Less well known [than other paradoxes] is the paradox of tolerance: Unlimited tolerance must lead to the disappearance of tolerance. If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them.—In this formulation, I do not imply, for instance, that we should always suppress the utterance of intolerant philosophies; as long as we can counter them by rational argument and keep them in check by public opinion, suppression would certainly be most unwise. But we should claim the right to suppress them if necessary even by force; for it may easily turn out that they are not prepared to meet us on the level of rational argument, but begin by denouncing all argument; they may forbid their followers to listen to rational argument, because it is deceptive, and teach them to answer arguments by the use of their fists or pistols. We should therefore claim, in the name of tolerance, the right not to tolerate the intolerant. We should claim that any movement preaching intolerance places itself outside the law and we should consider incitement to intolerance and persecution as criminal, in the same way as we should consider incitement to murder, or to kidnapping, or to the revival of the slave trade, as criminal.

- Karl Popper from The Open Society and Its Enemies [1945]

Holy shit sticks! We're all numb to the nazi Germany comparison being thrown around during arguments.

But the fact is, a description of the social and cultural state at the time of the rise of the nazi movement by a man WHO WAS THERE and fought against it....is identical to what's happening with maga/fox. Trump literally IS a new age, American, Hitler, and Bob and his ilk, the modern brownshirts.

Neo nazis are just niche bigoted haters, but the maga crowd are the literal successors of the historical nazis with the power to actually destroy our society.

CRT is not real outside of law school. It’s a big racist lie. It’s not taught in grade school.

Edit: Yes, if true, actual CRT, the law school class, was banned in grade school, nothing would change….but you want the intentional misuse and bastardization of the phrase to mean any mention of racial disparity, racist actions, slavery, Jim Crow, racist policies including those adopted by the Republican Party at the same time those racist policies were abandoned by Democrats in the late 60’s early 70’s, any mention of lynching, the KKK, the fact that non whites were not allowed to vote, the fact that non whites were not considered full human beings in the constitution, etc to all be under the name “CRT” and want it all to be removed from schools. You want to rewrite history so it resembles the false image you think you project. It’s absolutely moronic, attempted forced ignorance. The Republican plan for children because ignorance makes it easy to abuse and control the populace.

American history is real….and really racist.
By intentionally mislabeling anything about our racist history as “CRT”, a right wing buzz word they have stripped of any actual meaning to create some fantasy racial boogeyman they can point to to excuse blatant racist policy and actions, you think that allows you to pretend it doesn’t exist, to deny it, and to return to it. Removing any mention of our racist history is racist, stupid, and is a ploy to convince right wing morons that racism isn’t real, never happened, and so doesn’t need any fixing or even teaching. It erases an ENORMOUS part of American history, and all of black American history. You love that.

You bold faced liar. That’s EXACTLY what “anti CRT” is about, renaming the slave trade as “Africans immigrating”, calling slavery “job security”, pretending that Lincoln ended racism completely (but being confused because in your mind slavery is a hoax), ignoring the murderous atrocities during reconstruction, ignoring the blatant often deadly racism that was the norm through the 70’s, and the institutional racism that still exists, never mentioning and pretending attacks against blacks like Tulsa and others, mass murders, arsons, terrorism, all by law enforcement so there’s no legal remedies for the survivors….(The Tulsa race massacre took place on May 31 and June 1, 1921, when mobs of White residents, some of whom had been deputized and given weapons by city officials, attacked Black residents and destroyed homes and businesses of the Greenwood District in Tulsa, Oklahoma, US)…never happened. The anti CRT movement is about erasing that history so they 1)don’t feel guilty or uncomfortable for trying to defend or excuse having a murderously racist history, and 2)so it’s easier to return to that racist society with minimal effort because they won’t know where it leads.

Why? Because the senators that were complicit all switched to the Republican Party after the southern strategy, and those who believed in equality and rights for all switched to the Democratic Party. Another bit of racist history you personally love to deny despite it being the historical, undeniable record of our history. They don’t want to be asked, because they either answer truthfully and are proven to be racists, or lie and lose their racist voter base. Racists are nearly all…99%+-, right wingers. They do not belong to the party trying to eradicate racism. They belong to the party that openly accepts and fosters racism, and pretends, often insists it doesn’t exist when they’re in public….your party. The party of racists, white nationalists, insurrectionists, revisionists, anti American, pro Russian, sexist, anti democracy, anti education ignoramuses.

