Quote:
Originally Posted by The Batlord
Alright you need get Alex Jones screaming about FEMA camps out of your head. I don't know what got Tate banned but I'm guessing it was TOS violations. I don't remember what got Jones banned but from defaming the parents of dead children and edging his listeners towards white supremacist violence I'm sure there was ample reason to ban him too (and from the state of his finances coming out in court he may have been doing some fraud as well).
I don't know all that much about Joel Osteen but if he has anything in common with other televangelist grifters then there's probably some kind of financial fraud going on that gets swept under the rug for political reasons. Take away his church's tax exempt status or throw him in jail if there's enough to nail him. If not then I suppose we just have to do some good old fashioned leftism and burn do- I mean improve people's lives so maybe the misery of existing doesn't turn them to grifters for solace.
Amway have already gone to court over being an MLM but got off presumably because they give millions to the Republican Party and have direct connections to several Congress members.
You don't need to black bag any of these people. They crime basically out in the open. Unless you just want people to crime with impunity?
|
Well maybe you can explain what you meant by its only the beginning and they all deserve attention. In response to me saying you're just playing whack a mole. I think the commitment there is pretty clear my friend.
The bottom line is you think silencing whoever you deem to be harmful is somehow protecting the public from their harmful influence but not only do I think this is largely a convenient excuse to censor political adversaries and pariahs, I also just don't care to censor them even if they are somewhat harmful.
But if you are just going to say Alex Jones and Tate are just exceptional criminals who deserve special attention instead of "just the beginning" of what I could only assume would be a lengthy purge, then fine. But I don't believe you. I think you're trying to make them sound exceptional to help your argument, but that's not really where you draw the line. You would cheer the same fate for anyone who you thought was politically harmful in any way. Which includes virtually anyone on the right and maybe even some libs. Am I wrong in making this assumption about you?
Quote:
|
Ah so activism and organizing are too difficult and long term. You want the instant gratification of hard work and self improvement. Well, you know there are shelves upon shelves of self-help books going back decades that don't involve right wing propaganda and rampant misogyny. Well there are some at least.
|
that's not quite what I said
Political action is long term in the sense of that's the way you organize to try to change society as a whole... which is just naturally much more difficult than doing anything about your own life.
Those measures that you can usually take to improve your life are often not at all that short term either. Just more so than a political movement is.