
what's different where trump is being super dangerous and these other people are not?
this is a small chapter in an ever ongoing war
trump baits twitter
trump baits facebook
just to see their reaction
I reckon he knows he can't ban antifa, and even if he did, they'd just fire up more and gain more supporters
this is all just media wars I reckon
the tech heads protecting their china factory, and trump doing his best to dismantle it
"I realise it’s probably a pleasant fantasy to imagine an organic and spontaneous collective of like minded people who just happen to all arrive together in the same place at the same time to stage their rallies , but it seems a bit naive to me."
There's this thing called social media...
It's amazing I know.
Antifa are as much a bunch of Duttons as Trump. They are just as prone to dictating acceptable thought and speech except they want to impose their will through mob violence instead of legislation.
As much as this is reduced to nothing more substantial than your opinion against mine , I still claim that it’s ludicrous to suggest there’s absolutely no kernel of centrality to Antifa. Who do you think pays for the flags ? Who do you think organises the rallies ? Who consented to the contents of the handbook representing the movement ?
I understand that Antifa itself is representative of an ideology and that the banning of the brand Antifa will not remove the idea itself , but the Antifa brand would definitely lay concrete foundations for people to rally around. Many people would love to be associated with the brand as much as anything. The name lends itself to tribalism and becomes a rallying point for a movement to form.
Social media is a medium.
Facebook pages don’t create themselves. Flags don’t create themselves.
Read the article. There is obviously people directing events from planning through to tactics. Not to mention that the flag is the same flag used by the group in other nations which go by the same name.
You really trying to tell me this is the nothing more than the spontaneous and collective reactionism as you’d see in a school of baitfish ?
You may as well tell me the Hell’s Angels have no organisational structure.
PS....Youve got to love the pure hypocrisy demonstrated by the clowns. The name Anti Facist is the biggest pile of steaming double speak bullshit I’ve ever heard .
“ Burn that flag and burn that woman “ they shout at people who don’t think and act the way they are told by the “ grassroots authority “ .
"Antifa would be more than welcome to practice their communal gatherings if there wasn’t the verbalised and enacted threat of violence. I am very sympathetic to much of their thinking , but my hesitancy to go full revolution retard means I’m probably just as liable to be subject to their narrow interpretation of acceptable morality as anyone."
and that is why they can officially get fucked
"The potential banning of Antifa stems from alleged violent anarchy , not from their political leanings. Half of the USA hates Trump to the point of irrationality and they do so with impunity, yet you want me to believe that Trump is “ purging“ political opposition ?"
it really is hard to believe coming from one as learned as stunet
yet here we are, not a shot at you stunet, it just shows how distant our shared reality has drifted
it really is astounding (for me) that you do not see the last four years as one of the most desperate of attempted desperate political purges ever
I'm telling you that what he has stated is a legal impossibility, unless he's not being entirely honest in his purview.
And is it so hard to believe he'd be dishonest about it?
Any dickhead can tell you outlawing them won't make a lick of difference on the street - The People's Front of Judea becomes the Judean People's Front.
But he can use the cover of Antifa as a ruse to push unconstitutional policies. Silence opponents once and for all.
Spose you also believed in the WMDs, eh?
And all aboard with the LNP crackdown on free press?
Right on, Freedom Fighters!
I reckon you’re overreaching.
My belief is that he’s watching the anarchy on the streets and feeling the sentiments of the majority of Americans sitting at home both disgusted and afraid of the violence and he’s trying to angle his re-election on reinstating peace.
Whether Antifa are organised or not , whether it’s responsible for enough violence to be singled out , Trump has made a point of identifying someone he can focus on and been seen to be taking action against the lawlessness and the anarchy .
I believe it’s got far, far less to do with the trope of Trump as dictator and more to do with reelection.
On top of that there is also the frustration he obviously feels to have such a campaign of undermining his authority being waged by the Democrats and his enemies.
The Democrats in power in the regions of unrest are sitting on their hands whilst chaos unfolds and trying to wedge Trump into doing something with authoritative force which they can politically weaponise against him. They are using the social licence of the BLM movement as cover to allow anarchy to unfold under Trump’s presidency.
I don’t doubt that Trump also takes these political machinations personally as he is want to do.
Here’s a little slice of what is being permitted by the Democrat leaders of Seattle. Imagine if this armed insurrection was being perpetrated against anyone but Trump. It’d be Waco all over again.
Public town streets being occupied by armed people and denying access to regular Americans.....nuts.
And here’s the Democrat governor looking away whilst it unfolds .Allowing it to fester until Trump does something they are hoping to use against him.
"On top of that there is also the frustration he obviously feels to have such a campaign of undermining his authority being waged by the Democrats and his enemies."
Oh please, Mitch McConnell perfected the craft of oppositionism against Obama. He saw it as his job to make him fail, even if it hurt the US. They blocked him at every level, even threatened a debt default, using their economy as hostage FFS.
