Politics/Slapfights - Ancient history to modern day!

[TheodoricFriede]

And you just used identity politics to smear me.

Good job, things have come full circle.

Awww the far left doesn't like it when it gets turned around on them does it?

[Raga]

Maybe, just maybe, his caustic reactions to my mere presence are the problem here, Mazder. You can't blame everything on me, not by a long shot. I'm not harassing him in PM's or Steam, and I'm not harassing Raga through PM's or Steam. He really is just that butthurt over something I can't remember.

I don't know what but the exact start date of the feud I remember. It was Thanksgiving 2010. I went to my dad's for a week and so I wasn't in the Skype thread that we all had at that time, and when I got back for some reason you and Jane and he hated each other's guts and it's never recovered.

Nobody could ever quite explain to me what the hell actually happened. I have suspicions about who was the author of that because of drama that I experienced while I was a mod in Clan V, but as that party is not here to defend themselves and I wasn't actually there to see what happened, I've pretty much just kept my mouth shut about it.

[Mobius_118]

And you just used identity politics to smear me.

Good job, things have come full circle.

Awww the far left doesn't like it when it gets turned around on them does it?

It happens all the time, really.

There are still dumbfucks out there who think Michelle Obama is a transvestite.

You trying to smear me as an antisemite? Right up there with the middle school equivalent of calling someone gay, despite all evidence to the contrary.

However, when I call you a reactionary little shit, I'm not wrong. You react like ammonia and bleach dumped into a bucket whenever I even appear in the same thread as you.

I don't know what but the exact start date of the feud I remember. It was Thanksgiving 2010. I went to my dad's for a week and so I wasn't in the Skype thread that we all had at that time, and when I got back for some reason you and Jane and he hated each other's guts and it's never recovered.

Nobody could ever quite explain to me what the hell actually happened. I have suspicions about who was the author of that because of drama that I experienced while I was a mod in Clan V, but as that party is not here to defend themselves and I wasn't actually there to see what happened, I've pretty much just kept my mouth shut about it.

Well Jane and I kinda buried the hatchet, as far as I can remember. Perhaps not. It was still 8 years ago.

[TheodoricFriede]

despite all evidence to the contrary.

I see no evidence to the contrary. You wanted to attack me, you chose to use my Judaism as a means of attack. That is antisemitism.

You also have used implied homosexuality as an attack on people in this group as well.

And threats of violence.

You aren't just an antisemite, you are a hypocrite. And I'm not the only one who see's it anymore.

And you know the best part? You did it all to yourself!

[Raga]

No you and Jane were still friendly at that point. I mean that the two of you hated his guts and vice versa. As soon as I got back literally both sides came to me (Jane and Theo) and told me I needed to do something because the other was being an asshole, but neither could actually tell me what the hell was going on.

[Mobius_118]

No you and Jane were still friendly at that point. I mean that the two of you hated his guts and vice versa. As soon as I got back literally both sides came to me (Jane and Theo) and told me I needed to do something because the other was being an asshole, but neither could actually tell me what the hell was going on.

Oooh...Well shit went to hell between Jane and myself I think shortly after, which we settled like adults.

Theo is incapable of being the adult.

As is evidence below.

despite all evidence to the contrary.

I see no evidence to the contrary. You wanted to attack me, you chose to use my Judaism as a means of attack. That is antisemitism.

You also have used implied homosexuality as an attack on people in this group as well.

And threats of violence.

You aren't just an antisemite, you are a hypocrite. And I'm not the only one who see's it anymore.

And you know the best part? You did it all to yourself!

Let's see...You want me to die. Not figuratively, but literally. You want to deprive someone of life, simply because you hate them that much. I know that if you could get away with it you'd do the deed yourself. It'd be funny to see you try, though.

Like I said before, if you knew me in real life, you'd realize that you've been the asshole the entire time. Your evidence would be clear as day.

Your faith was no motivation for any personal attack I've used against you. Neither was your sexuality. What is my motivation? Nothing. It's simply to watch you do exactly this. Your reactions to me showing up is comedic gold, and I haven't lost any sleep over this little spat.

I don't care that you're a non-binary Jewish person. I do care that you're a complete fucking asshole, and that you carry so much hate that 2/3rds of the party involved have forgiven and forgotten. It's time to let that hate go, Theo.

You sit here calling me an antisemite when you attack me for simply giving you a compliment. Grow up and realize that you don't have to like someone to get along with them. The only reason why this is even happening is because you fail to grasp that concept.

[TheodoricFriede]

Ahh there it is. The saint act.

God you are pathetic. Im out.

[Mobius_118]

Ahh there it is. The saint act.

God you are pathetic. Im out.

You won't be missed.

I'm no saint but I never accused you of being something you're not.

Go be with your SO and cool off. Fuck knows you will have that over me for a long time.

[Mazder]

His death? No, I haven't. A beating? Yeah, because all else has failed in getting him to grow the fuck up and quit being a reactionary little bitch. Would it work? No, because he's pretty much locked into hating me for reasons that I can no longer discern. Some real Hattfields vs McCoy's shit going on here.

Seriously. I've complimented him before and get told to fuck off and die. That's not the reaction of a stable person. Nor is going apeshit over something that not even my Jewish friends in the cities, one of which is a traditional Hasidic, would consider a slur.

Maybe, just maybe, his caustic reactions to my mere presence are the problem here, Mazder. You can't blame everything on me, not by a long shot. I'm not harassing him in PM's or Steam, and I'm not harassing Raga through PM's or Steam. He really is just that butthurt over something I can't remember.

