POTUS 45.17 - Section 4 of Amendment 25

[burd]

Re: POTUS 45.17 - Section 4 of Amendment 25

Does he ever think about anything other than himself? I'd be surprised if he cares very much either way.

That's true, but he is a vicious and insecure bully. Racism is a natural fit for him for that reason.

 

[Kepler]

Re: POTUS 45.17 - Section 4 of Amendment 25

That's true, but he is a vicious and insecure bully. Racism is a natural fit for him for that reason.

It's also the air he breathed growing up with his father and with Roy Cohn.

 

[Kepler]

Re: POTUS 45.17 - Section 4 of Amendment 25

Well, it's continuing, submitted without comment, but relevant to my questions in this thread:

http://nbc4i.com/2017/08/19/protesters-call-for-removal-of-christopher-columbus-statue/

Columbus protests have been going on since the 1970s.

 

[Kepler]

Re: POTUS 45.17 - Section 4 of Amendment 25

You don't have to answer this if you don't want, and there is no hidden agenda here, but keeping Washington/Jefferson, is that due to their relevance in American history, do you think (in terms of the general populace's thoughts, not you personally)?

Their relevance to American history. W & J are about the birth of a nation. The rebel "heroes" the white supremacists are trying to save are about The Birth of A Nation.

 

[Jimjamesak]

I didn't think so at first. I just thought he was a craven opportunist.

The thing is, one group (alt-right) seeks ends that are reprehensible. The alt-left, as you seem to define them, seeks to obtain a good end (stop hate groups) by using the wrong means. There is an important difference there, IMO.

I guess call me "alt-left" because I absolutely advocate for violence against Nazis. And let's not fool ourselves that's what these "alt-right" folks are. These idiots absolutely believe in their superiority and the only to quiet them is to challenge their superiority, and you can't challenge them on an intellectual level. They're emboldened because they have their guy in power so they think their revolution has begun so we've got to stop it. Nothing shuts up a white supremacist faster than another white guy knocking them down and standing over them. You want them to be in fear, saying to themselves "nobody listens."

Sometimes you have to remind the betas that they are not the alpha.

 

[burd]

Re: POTUS 45.17 - Section 4 of Amendment 25

I guess call me "alt-left" because I absolutely advocate for violence against Nazis. And let's not fool ourselves that's what these "alt-right" folks are. These idiots absolutely believe in their superiority and the only to quiet them is to challenge their superiority, and you can't challenge them on an intellectual level. They're emboldened because they have their guy in power so they think their revolution has begun so we've got to stop it. Nothing shuts up a white supremacist faster than another white guy knocking them down and standing over them. You want them to be in fear, saying to themselves "nobody listens."

Sometimes you have to remind the betas that they are not the alpha.

Studies or anecdotal evidence?

I think many of them are cowards, and that is why they dress up with camo and guns and cover their faces. They have histories of abuse and neglect and speak out only from the cover of groups. You are probably right that you can't challenge them (directly) on an intellectual level, but using violence to oppose them only reaffirms their sick message.

Now, with gopher fans your approach is the only way to go.

 

[FadeToBlack&Gold]

Re: POTUS 45.17 - Section 4 of Amendment 25

Columbus protests have been going on since the 1970s.

Columbus was a miserable cur of a human being. I can't think of any good reason to continue honoring him with a statue, especially since he didn't discover America. Now, that doesn't mean we need to go re-naming the cities, mind you.

 

[The Rube]

Re: POTUS 45.17 - Section 4 of Amendment 25

Their relevance to American history. W & J are about the birth of a nation. The rebel "heroes" the white supremacists are trying to save are about The Birth of A Nation.

And that is one of the things I was wondering with my original questions. In your opinion, the general populace will draw the line at relevance in U.S. history. That's the line.

And I know about protests against Columbus, but I don't recall it being this aggressive. Maybe I'm wrong.

 

[The Rube]

Re: POTUS 45.17 - Section 4 of Amendment 25

I guess call me "alt-left" because I absolutely advocate for violence against Nazis. And let's not fool ourselves that's what these "alt-right" folks are. These idiots absolutely believe in their superiority and the only to quiet them is to challenge their superiority, and you can't challenge them on an intellectual level. They're emboldened because they have their guy in power so they think their revolution has begun so we've got to stop it. Nothing shuts up a white supremacist faster than another white guy knocking them down and standing over them. You want them to be in fear, saying to themselves "nobody listens."

Sometimes you have to remind the betas that they are not the alpha.

Not cool. They have a right to speak their thoughts. Now, I'd love to have a few rounds in the ring with them, but that is not the country we live in, and I'm thankful for that. We can say what we want to say and speak what we want to speak.

 

[Jimjamesak]

Studies or anecdotal evidence?

Anecdotal. I've never hid the fact I've decked a few white supremacists in my time (Wasilla exists unfortunately). Quite frankly, it's easier for the white guy in the group to get away with it.