"My belief is that he’s watching the anarchy on the streets and feeling the sentiments of the majority of Americans sitting at home both disgusted and afraid of the violence and he’s trying to angle his re-election on reinstating peace."
yep, and considering many black folk bagging antifa too, its a winning strategy. numbers wise...
banning them would be tokenistic at best, but he can't really lose having a dig
ongoing press wars
tech censorship wars
the china wedge
and I also reckon he's going after the funding. if he bans them it opens up a whole new can of worms
even if he loses, he can't lose
The worst bit about the situation is that it’s created a rift between people who should have been allies.
The anarchists are crew who have watched neoliberalism strip them of hope and a future just as much as the deplorables who voted for Trump.
Unfortunately, Trump has been created as the Great Satan to distract the population from the corporations and industries who are doing the nation-raping.
Of course Trump is at the behest of Wall Street , but no more than the Democrats who get the free pass due to the demonisation of Trump and the way he has been developed as a lightning rod for dissatisfaction within US society.
Maybe someone can help me here .....wasn’t the original Occupy movement much less partisan in its politics ?
yep, its bloody depressing really
trump is the wedge that fucked the left, but he ain't all to blame
this wa-po article and gervais nail the sentiment towards the democrats and their enablers...
"In the process, Gervais neatly illustrated exactly why so many people so resent the increasingly ritualized ceremonial sanctimony. Because it turns out that this may be exactly what makes people hate hypocrites so much: They fool us into giving them credit for holding potentially costly moral beliefs without actually paying those costs.
A 2017 paper from the journal Psychological Science reported a series of experiments demonstrating that we give people moral credit for condemning bad behavior — more credit than we give them for just stating that they themselves behave morally. But by the same token, we resent people who condemn others while privately indulging the same vices even more than we resent those who falsely claim to do the right thing. In fact, the people they studied seemed willing to give people a pass on hypocrisy if they admitted they didn’t live up to their own ideals.
What bothers us most, this suggests, is not the disconnect between values and behavior, something we’re all guilty of, but rather trying to gain social status by pretending to be more moral than you are. And that is precisely what Hollywood so often seems to do. It complains about the patriarchy, and then we find out it was sheltering a Harvey Weinstein; it lectures us on global warming while quietly flying around on private jets.
Hypocrisy isn’t the worst vice, but it is one of the most grating, especially from them. The people on that stage are already better looking than most mere mortals, and richer, and more famous, and better loved. But somehow that isn’t enough; they also want credit for being more moral than everyone else, and there they cross the line.
nothing is as partisan as now...
but it's complicated,
occupy democrats? resistance republicans?
Great viewing if you’re into current discussion on this thread .
Western world the same all over.
Sorry blowin, I've stopped clicking your links. They are always full of shit and I don't want to give more traffic to nutter websites or social media channels. The grifters bargaining power and revenue potential goes up with the more clicks.
plus of course, the more nutter stuff you click, the more nutter stuff you get sent due to algorithms.
Here’s the full broadcast. I’m just getting stuck in now.
Very relevant to this overall thread. Very interesting.
Why don't you watch Joe Rogans stuff Vic? He's actually quite good, he might not be be the brightest tool in the shed, but he doesn't pretend to be. Has some really interesting guests on too, and he lets them talk without heckling them.
Hey Blowin, got any facts to back this one up?
"The Democrats in power in the regions of unrest are sitting on their hands whilst chaos unfolds and trying to wedge Trump into doing something with authoritative force which they can politically weaponise against him. They are using the social licence of the BLM movement as cover to allow anarchy to unfold under Trump’s presidency. "
I think they might have decided that more police violence is not the way to defuse protests about police violence. Sure, the police or the military could sweep through and clear the streets, but that doesn't actually help relieve the underlying problems and would probably only make people angrier.
Highlights the real dangers of violent policing.
I'm happy to read views from the dismal end of the political spectrum, but I'm not clicking on a link that has no reference to who producers the material. I simply could be taken to some truly objectionable material. Something I'm not prepared to do.
"Hey Blowin, got any facts to back this one up?"
Don't hold your breath JQ. I'm still waiting for blowin to back up a handful of wild claims. Hey blowin, where's that information to back up your bullshit claim about 90% of foreign students being Chinese? still waiting champ.
Should give this one a go Vic, it was genuinely really interesting. After I watched it I went and found the rest of the interview and listened, super interesting guy.
JQ....Whilst I understand your angle , to me it sounds way too much like appeasing the mob.
If you watch the link to twitter I also put forward, you’ll see the Governor of Seattle literally saying that he isn’t even aware of 6 blocks of the downtown city he is responsible for being barricaded and check pointed by armed militia, whilst the police have been evicted from their station as it’s been vandalised.
