Sure, but there's again a spectrum and if you vote for and support Trump you're farther on that spectrum than I am for buying shirts at Walmart. I'm definitely supporting fascist capitalism but that's quite a bit farther down the spectrum from justifying a wall of hate like you do.

And of course there's the fact that you're engaging in dip**** propaganda by pointing out a form of the truth that gives you an out for actively and vigorously supporting white supremacy. We're both guilty of fascism but you're proud of it and pretending it's laudable.

Triple the ad hominem attacks, triple the fun. Gonna have to do better than that if you wanna play with the big boys, my Hitler-loving amigo.

You guys are so damn scared of Trump that you can't even have a discussion about anything related to him without trying to tear down other people. That's pretty pathetic.

Calling a murderer a murderer is ad hominem I guess.

Ant,

Do you support the wall?

Lol hell no.

Yes you do. You blame democrats for not caving to Trump's demands during the shutdown because they could get something out of it, and you mock Mexico for caving to Trump. **** off, you white supremacist liar. You have no principles and are proud of it. You are exactly the fascist enabler I'm talking about who will destroy this country.

Nuance isn't your strong suit these days I guess.

1. My position on that particular situation was that Democrats could have leveraged what they had more effectively to get Trump to do a deal. They're supposed to be the smart ones after all. But they have the same winner-take-all mentality that he does at the end of the day, just applied toward different things.

2. Mexico didn't "cave" to Trump: the tariff threat just lit a fire under their butts to hold up their end of a bargain for something they promised the Trump Administration months ago. It was the reaction by the media to this "deal" that was the point of the humor. Hence my reference to The Art Of The Deal. You should know this by now, but a lot of my posts fall into the tonal category of "gleeful sarcasm".

Are you drunk again?

And, fascist?

Mods, I think Chula somehow got into Batty's account. I call upon MB Congress to declare a National Emergency at our digital borders.

Nah, bruh, you a fascist. You just a fascist who'd wonder how all the good Hitler could have done when you voted for him went so wrong.

I honestly don't get what your so mad about or what your actually trying to say. It's like your just despairing at existence or something and looking for somebody to **** on who you don't even know. Is it because they cancelled Season 2 of Swamp Thing?

And you're just trying to justify what you do everyday as a capitalist by looking to a strongman to make you feel good while pretending that you care about everything else by putting lipstick on whatever form of democratic socialism that you don't actually care about.

I despair at existence because the average person looks to nothing to justify everything and hopes God will sort out the rest which just means looking to the status quo to keep existing as a comfort blanket. As if modern existence is anything but the latest form of nothingness given style.

I'll tell you what partner. You can pontificate and moralize and strawman AFTER you've gotten your own **** straight. Then we can have a real discussion. What makes you think you have any right to lecture me about how I choose (or not choose) how to live my life when you don't give two ****s whether I live or die anyway? You've never given me much of an impression that you operate at some morally superior plane to anyone else I've met. Get over yourself.

I'm very interested in democratic socialism because it's better than the corporatism that has swallowed up the U.S. and is in the process of doing so in China and India (among other places). You don't seem to think that's enough for an individual person, but I'm not the one who calls the shots or makes the rules. I wasn't lucky enough to be born into the top 1%. Too bad.

I'd probably agree with you more about other things if you didn't have such a ****ty attitude and mentality about everything, but I also don't know everything that's going on in your life. It's not my place to judge you one way or the other, so I don't expect you to judge me either when you don't have the insight to do so.

Remember when I called you out for defending white supremacy and you resorted to nothing but ad hominem, strawmen & goofy stereotypes while blatantly lying about your own words? "Oh, it was only satire! That's why I defended my statement when others called me out on it!" Yeah, that was pretty pathetic.

Edit: BTW it's like you completely ignore that literal Nazis at Trump marches threatening to shoot BLM or the numerous mass shootings coming from alt-right ideologies. Go spit on an American flag and see how violently those MAGA guys lose respect for your 1st amendment rights. Your pseudo centralism just comes off as fake when majority of your posts are painting the left wing with stereotypes in defense of the right.

"I only listen to the middle class, you ****ing peasant."

"Ah ****, we can't actually win an argument with this guy. Let's project some political positions that we don't like on him instead! That'll get 'im" :love:

Lucem: you mean that discussion where you moved goalposts multiple times then got mad when I ****ed around with you afterward? Yeah, I remember that well.

I hold the Left to a higher standard than the Right as a general rule. Why wouldn't I make fun of them more when they're the ones we have legitimate expectations from? They're supposed to be the voice of reason and intellectualism in a world that pushes back against those things. I treat the subject of Right-wing extremism like I do Islamic extremism: it's out there, but there's very little you can do about it because the underlying causes are complicated. Whereas the whole thing about throwing milkshakes on people is less about deep seated fear and more about just being an idiot with no better way to protest. Also, if your spitting on an American flag at an event with people who feel like they actually care about the flag...don't expect to be treated any better than the dude who carries around a raw steak into a vegan march. Just sayin'.