Quit bringing nothing but dishonest bold faced lies and rewritten history to the table. That means you leave, because dishonest bold faced lies and revisionist history are all you ever spout….because you are a dishonest liar and blatant consistent racist….and a sexist.

LBGTOW (little boys going their own way)….that describes you people well, we wish you would follow through. Go on now…shoo. Go your own way, buy your own country and go there. See for yourself just where unopposed right wing nonsense leads, just leave the US out of it. Ask Musk to forget Twitter and buy Guatemala or an island nation, invite Trump to lead for life, then GO! You have so many issues with other people having rights, so GTFO and create your own white male controlled, white right wing utopia…or move to Russia….but don’t expect to get to come back when it devolves into criminal despotism, economic collapse, and ecological disaster.

You came up before common core, so what’s your excuse?

CRT is another red herring….it’s a law school class misrepresented as a movement to teach white children their ancestors and parents are evil. Total nonsense the right created just to have something to be angry about.
Now the same people want to erase any mention of slavery, Jim Crow, segregation, red lining, etc as evil anti white “CRT”….banking on the idea that those who don’t know history are doomed to repeat it.

Not surprising to hear your support for modern day book burning.

Not everything, just known racists. (Like yourself). You just pretend you aren’t, possibly even convincing yourself (you are gullible enough to believe you) but your consistency tells a different story.
Edit: remember, you recently declared yourself totally not sexist, then 20 minutes later declared your support for MGTOW….a sexist group/movement I had to look up. Your racism is the same thing, you declared yourself a non racist, but your positions belie (contradict, prove false) that claim.

When you compare two similarly bat shit crazy people, chastising one, and the only known difference is their skin color, it sounds racist.
When you ALWAYS take the side of the white guy, even when their insanity and death wish is stronger, even when the white guy has committed terrorism (not this time, but many before like your comparisons of Jan 6 vs BLM) it’s a good indicator you are choosing based on skin color, or in the common parlance, by “race”.

So ignorant and consistently racist. When have you EVER taken the non white side when it wasn’t based on political affiliation? Not once I can recall, and my recall is fairly good as you know.

Dude wasn’t a Democrat, he was an absolute nut job. You’re listening to OAN again who tells you he’s leftist with no evidence of that beyond skin color. He hated both parties…he hated people…you might say he was an ecologist, but that’s absolutely not the same thing. He was a total racist and believed in segregation, that would make him a right winger.
Edit: He also posted many videos criticizing New York’s Democratic mayor, another indication he was more likely a right wing nut.

The other “nuke us” nut IS a Trumpist, not even an odd one. He’s your brand, not an outlier. Angry, violent, insane, and with the mindset “my way or the highway to hell”. That is what your party, and the right wing stand for….and nothing else, just hatred of the “others”.

Always ready to show off your partisan dishonesty and ignorance Bob. Anything to try to insult those you’re talking to. Such a little troll you are.

ROTFLMFAHS!!!
Do you see your post minutes earlier was you denying being a sexist?!?
Less than 20 minutes from denying being at all sexist to publicly and un-ironicly announcing your support of a supremely sexist movement.
OMFG I’ve never imagined someone so clueless, Bob.
You are a living parody.
Thanks for the laughs.
Congratulations, you got your liberal tears….I’m crying from laughing so hard.

Sorry if I’m being over sensitive….anything that seems to legitimize the bastardized definition of CRT, in my eyes, is buying into the intentional political ruse to paint any anti racism program, plan, or organization, even unpleasant history with the “CRT” label (and everyone knows CRT is the Devil), and I find that upsetting, even when it’s unintentional….maybe more so when it’s unintentional because that means the rebranding and improper conflation is working.

I think you know, CRT is an advanced law class taken by law students, not a racist movement to erase white people from history as the right claims, not a diabolical plan to make all white children self hating BLM activists, and it really irks me how successful the publicly admitted, intentional, blatantly racist scapegoating and misrepresentation has worked.