This isn’t a softly softly approach , this is a purposeful dereliction of responsibility.
It’s the equivalent of Gladys Berejilklian claiming that she wasn’t aware that 6 blocks in Newtown has been occupied by a political movement using armed force to force others out . It’s patently impossible that this could be so. The only alternative is that the Governor of Seattle doesn’t care because the situation plays in his party’s favour politically.
You should watch this vid , JQ. Tell me what you think.
Vic Local.....show me where I said 90 percent of foreign students are Chinese. I think you may discover it’s yourself talking shit.
"I think they might have decided that more police violence is not the way to defuse protests about police violence. Sure, the police or the military could sweep through and clear the streets, but that doesn't actually help relieve the underlying problems and would probably only make people angrier.
Highlights the real dangers of violent policing."
let's hope it doesn't come to that
it seems its a gamble both trump and the democrats are willing to take
public sentiment will be the only decider of what was, or is, appropriate...
trump is desperately scraping together his miserable barely 50%
and the democrats and their allies believe they're in the middle of a 1960s like civil rights movement moment
both in importance and scale
I'd say they're probably well delusional about the first part, and most definitely delusional about the second
they're support is loud and powerful, but I'm thinking it's a very noisy minority rather than, well, you know, the opposite...
Lets not get over excited about the Seattle thing. Ive got a mate living 3 blocks from CHAZ or whatever its being called this week.
He says if it wasnt for the news coverage he would barely know it exists. It would seem all the edited pictures of various burnt cars from around the country made out to be Seattle mightve worked for some.
I watched that vid Blowin, it's not nice, but it's not horrific. Reminds me of a Trump rally, but more peaceful and respectful. Do you not see the similarity, in the treatment of the 'media' anyway?
"I'm happy to read views from the dismal end of the political spectrum"
Very telling line that one.
Kinda like "the one true religion."
Debate is fruitless. It's all about winning and power projection, nothing more.
Sypkan, I think the US (and maybe Aus) has got to the point with politics, that you cannot win without dividing and inflaming. If one side throws mud, muck and lies, it's pretty hard to counter that, especially in the media and social media environment of today.
didn'chaz get the chop?
not the name change, I saw pictures of barricades being torn down by police today, peacefully
out front of the democrat mayor's house apparently...
conceded tassie to keep the continent?
"Vic Local.....show me where I said 90 percent of foreign students are Chinese. I think you may discover it’s yourself talking shit."
You're a fucking clown blowin. You want me to trawl back through the comments made two months ago? you wouldn't believe any evidence anyway. I've called bullshit on you on multiple occasions and it always ends the same way. You deny and then go MIA.
How about a more recent example of your bullshit made a few days ago. Remember when you wrote that Australia has the highest per capita immigrant intake in the world? Where's the back up for that you racist bullshit artist.
Oh and remember when you wrote that temporary visa holders will "all be on $1100 per fortnight indefinitely... (because)... trysting South American baristas would rather laze around on taxpayer coin rather than return to their own shithole countries" Well that was racist bullshit too. How do you live with yourself knowing that you're a complete fraud?
I don't chose my words lightly blowin. You are a racist bullshit artist. You could defend yourself by providing evidence to back up your claims. This would be highly embarrassing to me and force a grovelling apology. The fact you choose not to defend yourself against such strong criticism is very telling. Like I said, you're a racist bullshit artist.
i accept the numbers
not the sentiment
three years on, sentiment way off...
Couldn't find any evidence that Australia has the highest per capita immigrant intake in the world.
Wasn't sure if we were talking permanent or temporary so I had a look for both.
And was it the world or the OECD?
"Australia is home to one of the largest temporary migrant workforces in the developed world with the OECD warning that high levels of immigration can hurt low-income communities even as it benefits the broader economy."
"Australia had almost 750,000 permits for temporary migrants on issue in 2017, second in total number only to the US. As a proportion of the overall population, Australia was also second behind New Zealand."
"Australia is in 2nd place in the OECD in terms of the share of immigrants in its population, with the foreign-born accounting for 26% of the total population."
"According to World Bank data, Australia ranks fifth among OECD members for population growth."
"Australia is in 2nd place in the OECD in terms of the share of immigrants in its population, with the foreign-born accounting for 26% of the total population."
Bit different to blowin's claim that 50% of people in Australia were immigrants.
Sounds like he got confused.
He was probably thinking of this stat.
"In 2016, nearly half (49%) of Australians had either been born overseas or one or both parents had been born overseas."
We all get confused every now and again. Making a mistake is not a criminal offence, but when you're aware of your error, there's two possible options. Put up you hand and admit it, or try and deny / ignore/ abuse you're way out. The first option is a sign of strength which leaves you with a reputation in tact. The blowin option is a sign of a very small petty man with zero credibility.
It’s a no dickhead friday evening.