Yeah you know why you got told to fuck off and die?
Because what you saw as a compliment Theo saw as you breaking the act of not interacting with him.
He wants nothing to do with you.
But then you open up the dialogue nearly every time.
Yeah he'll insult you, but that's because he doesn't like you.

Even if there is "nothing", which I still very much highly doubt, you still don't take the massive hints.
He doesn't like you, he doesn't want to talk with you he sometimes maybe would like to yell at you but that's about as far as your interaction will go. Anything else is pretty much never going to happen.
Stop trying, leave it at that and we'll all have a much simpler life.

I don't know the source of the feud, I don't want to know. All i want is for you two to either bury the hatchet or to fuck off to opposite corners and not talk to each other. Either pleases me, I don't care which you pick just pick one and do it and let it be the end of it.

Let's see...You want me to die. Not figuratively, but literally. You want to deprive someone of life, simply because you hate them that much. I know that if you could get away with it you'd do the deed yourself. It'd be funny to see you try, though.

Like I said before, if you knew me in real life, you'd realize that you've been the asshole the entire time. Your evidence would be clear as day.

Your faith was no motivation for any personal attack I've used against you. Neither was your sexuality. What is my motivation? Nothing. It's simply to watch you do exactly this. Your reactions to me showing up is comedic gold, and I haven't lost any sleep over this little spat.

I don't care that you're a non-binary Jewish person. I do care that you're a complete fucking asshole, and that you carry so much hate that 2/3rds of the party involved have forgiven and forgotten. It's time to let that hate go, Theo.

You sit here calling me an antisemite when you attack me for simply giving you a compliment. Grow up and realize that you don't have to like someone to get along with them. The only reason why this is even happening is because you fail to grasp that concept.

The whole "IF you knew me in real life" line is getting really fucking tiring.
Look, as far as we're concerned how you act here IS how you are "in real life" and if you do act differently here than you do IRL then honestly start acting like you do IRL. Stop putting on an act.
Maybe the reason why you can not be reasoned with is because you're not acting like yourself so no-one trusts you in anything you do or say, has that thought crossed your mind?

Yet you still used his faith as a source, you still used his sexual orientation as a source, or in the very least you used it as a source in language.
He doesn't want to "get along" with you.
I mean you've apparently done something to make him feel that badly towards you and you can't even spend the time to find out what it even is. And if it's a case of no-one remembering then honestly you could try acting apologetic and not just saying it and immediately turning about-face if he doesn't want your apology.

[Mobius_118]

As far as I'm concerned, it's done. If he wants to continue to be a caustic shit stain, that's his prerogative. But Theo has to understand that he's not an invisible element here, and I will respond to his posts if they're relevant.

It's something he has to get over. Conflict resolution does not appear to be a skill he possesses.

[Sinekein]

Hearing that, currently, the left is more dangerous than Trump...seriously, what the fuck? It's easy to diss the Dems because they rely on identity politics, but it's even easier to do so when you're white and straight, because you don't have to suffer the daily consequences of a president whose hardcore fanbase is made of overtly racist, misogynist and homophobic people.

Name me one major norm setting institution that isn't currently dominated by left of center thought.

The media (both news and entertainment) is.
The universities are.
Big corporations, especially tech companies that are in the information dissemination business, are.
Government administration at almost all levels is.
Science increasingly is.

The only one I can think of that arguably isn't is the court system, which is one of the reasons a lot of conservatives are hyperpartisan on the issue of conservative justices.

So *if* a hypothetical authoritarian gets into office and the general trend of the whole population is drifting towards pro-authoritarian policies (and it is), which side currently has more of an infrastructure in place to enforce what they want done?

While it is true, I don't see any of these being the consequence of an actual political plan. Most are the consequence of hardening identity politics from the Republicans. The medias lean left now because the right was the first to decide to attack them when stating facts didn't suit them - all while being actively backed by Fox News which they used to draw a line between the "good" (Fox) that agreed with them and the "bad" (the rest) which didn't.

Big corporations might be led by Democrats, but it is also a new phenomenon, and one that hasn't shifted their goals one bit: it's still to make money, as it was before. Corporations are absolutely soulless, they will thrive no matter who is in charge. So overall the political leaning of their leaders is irrelevant, Facebook for example is a tool which has grown beyond the control of Zuckerberg for a while and has been used much better by the GOP than by the Dems in the US.

Science is like the media, it started truly leaning left when climate change deniers rose in prominence among the GOP. Put some decent human beings in charge of the Grand Old Party instead of Trumps, McConnells, Cruzs or Ryans, and you'll probably head back towards a status quo. Just stop relying on politicians who use their Bible to "disprove" scientific articles, as those are unlikely to gain any favor among scientists at large.

I might add that while they might not qualify as "norm setting", the police and the Army still lean towards the right and are hugely influential. So it's not like putting a Democrat in charge would turn the USA into a total commieland.

And they're not outright lies. And worst they're the general feeling of a lot of the nation, or a significant enough chunk of it that are worried enough to side with Trump. At the very least the left is not doing enough to dissuade their fears, or show support for their ideals. A lot of current Democrat ideals are very useful in the big cities/densely populated states but they lose a large chunk on rural areas. Areas where they have very tight-knit communities that are not very open to rapid changes/different ways of life.

Yeah that's my point, they're "feelings". But they're also often untrue. You "feel" that Democrats only criticize Trump, because that is what Republicans say of the Democrats over and over, or what is repeated on Fox, but it's still not what happens. Yet many have stopped trying to look beyond what Republicans/Fox serve them, even if a bit of investigation can disprove many claims.