And sadly the race of the person giving them a pop in the face does matter. If a Black or Hispanic guy does it then they've gotten what they wanted. If a White guy does it and goes off with a mixed race group it completely shatters their world.

And for evidence I'd point to Richard Spencer who's known for two things, being a nazi and this:
<img src="https://media.tenor.com/images/51d0e89e6b7e70c1694e984271fdac87/tenor.gif"></img>

 

[Jimjamesak]

Not cool. They have a right to speak their thoughts. Now, I'd love to have a few rounds in the ring with them, but that is not the country we live in, and I'm thankful for that. We can say what we want to say and speak what we want to speak.

Speech, like every other action, has consequences. Advocate for the subjugation of people based on the color of their skin, you're gonna get punched in the face.

 

[rufus]

Re: POTUS 45.17 - Section 4 of Amendment 25

That's what I was thinking in the beginning...now? I don't. Given his comments (or lack thereof) over the last few months...I think he's racist; kind of like that person who says "I'm not racist, I have black friends!" That type.

I think that's Bannon talking. Worked for him in the primaries. I'm thinking maybe after all this backlash over Charlottesville, Trumpy's starting to figure out that maybe, just perhaps, there's a majority of people in this country who don't think the way Bannon on the campaign trail and in the WH told him people think. After all, all Trumpy wants is the people to worship him. And make a chitload of money off them in the process.

I'm thinking that a lot of this white nationalism/white supremacy crap we've been hearing from him is gonna go away. I think we may have already seen a bit of that in his tweets about Boston. Maybe I'm just deluding myself, maybe I'm writing my own "is this the moment Trumpy becomes presidential?" column, I don't know.

 

[The Rube]

Re: POTUS 45.17 - Section 4 of Amendment 25

Speech, like every other action, has consequences. Advocate for the subjugation of people based on the color of their skin, you're gonna get punched in the face.

I agree there are consequences. Like in Boston where thousands displayed their disagreement. Peacefully. And people have gotten fired because they were pro-whitey in Charlottesville. And disowned by their families for the same reason. But they still have a right to speak their mind.

 

[The Rube]

Re: POTUS 45.17 - Section 4 of Amendment 25

I think that's Bannon talking. Worked for him in the primaries. I'm thinking maybe after all this backlash over Charlottesville, Trumpy's starting to figure out that maybe, just perhaps, there's a majority of people in this country who don't think the way Bannon on the campaign trail and in the WH told him people think. After all, all Trumpy wants is the people to worship him.

I'm thinking that a lot of this white nationalism/white supremacy crap we've been hearing from him is gonna go away. I think we may have already seen a bit of that in his tweets about Boston. Maybe I'm just deluding myself, maybe I'm writing my own "is this the moment Trumpy becomes presidential?" column, I don't know.

Interesting thoughts (no sarcasm). I guess we have to wait and see...I just hope nothing really drastic happens in the meantime. I really hope.

 

[Jimjamesak]

I agree there are consequences. Like in Boston where thousands displayed their disagreement. Peacefully. And people have gotten fired because they were pro-whitey in Charlottesville. And disowned by their families for the same reason. But they still have a right to speak their mind.

I absolutely agree they have a right to speak their minds, they can go ahead. If they put any action to those words, they're getting punched in the face.

 

[The Rube]

Re: POTUS 45.17 - Section 4 of Amendment 25

I absolutely agree they have a right to speak their minds, they can go ahead. If they put any action to those words, they're getting punched in the face.

And there is the big difference. If there is an action, the consequences change. I am on board with that. I won't defend action. I will just defend their right to speech.

 

[Kepler]

Re: POTUS 45.17 - Section 4 of Amendment 25

There are some speech acts that are threats. But the issue is there are foreign domestic terrorist groups and a mechanism for dealing with them, but there is no analagous category and mechanism for domestic terrorist groups. Groups like the Klan and the Nazis are deserving of that category -- they mean what they say, and they are anti-democratic and in favor of the overthrow of republican government. There are certain speech acts which, in context, are assault.

 

[burd]

Re: POTUS 45.17 - Section 4 of Amendment 25

I absolutely agree they have a right to speak their minds, they can go ahead. If they put any action to those words, they're getting punched in the face.

Where does "action" cross the line, and does that line change depending on the offensive views of the actor?

 

[burd]

Re: POTUS 45.17 - Section 4 of Amendment 25

There are some speech acts that are threats. But the issue is there are foreign domestic terrorist groups and a mechanism, but there is no specific mechanism for domestic terrorist groups. Groups like the Klan and the Nazis are probably deserving of that category. There are certain speech acts which, in context, are assault.

What do you mean by "speech acts," Kep?

 

[Kepler]

Re: POTUS 45.17 - Section 4 of Amendment 25

What do you mean by "speech acts," Kep?

The difference between "I wish you would die" and "I'm going to come to your town and kill you."