@newtboy,
Nazis and white power groups are bad enough that standing with them makes one my foe....like NAMBLA.

Do you apply that with equal opportunity?

The guilt of association for the gallery with Stevens and whatever his name was from Amerika.org, should be similar to association with say the Nation of Islam and Farakhan?

What about Canada’s branch of BLM in Toronto who blocked the Toronto Pride parade and one of whose founders(Yusra Khogali) have said things like “white people are recessive genetic defects, this is factual”

https://archive.is/7R2LV/c2fbdb212391ecd395c3c89372819e2bd8d772bc.png

And

“ Plz Allah give me strength to not cuss/kill these men and white folks out here today. Plz plz plz”

Thats as much ‘evidence’ as you’ve given for convicting Brett Stevens of white supremacy, and then to convict anyone associated with him there after.

I say we dont get so extreme as you and deny all those people and anyone associated a right to speak their piece on that basis alone. I say the stupid and wrong things being said need to be allowed to be spoken, and confront them with corrections and revelation rather than force and violence to quiet them.

The gallery has been accused of providing a platform for fascist, neo-Nazi and Islamophobic speakers and individuals who promote white supremacy and eugenics.

In the summer, it held a “Neo-reaction conference” which included a talk by Brett Stevens, a white supremacist who has lauded the “bravery” of Anders Breivik - the Norwegian white supremacist who killed 77 people in 2011.

Mr Stevens' writing was said to be an inspiration to Breivik.

After the attack, Mr Stevens, who edits a far-right website called Amerika, wrote: “I am honoured to be so mentioned by someone who is clearly far braver than I, no comment on his methods, but he chose to act where many of us write, think and dream.”

Mr Stevens comments on his blog, Amerika, where he says the “neoreaction conference” was hosted behind a “veil of secrecy", confirming the secret agenda of the gallery because you can't have a beneficial discussion of these issues when the discussion is hidden from one side of the issue. Clearly then this isn't an effort to facilitate “a dialogue between two different and contrasting ideologies” when the event is hidden from all but one ideology, right?

The gallery has leaked the identity of artists who exposed its activities to the far-right neo-Nazi website, Amerika.

The gallery has also hosted, Peter Brimelow, a high profile American anti-immigrant activist. He has been described as the “new David Duke” – the former Imperial Wizard of the Ku Klux Klan (KKK).

Mr Brimelow founded website VDare, which the Southern Poverty Law Centre describe as “a nonprofit that warns against the polluting of America by non-whites, Catholics, and Spanish-speaking immigrants.”


Ms Diego, the owner, described the left as “more like a fascist organisation than the real fascists”“I’m not even sure if I disagree with the Muslim ban. I see it also as a temporary measure in order for America to get sorted while they transition to another form of government,” She said: “Our position has always been that the role of art is to provide a vehicle for the free exploration of ideas, even and perhaps especially where these are challenging, controversial or indeed distasteful for some individuals to contemplate." But her actions, holding far right racist events in secret exposes that statement as pure bullshit.

I can't speak to the student/Jordan Peterson thing without knowing all the facts or I might end up as wrong as the title and description of this video, which is pure lies btw.
I feel it's likely the video she played actually promoted hatred and violence directly, not just that it included one person who had a different political affiliation like you indicate, but I don't know.

After how you erroneously described this event/video, I'm not so sure I can trust your explanations. Sorry.

Again, all this info is in the links provided.

Your video, Quantum Supremacy & AI, with Stephen Fry., has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

Your video, Demonstrating Quantum Supremacy, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

@newtboy

i think what bcglorf is suggesting,and correct me if i am wrong bc,is that the ideological intolerance that is permeating the far left,and creeping into the current media narrative...is turning people away from the left and driving them further right.

that how the ultra-left deals with criticism by labeling ALL criticism as an attack,and not a functioning dynamic of dialogue,is counter-productive and again..drives people further right.

so what is a moderate to do?

on the alt-right they have a choice of a grotesque and vulgar racist political philosophy akin to the "aryan supremacy" of the 30's dressed up as nationalism and patriotism.

and on the alt-left they have an equally grotesque group who subvert freedoms and liberties all in the name of "equality" and "tolerance".while single-handedly being the most intolerant of them all.

fascists to the left of me..
fascists to the right..
and here i am..
stuck in the middle...

Carnivore;
JesusHitler-Race War-Male Supremacy-and end with Thermonuclear Warrior.
Of course, they would have to resurrect Lord Petrus, but I'm game.

Even if you were to extend the definition to "Eurasia", as he no doubt does, it ignores something critical. The aboriginal Americans were masters of biotechnology. We have found the antecedents of maize, tomatoes, and potatoes, and they vary from utterly inedible to kinda poisonous. Over time, they transformed these noxious weeds into the crops that today keep billions of people alive. Imagine Italian cuisine without tomatoes. I would argue that maize was the Mezoamerican cathedral, a visible sign of their supremacy over the natural world.

they absolutely have the same rights and they absolutely can be as "good" as people who aren't muslim.

and your argument can be easily used against you. you hold admittedly appalling ideas so in your own view you should not be viewed as "good" as people who have less appalling ideas and your rights should be limited. your view is inherently egocentric, relative to the individual, and is exactly the same as extreme religious views on apostasy or racial/cultural supremacy. it's the same childish "us = righteous, them = evil" bullshit that's a major problem with a lot of ideologies, religious or otherwise.

As a small sidenote, I think it's slightly risky to indicate, even tongue in cheek, that any of us were involved at the start of a movement that began in the 1800s... even if you're kidding, people might get the wrong idea. Third wave feminism, which coincidentally I think you're more opposed to than the first two waves, did begin (I think?) in the US in the 1980's or 90's, but the overall movement was a well-established global phenomenon at that point. None of us were close to being involved in starting it.