Even if that's the case it's the media who are doing the damage there. A small amount of people are going to hunt for their politics/politicians. They will just turn on the news and get it there. Or on the internet/subreddit/forum/etc. The media needs a clean-up if the party line is all very left-wing based enough to say literally everything about Trump. Which TBH I bet he's mostly doing because the media is frothed to a frenzy when he opens his mouth. He's a businessman and he knows any publicity is good publicity. I mean we're talking about him aren't we?
What if we weren't? I'm not saying ignore him, but show him his grandstanding and posturing means nothing to us.

Because you cannot ignore what the POTUS says, especially if what he says is important. Obama didn't always make the headlines because he sometimes went silent or spent time doing speeches that did not bring any new information - you won't make a headline over "Obama explains his healthcare plan for the 21th time at a meeting in Milwaukee", that's not "news".

But Trump is so incoherent that every day, and sometimes several times a day, he says something worthy of the news. And if journalists start judging that something coming from the POTUS is below their reporting - that's when they stop doing their job. You cannot blame them for talking about Trump constantly.

Like, today, he apparently announced he would fund the wall using the state of emergency. Whether he can or not is irrelevant - it has to make the news, because it is a politically important declaration.

The main thing that'll change in 2019 and especially 2020 is that the national media will allocate time to Democratic candidates to the presidency because when they declare, it means that their policies become a national matter (at least while they're in the race). Many are likely to repeat things that they've been saying for months if not longer, but if you've bought since 2016 that the only thing they were saying was "I hate Trump", it might look artificial.

You want to know why Trump and the Media are so easily listened to? Because they make it easy to listen to. They go where the people go, formulate it in quick, easy to digest and easy to feel/react chunks. Because people are lazy/efficiency oriented. They want what they want now so they can get on with their lives. The elitist "only these people are being proper in discussing politics" thing is bullshit to the average person, and it's the average person you have to convince.

But the world is not simple. You can't summarize everything in the span of 280 characters if you have a modicum of intellectual honesty. You can't explain a complex healthcare plan in a tweet. You can't summarize your position regarding how much Wall Street is controlled in a buzzfeed headline. You can't explain your position on international politics in a simple meme. If you do, it means you are dishonest.

It's not because Trump says that everything is "simple" or "easy" that it actually is. For him it's easy, because everything he says, he considers to be true. But he doesn't have the power to bend reality to his will, thankfully. And the world is still as complicated now as it was before he was elected.

I think that with this it's more a fault that the "less vocal" sections of the Democrats aren't as vocal as they could have been/should have been. Especially since there is no denouncement of the more radical sections of their political sphere.

You know, at some point, when you are a moderate, it's really annoying to have to constantly explain why you are not part of the extremes. In France, it happens all the times to muslims who are apparently supposed to explain, every time, that they don't actually like suicide bombers and that they aren't, in fact, supporting terrorism. It's the same for left people at large. I consider myself a feminist, yet after the 10th time I had to explain that it didn't mean I wanted to cut the balls of all men I met (including mine I guess), or to live in a matriarchy, or that I didn't want to make it forbidden for women to want to look pretty, or that I didn't want all male characters to be banned or castrated in the fiction I read, it becomes tiring, and I just don't bother doing it anymore.

It's actually probably the same thing that happened in the right. You mention that the right as whole banded against the way the left treated them - basically, constantly forcing them to explain that they weren't "alt-right" or outright racists. It was annoying for them, and it's also annoying for left-wing moderates.

[Sinekein]

And you are the quintessential SJW. I dont even like using that term, but you are it.

Yeah, I couldn't even being to imagine you insulting people, that's so out of character. Although considering what I get from your perception of the world, I can safely take it as a compliment.

You're just a black hole of negativity. Even GAC whom I really, really disagree with, comes out as someone who is probably satisfied with his life. Mobius often sounds angry, but his anger seems to be born out of worry and wanting for some kind of improvement. I mentioned how Alien's multiple links of actual SJW crap annoys me, but again, it's because he'd be better off without them, as we would all. There are others with whom I am often on opposing sides of debates I can have civil interactions with, or with whom I can settle things down if things get heated.

But there is just nothing that seems to make you satisfied, except trolling and insulting people to try and make them feel equally as miserable. There is no civility, or basic politeness, just negativity, insults, and a feeling that the one thing that brings you happiness is seeing others unhappy or suffering. And considering how long I've seen you on internet, I don't think it can be blamed on edgy teenage years anymore.

[Mobius_118]

Mobius often sounds angry, but his anger seems to be born out of worry and wanting for some kind of improvement.

Sounds about right. Add on frustration because evidence proves to the contrary of claims made here, to which it's completely disregarded because fuck libs/reality.

[TheodoricFriede]

Oh this is cute. Why dont you guys start your own group and circle-jerk one another till you pass out from exhaustion.

[Mazder]

As far as I'm concerned, it's done. If he wants to continue to be a caustic shit stain, that's his prerogative. But Theo has to understand that he's not an invisible element here, and I will respond to his posts if they're relevant.

It's something he has to get over. Conflict resolution does not appear to be a skill he possesses.

You speak of him lacking a skill whilst saying you're going to actively do the thing that begins conflict in the first place.
I'd say your current abilities of conflict resolution are also in question as right now you literally have to do nothing to avoid conflict. In fact by taking your current stance you prolong/reignite any and all conflict.
Just stop.
Don't reply to his comments, don't even talk about him or his posts, just leave it alone.
That, right now, is the only way for conflict to be resolved. Just because one of you has left temporarily doesn't mean it's over, clearly, given the cycle as it's been prevented before us.