It seemed you were accepting the right wing definition even as you dismissed the (I assume anti) “CRT” movement by comparing it to unconstitutional anti German/foreign language laws in the past. Apologies if I misunderstood or came across as accusatory.

LMFAHS!! Did you hear Trump’s latest Fox interview/call in when he berated the host for telling people about OUR amphibious attacks during our current invasion of Ukraine?!? Complaining she was giving away state secrets by reporting troop movements. (These were reports on the Russian amphibious attacks, btw).

Q: which is it….does Trump think the US is invading Ukraine, who he considers an enemy, or did he forget that he’s not supposed to be on Russia’s side….or does he not know where he is or what’s happening and is just blathering in his confused dementia?

Newt has it researched as usual, some minor points:
- Ukraine is in the UN
- Ukraine in its pre war state could not get into the EU, there are economic criteria for that to have a chance to work. What was proposed was a free trade zone and economic help. The EU was slow as fuck. The Ukrainian political situation was volatile.
- Ukraine could not be admitted into NATO after 2014 as it was already in a proxy war against Russia.

What a US president with a brain could have done in Trumps term was broker a deal with Putin that would make land concessions to Russia (russian speaking regions based on referendums maybe?) in exchange for future EU and NATO affiliation for the rest of Ukraine with vague promises of weapon and troop movement limitations. Nearly impossible but it could be tried if one stayed a step ahead of Putin.

Trump patted him on the back instead and took selfies.

Don't forget that the US right wing also declared themselves fascists when they sided against the anti-fascist (Antifa) movement.

I read it, nowhere did it give an estimate of what those protests cost, and it indicated there were multiple other routes for the oil to travel so didn’t even disrupt oil transportation completely, much less ALL commerce.
And it was about pipelines crossing their (or protected) land it seems, a far cry from the truckers. Yes, the validity and severity of your cause matters, just like the damage you do and to whom.

Billions worth of goods stuck temporarily…but no actual estimated cost for their delay, this cost billions in lost production and salaries that won’t be recovered.

That protest was targeted against the offending entity, not the populace. I have no issue with natives blockading their own land and preserves that feed those reservations against permanent destruction for some private profits. That’s a far cry from the truckers blockading the main border crossing for industry and tourism because they’re afraid to get a poke.

The numbers I saw were special. Hundreds of millions-billions lost (your billions in goods delayed doesn’t have a price tag). That was before the bridge was reopened. These protesters weren’t satisfied with that damage and continued to close your capitol with ever shifting demands. Since regular measures had failed, I support emergency measures, seizure, even forfeiture after trial, of any funds or tools used.

Perhaps they became only as localized (but certainly not as targeted, and localized in a city not the unpopulated country), but they had already done exponentially more damage and showed no sign of end or even demands.

Let’s ignore someone personally supporting a grass roots movement outside their country and control, please. I find it a red herring totally unconnected to how he governs.

Yes, some Floyd protests were more violent than the truckers, some weren’t, remember how they were all violently smashed, tear gassed, rubber bullets galore, run through with police trucks, unmarked vans pulling up and grabbing people crossing the streets, unmarked vans driving through towns full of police shooting tear gas at any moving body, etc? Don’t pretend the response is similar.
Also, the Floyd protests lasted a weekend in most cases (occupy Portland really wasn’t about Floyd) and went elsewhere the next march. They weren’t closing down one area for weeks intent on staying. Most lasted hours and were peaceful until police became violent, despite right wing media’s fear-mongering.

I think you’re stretching, putting on blinders, and doing insane mental gymnastics to pretend you believe that. From the actual damage caused, the idiotic reasoning behind it (quickly abandoned), the extremely uncanadianness of the self centered far right rally masquerading as protest, the international damage, the foreign involvement from planning to funding, these are unique “protests” in numerous ways.

Their idiotic beliefs are only one of many distinctions I’ve pointed out, and as I mentioned only color public opinion and the amount of patience they’re given by the public, not how the government treats them. It’s not at all honest for you to pretend that’s the entirety of my position…it’s very Bob of you, and has lost some of my respect.