As far as your main point goes, I think it's partly a question of whether you define your own vision by the end goal you want to achieve, or the first problem you want to solve. "Black Lives Matter" is not the end goal, it's the first problem we need to solve on the way to a state free of police murder. Egalitarianism, on the other hand, can be the end goal. It doesn't tell me which problem areas you want to address though.

For some feminists, feminism is the end goal - a woman-centric world would be better, more sane, and more sustainable in their view than any other world. For other feminists, feminism is the first problem area to address, ie that we are literally living in a culture of undeniable male supremacy.

The problem with only defining your end goal is that it can become a little unclear what, if any, action you want to take. "You matter" is certainly fine, but I have no idea what you want to change in society, or if you want to change anything. I matter, you matter, and the Koch brothers matter - but we still have very different ideas about what society should be. In a perfect world I might want to join up under the egalitarian banner, but in the current mess we're in, I tend more towards environmentalism, socialism and feminism - because those are the problem areas I want us to address first.

"Claiming to be at the top of the food chain has become a popular justification for eating animal products and an affirmation of our ability to violently dominate everything and everyone. Yet justifications for needless violence that draw on notions of power and supremacy are based on the philosophy of “Might makes right” — the principle behind the worst atrocities and crimes of human history."

"We humans are not at the top of anything. We are merely part of an interdependent web of life that forms complex yet fragile ecosystems. We choose to either participate in the protection of these natural systems, or to destroy them at our own peril. The concept of a food chain is a human construct that imposes a rigid and competitive hierarchy among species, rather than a good faith understanding of the complexity of the ecosystems to which we belong. Selectively appealing to biological determinism also ignores the fact that we are moral agents. By choosing plant foods, we can get our nutrients through primary sources of nourishment, in the most environmentally friendly and resource-efficient way possible, minimizing our harm to other animals, humans and the planet."

http://freefromharm.org/common-justifications-for-eating-animals/breaking-food-chain-myth/

@CrushBug

Related story: during the later years of the war, when Allied air and sea supremacy made the Bay of Biscay a deathtrap, Allied torpedo boats took up ambush positions at the entrances to U-Boot bases, particularly La Rochelle. They'd get into position at night and stay just outside of range of the coastal defence batteries. Before outgoing submarines could reach deep water, they'd be plastered with hand grenades by these speed boats.

It wouldn't be able to sink a sub, but a lucky hit might damage the periscope and it did reduce the sub's sonar abilities by massive amounts, covering the entire exit area in a blanket of noise. Not to mention the psychological effect...

Anyway, just small bits of history.

Now, about this video: that small chance to be hit by a grenade chunk is surpassed by the rather noticable chance to be hit by one of roughly 6500 steel balls within a run-of-the-mill frag grenade used over here. Doesn't make the underwater experience any better though...

If 'unequivocally disavow' are 'pretty complicated words' to Trump, he's completely unqualified for office.
But he actually asked him to 'unequivocally condemn' Duke, not 'disavow', then went on to dumb it down farther and said 'and say you don't want his vote, or the votes of white supremacists'. Trump replied clearly that he knows nothing about David Duke or white supremacists, so he won't even discuss them. The Duke part is a blatant lie, he's publicly condemned David Duke in the recent past. Condemning or not condemning white supremacists requires no additional information, unless you simply don't know what white supremacy is, which in itself is also a disqualifier for any high office.
At the time of the interview, there was no problem with him understanding anything or bad communication/equipment, only later when his answer bit him in the ass.
I knew that at some point this catch 22 of either being caught agreeing or disagreeing with blatant racists and white supremacists would catch up with him, because taking either stance alienates 1/2 his supporters and makes him lose the election.

I don't hate you. Just the stupid opinions you express all the time.

"You're better than that". I know because you've made pretty thoughtful neutral comments on occasion.

[like on the Ann Coulter segment. You at least acknowledge BOTH sides. how liberal of you]


But yeah, you're just stupid.

You claim you aren't a racist.. and then tell me i'm inferior..
Which is THE definition of White Supremacy.. so..

But please, explain to me why is it that..

Blacks are "playing the victim".. but Conservatives aren't?

You got FoxNews, 300,000 Christian Churches, Christmas & Easter, Memorial Day & July 4th, Every President besides Clinton, Carter, Kennedy, & FDR..

Explain how you & @lantern53 aren't just making up problems to complain about?

Let me quote the Vice President of the Confederate States, March 21st, 1861:

"The new constitution has put at rest, forever, all the agitating questions relating to our peculiar institution African slavery as it exists amongst us the proper status of the negro in our form of civilization. This was the immediate cause of the late rupture and present revolution."

(...)

"Our new government is founded upon exactly the opposite idea; its foundations are laid, its corner- stone rests, upon the great truth that the negro is not equal to the white man; that slavery subordination to the superior race is his natural and normal condition. This, our new government, is the first, in the history of the world, based upon this great physical, philosophical, and moral truth."

That's white supremacy. That's white supremacy and then some.

At the end I wondered if the woman was calling the cops and then I was all like "oh, wait".

I think it's worth remembering that the failings aren't limited entirely to the police force. I believe they are a product of their environment as much as poor neighbourhoods they "police". This is institutional racism, a system in which good people are trapped by the aftershocks of white supremacy. Not to say individuals shouldn't be held accountable, I just don't believe that taking an antagonistic stance towards the enforcers is somehow going to shame them into improving when really the problem is far more complex and much more deeply rooted than "all police are racist pigs". How does anything grow straight in a city like Baltimore, really.