Just don't interact.
If anything making it so neither of you saw each others posts would be a perfect resolution to this problem.

There are others with whom I am often on opposing sides of debates I can have civil interactions with, or with whom I can settle things down if things get heated.

Hell, you and I had a MASSIVE falling out on Clan V and we've managed to bury the hatchet for the most part.
We still disagree at times as I'd like to think we're pretty civil enough.

Yeah that's my point, they're "feelings". But they're also often untrue. You "feel" that Democrats only criticize Trump, because that is what Republicans say of the Democrats over and over, or what is repeated on Fox, but it's still not what happens. Yet many have stopped trying to look beyond what Republicans/Fox serve them, even if a bit of investigation can disprove many claims.

I, personally, feel that the vocal sections of their parties do a lot of the over-all criticisms, but when it comes to popular opinion and it's influence on the voting populace those same vocal minorities are thrust to the forefront of people's minds. Even if they're easily debunked they're still present and loud.

Because you cannot ignore what the POTUS says, especially if what he says is important. Obama didn't always make the headlines because he sometimes went silent or spent time doing speeches that did not bring any new information - you won't make a headline over "Obama explains his healthcare plan for the 21th time at a meeting in Milwaukee", that's not "news".

But Trump is so incoherent that every day, and sometimes several times a day, he says something worthy of the news. And if journalists start judging that something coming from the POTUS is below their reporting - that's when they stop doing their job. You cannot blame them for talking about Trump constantly.

Like, today, he apparently announced he would fund the wall using the state of emergency. Whether he can or not is irrelevant - it has to make the news, because it is a politically important declaration.

The main thing that'll change in 2019 and especially 2020 is that the national media will allocate time to Democratic candidates to the presidency because when they declare, it means that their policies become a national matter (at least while they're in the race). Many are likely to repeat things that they've been saying for months if not longer, but if you've bought since 2016 that the only thing they were saying was "I hate Trump", it might look artificial.

I mean, you can ignore what he says, but it is more along the lines of "they're aware but we don't care" type of ignorance.
Like yeah they could report it straight up and not give opinions on it, that might help the situation a little. I get it's their business model more than anything.
I dunno maybe I am more used to the BBC in being closer to state-run than the American media so there is less opinionated content through that.

But the world is not simple. You can't summarize everything in the span of 280 characters if you have a modicum of intellectual honesty. You can't explain a complex healthcare plan in a tweet. You can't summarize your position regarding how much Wall Street is controlled in a buzzfeed headline. You can't explain your position on international politics in a simple meme. If you do, it means you are dishonest.

It's not because Trump says that everything is "simple" or "easy" that it actually is. For him it's easy, because everything he says, he considers to be true. But he doesn't have the power to bend reality to his will, thankfully. And the world is still as complicated now as it was before he was elected.

True but people aren't looking into the complex as much, they are paying attention tot he tweets and headlines as they're just as easily swayed if Trump is somewhat entertaining, either by being the clown or by showing us who else is the clown.

You know, at some point, when you are a moderate, it's really annoying to have to constantly explain why you are not part of the extremes. In France, it happens all the times to muslims who are apparently supposed to explain, every time, that they don't actually like suicide bombers and that they aren't, in fact, supporting terrorism. It's the same for left people at large. I consider myself a feminist, yet after the 10th time I had to explain that it didn't mean I wanted to cut the balls of all men I met (including mine I guess), or to live in a matriarchy, or that I didn't want to make it forbidden for women to want to look pretty, or that I didn't want all male characters to be banned or castrated in the fiction I read, it becomes tiring, and I just don't bother doing it anymore.

It's actually probably the same thing that happened in the right. You mention that the right as whole banded against the way the left treated them - basically, constantly forcing them to explain that they weren't "alt-right" or outright racists. It was annoying for them, and it's also annoying for left-wing moderates.

Yeah, I can totally get that.
And don't get me wrong, on an individual level it works and is tiring as all fuck. But I rarely see 2 people who're on the same side iron out what is and isn't too far across the line or even open up a dialogue about their beliefs. Maybe I need to see more.

[Mobius_118]

Oh, there he goes again.

Have you ever tried yoga? Hypnosis? Meditation?

You're gonna have to find a way to pull that gigantic stick out of your ass at some point, metaphorically and literally. And you really don't want to mention circle jerks while you cozy up to GAC and Mazder during your "Hate Mobius" time. You three are synchronized tugging artists when it comes to circle jerks.

[Mobius_118]

Yeah you don't know me, Mazder. Don't pretend to.

[TheodoricFriede]

Just don't interact.
If anything making it so neither of you saw each others posts would be a perfect resolution to this problem.

Oh you mean that thing I said to do a a year and some months ago in a group chat with Vol, myself and him and he didn't agree to?

[Mobius_118]

Because you can't ignore people in real life.

I've had worse arguments with real people. Wanna know something? We settled it like adults and moved on. You've had 8 years.

Move on.

[TheodoricFriede]

Get fucked. I have offered the out. You didn't take it.

This is all on you.

[Mobius_118]

Yeah, no. Life doesn't work that way. Deal with it.

[Raga]

I've actually intentionally tried to stay out of this because for the most part I have never been in the middle of any of this drama, but when I said that it started 8 years ago, I didn't mean to imply that there hasn't been gasoline continually thrown on the fire since then.