Pipelines crossing sovereign territory or preserves = bad so blockading those areas to force pipeline movement = good….oil companies didn’t truck the oil out, they increased shipments from other areas by rail. Read the article you linked.

Native cultures and governments are different. Pretending an elected board for a reservation works for the people is naive in the extreme. Read about politics on reservations, who funds the people that get elected in most cases, what happens to opposing candidates…saying the board signed off while so many showed up to fight against it seems a bit at odds, no? Like maybe the board members were bribed, had ties with the oil industry, or other conflicts….just maybe?

And again, those protests didn’t cost a fraction what the truckers did from my research. Delaying delivery of a billion in goods isn’t the same as costing a billion in losses. Neither is delaying or cancelling a billion dollar project. Be adult please….don’t make such specious arguments ….please. They don’t slip by, and they make me think you are being disingenuous.

Um….the horse and buggy still exists. It’s the main transport in many (often poorer) places, even some in America (Amish country).

You’re insane if you think the internal combustion engine is dead. Even if that was the worldwide goal, it would take decades upon decades to pull off and tens-hundreds of trillions in subsidies….and even then there are hundreds of applications where electric doesn’t work for hundreds of reasons.
If you believe that, why do you support expanding oil exploration and offshore drilling? Why destroy the few places left unadulterated for a horrendous energy source you claim is phasing out soon. That’s incredibly short sighted and dumb.

Besides, you might be unaware, the electric car was more accepted than combustion engines before, at the turn of the last century. We’ve seen this movement before. It didn’t turn out as you predict.

Electric is great, but it’s not a panecea, and it’s not a painless switch.

Just incase you're afraid of- you know- facing reality

========================================


IQ testing and the eugenics movement in the United States

Eugenics, a set of beliefs and practices aimed at improving the genetic quality of the human population by excluding people and groups judged to be inferior and promoting those judged to be superior,[39][40][41] played a significant role in the history and culture of the United States during the Progressive Era, from the late 19th century until US involvement in World War II.[42][43]

The American eugenics movement was rooted in the biological determinist ideas of the British Scientist Sir Francis Galton. In 1883, Galton first used the word eugenics to describe the biological improvement of human genes and the concept of being "well-born".[44][45] He believed that differences in a person's ability were acquired primarily through genetics and that eugenics could be implemented through selective breeding in order for the human race to improve in its overall quality, therefore allowing for humans to direct their own evolution.[46]

Goddard was a eugenicist. In 1908, he published his own version, The Binet and Simon Test of Intellectual Capacity, and cordially promoted the test. He quickly extended the use of the scale to the public schools (1913), to immigration (Ellis Island, 1914) and to a court of law (1914).[47]

Unlike Galton, who promoted eugenics through selective breeding for positive traits, Goddard went with the US eugenics movement to eliminate "undesirable" traits.[48] Goddard used the term "feeble-minded" to refer to people who did not perform well on the test. He argued that "feeble-mindedness" was caused by heredity, and thus feeble-minded people should be prevented from giving birth, either by institutional isolation or sterilization surgeries.[47] At first, sterilization targeted the disabled, but was later extended to poor people. Goddard's intelligence test was endorsed by the eugenicists to push for laws for forced sterilization. Different states adopted the sterilization laws at different paces. These laws, whose constitutionality was upheld by the Supreme Court in their 1927 ruling Buck v. Bell, forced over 60,000 people to go through sterilization in the United States.[49]

California's sterilization program was so effective that the Nazis turned to the government for advice on how to prevent the birth of the "unfit".[50] While the US eugenics movement lost much of its momentum in the 1940s in view of the horrors of Nazi Germany, advocates of eugenics (including Nazi geneticist Otmar Freiherr von Verschuer) continued to work and promote their ideas in the United States.[50] In later decades, some eugenic principles have made a resurgence as a voluntary means of selective reproduction, with some calling them "new eugenics".[51] As it becomes possible to test for and correlate genes with IQ (and its proxies),[52] ethicists and embryonic genetic testing companies are attempting to understand the ways in which the technology can be ethically deployed.[53]

Is anyone else cringing over Cena's lack of musicality in his movements?