To your credit, you have actually chilled out on this over the last year or so, but when I first started coming back in here, it seems like you went out of your way to literally leave some baited, snide comment after like everything that Theo said.

A particularly classy example I can think of off the top of my head is right after we bought my cat from a breeder, he posted a picture of it and your response was basically like "yeah cats are all dumbasses and dogs are better."

I am not defending everything that Theo says on here (and he totally has this thing which I have referred to as the "mood aura," which means that his entire surroundings just get saturated by whatever mood he's in even when he's not saying anything or doing anything for some bizarre reason), but this particular dumpster fire of a situation has had input from both sides.

*Edit*

And that's the last input I have on this. I'm going to watch Netflix now. I'll probably have some response to the actual politics half of this thread later and continue my general attempt to leave the slapfights part alone.

[Mobius_118]

Never said I was innocent, I just don't go balls out fuck you. I try to be cordial and he spits in my face. And I don't take shit from people, you know this.

I'll continue to attempt to be cordial. If he cannot, then he brings this all on himself.

[Mobius_118]

So, back to politics.

Trump wants to try and authorize an emergency usage of the military to build his wall. Congress won't allow it.

I have to tell you, I'm not looking forward to maybe getting picked to pull security while some Engineers build a wall that won't stop anything anyway.

[Sinekein]

From what I gathered, what the House voted right after Pelosi was elected is paying for basically everything the Republicans want when it comes to dealing with undocumented migrants, except for the wall.

I think it might even be what Paul Ryan proposed before Trump became obsessed again with the wall.

I am curious to see how it will be received in the Senate and what GOP Senators will say of it.

[Vol]

Well then. I see passions were running high while I was getting my ass whipped in DS3 PVP and working out. Again, this thread is for slapfights as much as politics, and while skimming the conversations I did not spot anything that would qualify as illegal speech. As it appears we've all come back down, I'll leave it at that, but I'm usually on Steam in the evenings if matters ever go too far.

#Trump2020

[Mazder]

Firstly sorry because time-zones.
Secondly I recognize the irony in my following statements due to what I can do now this is all down to hindsight, hence spoiler tags to ease with doing which I claim myself.

► Show Spoiler

You three are synchronized tugging artists when it comes to circle jerks.

And yet we all come from 3 different areas/points and yet all somehow find umbridge with ya separately until you keep it going long enough for others to see.
I usually come in to point out shit you missed or to offer the explanation you miss and end up getting dragged in that way.

Yeah you don't know me, Mazder. Don't pretend to.

Never fucking claimed to dearie, only pointed out the literal behaviour in this thread and the options left open to you.

Because you can't ignore people in real life.

I've had worse arguments with real people. Wanna know something? We settled it like adults and moved on. You've had 8 years.

Move on.

Um, yes, you can.
Really fucking easily.

Yeah and one solution to arguments IRL is a restraining order. Also known as a "don't interact with them" rule. Something that can be simulated on a forum with blacklisting/ignore functions.
If anything you're the one being, stubborn, childish and petty (everything you claim Theo to be) for not taking that option.

One of you two be the bigger man and just use the site functionality already.

Yeah, no. Life doesn't work that way. Deal with it.

...
Except it really, really does though....

Never said I was innocent, I just don't go balls out fuck you. I try to be cordial and he spits in my face. And I don't take shit from people, you know this.

I'll continue to attempt to be cordial. If he cannot, then he brings this all on himself.

And as it has been seen that method doesn't work in this example.
Your refusal to take the very easily implemented option that would literally save everybody effort, time and arguments just shows how you yourself are either not over it, or are just as petty as you claim your opponent to be.

If anything you're bringing the rest of the forum down into the argument with you by not taking the ignore option and function.

[Grand Admiral Cheesecake]

Dude, you fucking called people antisemitic for not liking A Serious Man.

I mean, that's not true either, but I might as well say it and people will believe me, right?

Here's the difference.

One of the events actually happened, and I could find proof of in in this very group.

And if not with Black Panther, then any number of times you accused someone of racism or sexism because they didn't like a particular comic or movie.

There's volumes of GAC's an antisemitic, anti-muslim, anti-gay asshole comments. You yourself have been a complete fucking asshole to multiple people here on this very forum.

And one time I tell you to grow up using an off the cuff remark is worth automatically being labeled? Must be nice to be able to selectively use those identity politics you so love to shit on when it suits you.

How the fuck am I anti-semetic or anti gay?

I'll very easily cop to being against Islam because Islam is the worst major religion in the world.

I'm also extremely anti-communist. But then again Mobius uses capitalist as an insult so that's probably double plus ungood.

[Mobius_118]

It's just funny that GAC has no idea how a Democratic Socialist Society really works. Or he does, and doesn't want to pay his proper tax rate.

[Grand Admiral Cheesecake]

It's just funny that GAC has no idea how a Democratic Socialist Society really works. Or he does, and doesn't want to pay his proper tax rate.

We're not a democratic socialist society you nitwit.

This is the most inane position you've ever taken. I'll also notice that you presented no proof for your bullshit. Really makes ya think.

[Mobius_118]

Yeah tell that to my taxpayer funded benefits, paycheck, federal agencies that run public works, etc... We invest into those programs and departments to make sure everything runs. Sounds Socialist to everyone but the dumbest motherfuckers out there.

I challenged you to step up a while ago, to help pay for Flint's water situation. You declined. You proved my point multiple times that you haven't a fucking clue what you're talking about, and then you proved my point that capitalism works for only a few people. The rest of us subsidize your existence.

Just imagine the good you'd do if you paid your fair share of taxes. 70% sounds reasonable, just like it did during the New Deal era, which one of the results was us going to space.

[Augustei]

Darn i'm getting a strong sense of Deja Vu right now, as if this conversation has happened before...several times. Lol

Edit: Family Friendly Augustei =)

[Mobius_118]

Right? GAC never learns.

[FrozenShadow]

Like, today, he apparently announced he would fund the wall using the state of emergency. Whether he can or not is irrelevant - it has to make the news, because it is a politically important declaration.

I actually wish Trump would declare that state of emergency. At least then we would finally get rid of him one way or another. I mean really, not only Trump had closed huge part of federal agencies (which is barely legal really), but now he openly threatens to whole damn nation by the state of emergency. And all of over some frigging idiotic wall? I could understand, if Trump wanted to hire people to actively supervise the Mexico border as that would actually make sense and provide more jobs for the people. Yet, he just wants to build a wall.

Frankly, Trump had no right to demand any money from the congress, especially after all the talks about making Mexico to pay that wall. You should keep your promises Trump. And if that frigging wall is damn important to you, why don't you pay the wall yourself or at least part of it. If Trump promise to pay part of that, that would nearly guarantee his re-election for 2020. Oh, but of course Trump don't want to waste his own money for it, just about everyone else.

And if this wall is so damn important, why don't Trump and co finance it with kickstarter or crowfunding. Better yet, why don't we make everyone who voter for Trump to pay that wall. Government knows who voted for Trump, so they could easily send the bill to them. It would actually even be poetic justice. After all people who voted for Trump obviously liked the idea of the wall, so they should pay for it and leave the rest out of this glorious stupidity.

[TTTX]

Darn i'm getting a strong sense of Deja Vu right now, as if this conversation has happened before...several times. Lol

Edit: Family Friendly Augustei =)

Good thing I'm the only one.

Right? GAC never learns.

Pot meet Kettle.

[Augustei]

Right? GAC never learns.

Riiight....GAC

Here you go guys, haven't read this thoroughly, but it's a socialist source drawing the delineations between a socialist and social democratic society, the latter being the mixed economies of northern Europe. Not a fan of this book but it's still got plenty of useful information within
Towards A New Socialism

"Social democracy has traditionally stood for a ‘mixed economy’, for the mitigation of the inequalities of capitalism by means of a system of progressive taxation and social benefits, for parliamentary democracy and civil liberties. [...] 'Socialist’ activities have had to be financed out of tax revenue. extracted from the capitalist sector, which has meant that the opportunities for expansion of ‘welfare’ measures and the ‘free’ distribution of basic services have been dependent on the health of, the capitalist sector and the strength of the tax base."
So essentially a system whose financial basis is taxes from the private sector is not a socialist system.

[Augustei]

And if this wall is so damn important, why don't Trump and co finance it with kickstarter or crowfunding. Better yet, why don't we make everyone who voter for Trump to pay that wall. Government knows who voted for Trump, so they could easily send the bill to them. It would actually even be poetic justice. After all people who voted for Trump obviously liked the idea of the wall, so they should pay for it and leave the rest out of this glorious stupidity.

Actually wasn't there a gofundme or something for the wall a bunch of his voters started? it was raising like a million dollars a day

Found it: https://au.gofundme.com/TheTrumpWall

[FrozenShadow]

And if this wall is so damn important, why don't Trump and co finance it with kickstarter or crowfunding. Better yet, why don't we make everyone who voter for Trump to pay that wall. Government knows who voted for Trump, so they could easily send the bill to them. It would actually even be poetic justice. After all people who voted for Trump obviously liked the idea of the wall, so they should pay for it and leave the rest out of this glorious stupidity.

Actually wasn't there a gofundme or something for the wall a bunch of his voters started? it was raising like a million dollars a day

Found it: https://au.gofundme.com/TheTrumpWall

There you go. People wanting the wall can go there. And just imagine publicity stunt it would be, if Trump would openly go and donate couple millions on this funding. Lots of people would go crazy and praise Trump before they would donate themselves. It would be even better, if Trump would talk about this funding representing American dream and idea of being responsible of your own fate or so on. After that people would throw double the amount of money for the wall building....ad again Trump's re-election would be so much closer after this. Hell, it might even convince more people to support for Trump as this would show he really beliefs in making America great again and that he is willing to put his own money for it too.

But naturally Trump would never do anything like this. He is too greedy and narsistic to ever do anything like this. At most, he will take credit of this funding, if he ever learns about its existence.

[Mazder]

Hey Sine, what is going on in France these days?
Last I heard there was some form of protests going on before Christmas and one guy got his hand blown off by a grenade of some sort.

Did that actually happen or what?

[Sinekein]

Right? GAC never learns.

"Social democracy has traditionally stood for a ‘mixed economy’, for the mitigation of the inequalities of capitalism by means of a system of progressive taxation and social benefits, for parliamentary democracy and civil liberties. [...] 'Socialist’ activities have had to be financed out of tax revenue. extracted from the capitalist sector, which has meant that the opportunities for expansion of ‘welfare’ measures and the ‘free’ distribution of basic services have been dependent on the health of, the capitalist sector and the strength of the tax base."
So essentially a system whose financial basis is taxes from the private sector is not a socialist system.

Unless your point is to make a distinction between socialism and social democracy, then your quote actually explains that this system uses taxes on the private sector/capitalism to finance social benefits.

Actually wasn't there a gofundme or something for the wall a bunch of his voters started? it was raising like a million dollars a day

Found it: https://au.gofundme.com/TheTrumpWall

Aside from the irony of an American kickstarter which is probably financed by the same people who screamed "MEXICO WILL PAY FOR IT" at his rallies, at that rate of one million a day, considering the discrepancy between the proposed budget before Trump got his latest wall fit and what he asks for now, they should be able to pay for it around 2029.

Hey Sine, what is going on in France these days?
Last I heard there was some form of protests going on before Christmas and one guy got his hand blown off by a grenade of some sort.

Did that actually happen or what?

There were protests coming mostly from what would be the equivalent of pro-Trump counties in France - rural, poor, little access to services... - that went on during saturdays of November and December, in reaction to new taxes that the government planned to put on oil to finance ecological transition in the country towards cleaner energies. At first the government decided to ignore it, but the first days of protest were hugely followed and led to blockades all over the country, which eventually led to the president going back on his proposed tax and offering instead various helps for small revenues. However, he did not bring the wealth tax back, which was something the protesters asked (the wealth tax is basically the first and only one that has been removed since Macron got elected).

After those announces, there still are some protesters, but those are basically radical hard-right or hard-left who want to bring the government down. They have been causing trouble since day one, but now there are no peaceful protesters anymore to hide the fact that they're a bunch of wackos.

I have no idea of the long-term consequences it will have, but I've seen some new ideas flying since the government came back on this tax - namely, promoting nuclear energy again as a clean source, while before that it was seen as equally as bad as oil and coal by some, and increasing the tax rate on inheritance, which I would consider an absolutely fantastic measure to counter the wider and wider gap between the wealthy and the poor, but Macron will never do it, sadly. Still, if someone more on the left could take that idea and run with it, that might be a huge electoral boon in the future.

[Vol]

A bitcoin exchange (place to transfer them into real money and the other way around) that Gab was using for their donations has banned them.

Allowing hate speech on a social media site is a worse crime than actual crime, and the moral guardians of the internet will see to it that only when a total parallel infrastructure of access and finances is created will you all have to be subjected to the existence of such ideas. Don't you feel good now?

[Augustei]

Unless your point is to make a distinction between socialism and social democracy, then your quote actually explains that this system uses taxes on the private sector/capitalism to finance social benefits.

It's to demonstrate the falseness of the conclusion that the public sector is socialist, or that the nordic countries and other similar models are examples of democratic socialism. Much of this contemporary misconception seems to have stemmed from Bernie Sanders 2016 campaign, where he presented his views as those of democratic socialism, a statement that has annoyed both socialists and social democrats. They are not, they are social democracy.

As the book states, but I failed to mention in my quotes, the system of social democracy involves large investment into the public sector from private sector taxes for common public services, so the United States would not qualify as an example in most peoples opinion, it is still for the most part a Capitalist nation per GACs inference. What qualifies as large investment is arbitrary I suppose, but the difference between the US and Denmark is a notable one. Regardless, for roads and emergency services, and militaries to qualify as socialist institutions their revenue can't have come from private sector sources.

[Augustei]

Right? GAC never learns.

"Social democracy has traditionally stood for a ‘mixed economy’, for the mitigation of the inequalities of capitalism by means of a system of progressive taxation and social benefits, for parliamentary democracy and civil liberties. [...] 'Socialist’ activities have had to be financed out of tax revenue. extracted from the capitalist sector, which has meant that the opportunities for expansion of ‘welfare’ measures and the ‘free’ distribution of basic services have been dependent on the health of, the capitalist sector and the strength of the tax base."
So essentially a system whose financial basis is taxes from the private sector is not a socialist system.

Unless your point is to make a distinction between socialism and social democracy, then your quote actually explains that this system uses taxes on the private sector/capitalism to finance social benefits.

Actually wasn't there a gofundme or something for the wall a bunch of his voters started? it was raising like a million dollars a day

Found it: https://au.gofundme.com/TheTrumpWall

Aside from the irony of an American kickstarter which is probably financed by the same people who screamed "MEXICO WILL PAY FOR IT" at his rallies, at that rate of one million a day, considering the discrepancy between the proposed budget before Trump got his latest wall fit and what he asks for now, they should be able to pay for it around 2029.

Hey Sine, what is going on in France these days?
Last I heard there was some form of protests going on before Christmas and one guy got his hand blown off by a grenade of some sort.

Did that actually happen or what?

There were protests coming mostly from what would be the equivalent of pro-Trump counties in France - rural, poor, little access to services... - that went on during saturdays of November and December, in reaction to new taxes that the government planned to put on oil to finance ecological transition in the country towards cleaner energies. At first the government decided to ignore it, but the first days of protest were hugely followed and led to blockades all over the country, which eventually led to the president going back on his proposed tax and offering instead various helps for small revenues. However, he did not bring the wealth tax back, which was something the protesters asked (the wealth tax is basically the first and only one that has been removed since Macron got elected).

After those announces, there still are some protesters, but those are basically radical hard-right or hard-left who want to bring the government down. They have been causing trouble since day one, but now there are no peaceful protesters anymore to hide the fact that they're a bunch of wackos.

I have no idea of the long-term consequences it will have, but I've seen some new ideas flying since the government came back on this tax - namely, promoting nuclear energy again as a clean source, while before that it was seen as equally as bad as oil and coal by some, and increasing the tax rate on inheritance, which I would consider an absolutely fantastic measure to counter the wider and wider gap between the wealthy and the poor, but Macron will never do it, sadly. Still, if someone more on the left could take that idea and run with it, that might be a huge electoral boon in the future.

I got the impression they were from across the spectrum considering how extremely unpopular Macron is now, I mean 5 more approval points and Donald Trump would have double his rating

[Mazder]

There were protests coming mostly from what would be the equivalent of pro-Trump counties in France - rural, poor, little access to services... - that went on during saturdays of November and December, in reaction to new taxes that the government planned to put on oil to finance ecological transition in the country towards cleaner energies. At first the government decided to ignore it, but the first days of protest were hugely followed and led to blockades all over the country, which eventually led to the president going back on his proposed tax and offering instead various helps for small revenues. However, he did not bring the wealth tax back, which was something the protesters asked (the wealth tax is basically the first and only one that has been removed since Macron got elected).

After those announces, there still are some protesters, but those are basically radical hard-right or hard-left who want to bring the government down. They have been causing trouble since day one, but now there are no peaceful protesters anymore to hide the fact that they're a bunch of wackos.

I have no idea of the long-term consequences it will have, but I've seen some new ideas flying since the government came back on this tax - namely, promoting nuclear energy again as a clean source, while before that it was seen as equally as bad as oil and coal by some, and increasing the tax rate on inheritance, which I would consider an absolutely fantastic measure to counter the wider and wider gap between the wealthy and the poor, but Macron will never do it, sadly. Still, if someone more on the left could take that idea and run with it, that might be a huge electoral boon in the future.

Oh, damn, I hadn't realised those protests got so out of hand.
No pun intended with my previous question, lol.

I am not as clued in on the whole inheritance issue but I think something needs to be done to make it less easily abused as a system.

And nuclear energy....yeah, could work but only with the proper resources.

TBH what could be better is redistributing some funds to make the rural area's access to fuels, both clean and not, easier.
The only "true" way to get people on board is by making it easier to adopt after all.
Not sure if your government would do that though.

Mind you there is a lot I don't know about the French government structure, which I shall have to amend one of these days.

[Sinekein]

I got the impression they were from across the spectrum considering how extremely unpopular Macron is now, I mean 5 more approval points and Donald Trump would have double his rating

Comparing the popularity of French and US presidents is like comparing apples and oranges.

At 37-43%, Trump is very unpopular. A French president with the same ratings would be considered popular, as we have more than two parties, and as such the loyal base is much thinner - and people easier to displease. At 40% you are satisfying people who don't belong to your electoral base here.

Also, in France, single-issue voters are not really a thing, making it harder to "easily" extend your base

Gilets Jaunes were not really across the spectrum, moderates were extremely underrepresented, although many of them said they had nothing against the protests.

As the book states, but I failed to mention in my quotes, the system of social democracy involves large investment into the public sector from private sector taxes for common public services, so the United States would not qualify as an example in most peoples opinion, it is still for the most part a Capitalist nation per GACs inference. What qualifies as large investment is arbitrary I suppose, but the difference between the US and Denmark is a notable one. Regardless, for roads and emergency services, and militaries to qualify as socialist institutions their revenue can't have come from private sector sources.

But Nordic countries or even France qualify, even though France finds it much more difficult to actually tax the private sector due to some forbidden liaisons between it and politicians. Implementing the ACA also clearly made the US move in that direction, and despite all his efforts, Trump's inability to pass reforms at a steady rate means that he hasn't corrected the course yet (and he doesn't really look more in control of Congress than he was in the first two years of his mandate).

The US however are still far from being a social democracy. Uni wages or the remaining health costs are way too high to make them qualify. I'm going to get surgery for glaucoma in four days on my second eye, and the two operations will have cost me a grand total of €0 - while the everything that follows the surgery itself will have cost me around €150 (€75 for each eye, roughly) because I have had and will see the surgeon about 8 times once it's done to control that everything is alright. My entire health expenses every year cost me roughly €400 despite glaucoma, myopia (so glasses) and high blood pressure - 300 of which come from the complementary health insurance.

And France still has a way to go to be a social democracy. A fantastic thing in Nordic country is that some fines are adjusted depending on someone's income, which means that getting a speeding ticket will feel roughly the same whether you earn €1k or 10k a month.

[Mobius_118]

Hell, there's states that are trying to go the Nordic route, namely the Democrat led states. Funnily enough, they're the ones that top the US ratings charts for quality of life, economy, all the good stuff. There's a few outliers that fail to follow that, and it shows.

The system works, we just have holdouts that shit themselves screaming that pure capitalism works when it clearly doesn't.

[Joblom]

A bitcoin exchange (place to transfer them into real money and the other way around) that Gab was using for their donations has banned them.

Allowing hate speech on a social media site is a worse crime than actual crime, and the moral guardians of the internet will see to it that only when a total parallel infrastructure of access and finances is created will you all have to be subjected to the existence of such ideas. Don't you feel good now?

As long as it's not the government crushing me I'm cool with it.

[Mobius_118]

As long as it's not the government crushing me I'm cool with it.

Funny thing, those people who get all up in arms about the government have no problem with it happening to others. They'd rather be the ones doing the crushing. In fact they do it to themselves, if the leader is charismatic enough.

Looking at you, libertarians.

[TTTX]

Funny thing, those people who get all up in arms about the government have no problem with it happening to others. They'd rather be the ones doing the crushing. In fact they do it to themselves, if the leader is charismatic enough.

Looking at you, libertarians.

it's human nature, we harm (not necessarily psychically but with words) others we disagree with sometimes, it's something we have all experience in school in some form.

Both sides does it, end of story.

[Mazder]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1RqAD8B39vA