Batlawd: You could always, you know, go join the middle class by shipping yourself in a crate to Denmark or something. What the hell do you have to lose, right?

No, you tried this same condescending dishonest, blatant lying bull**** last time. I never moved goal posts. Not even once. And you know it. Quit with you're bull****ting to cover your ass.

That, as usual from you, is a poor ass ****ing stupid defense. You know morons exist in every walk of life. You don't scrutinize one group over another expecting better. What you're really doing is spreading anti-leftist propaganda by using the worst examples as representations for the whole movement while consistently defending the other side. Before you even fix your fingers to type out even more dishonest back peddling bull**** consider the fact that you already stereotyped me with liberal cliche's for calling you out for defending white supremacy. You're feeding into ignorant culture war bull****. Consistently.

Can you link and quote to Ant defending white supremacy?

Yes, if I dig through the threads.

It was when that mass shooting happened and he pulled a 'what about this' with the racial massacres going on in the middle east.

Then he started going off about how majority bias is to be expected and that we're lucky that we're the majority and not Mexicans and as much as he claims that was a joke he was actually defending that statement against Batlord for a page where he, as he always does, accused Batlord of being drunk because he can't handle an actual debate with out childish ad hominem to dismiss the other's points.

It seems to me he’s been the victim of a lot of ad hominem. I see people throwing **** at him and it makes me curious. So if you could please do dig through the threads and show me something.

.

Right?

It was, as Frown said, whataboutism in defense of white supremacist massacres. Not only creating a false dichotomy, but not understanding the reason why we fear this over that is because this is here where we are at and that is over there away from us.

Right? Who would have thought that there's Chinese supremacy over in China. Or that talking about the lack of focus by journalistic outlets on a still present high death toll in the Middle East (which is partly our responsibility) was the same thing as saying "man, white supremacy is the right way to go.". Or that acknowledging that all races (including whites) are equally ****ed up when you put them in power is anything less than the truth.

And last time I checked, that New Zealand massacre wasn't a domestic U.S. incident. Seeing as, like elphenor points out, it didn't happen in the United States. I brought up the Middle East after that as a parallel to how these things are framed by the media and how they're no longer as interested in what the U.S. has birthed over there now that incels are marching through our cities.

All that digging and you couldn't find a single statement supporting white supremacy. Bravo.

Is this another strawman? Oh boy.

The cycle continues.

:rofl:

A fascist.

Can you draw a similar parallel to current U.S. domestic policy? What they're doing would be wrong in any country. Lucem "I have the reading abilities of a 1st grader" Ferre might want to take a shot at it.

See?

Strawman followed by ad hominem.

:rofl:

Remember when you were calling Bat pathetic for not being able to have a debate with out tearing people down?

He didn’t defend white supremacy. Defending white supremacy would be saying something like the Christchurch shooter did New Zealand a favor. What Ant did was put it in context.

Insensitive timing yes but other racial groups do nasty **** as well. That’s the truth.

If you actually read what you cited from those posts you dug up out of the grave, you see me not only defend racial diversity, but make fun of other white people and talk about the inevitability (in a positive sense for the whole of humanity) of the U.S.'s growing diversification, which was in reference to a study by a prominent non-profit organization on demographic projections. White supremacy won't be able to thrive effectively in a country where whites aren't the majority demographic. Are you butthurt because you wanted to make that point yourself but I beat you to it?

And yes, it is pathetic when I see people trying to tear me down when the best course of action you decided upon was to attempt to take me out of context and/or outright slander me. Bat and I fight a lot, but generally he wouldn't go to the extent you did to prove me correct.

No, he absolutely did defend white supremacy.

The comment that came after defending white supremacy doesn't change the fact that you defended white supremacy. In fact, it still kind of defends white supremacy because your defense of it is that majority bias is inescapable. You think white supremacy is okay if the majority is white. To be honest, as I've already pointed out, you always tend to back peddle on this **** when you get called out and that's what this comment comes off as.

Well at least you got one thing correct. Thank you.

Talking about the realities of race doesn't mean they're fine. You just can't do anything about them in the present. Which is why I cited the studies that I did in the first place to showcase that.

I mean, I don't think taxes are fine when I know a big chunk of my money is just going overseas to kill people, but the change is going to have to come from somebody above my paygrade.

I think he was also trying to say that other countries handle majority bias more savagely than us.

I don't think that is a passable excuse. Not just for white supremacy but any form of racial supremacy. And yes, when you said that you are defending white supremacy. I'm definitely not against diversifying our country, but I don't think we should have to in order to get over racial biases.

Edit: Look how far we've already come. We can do better.

You have a very bad of habit of assuming one possible and least favorable extension of someone’s argument is indisputably what they’re getting at.

He never said white supremacy is ok.

To me it sounds like he’s saying the majority often mistreats the minority. That seems like a reasonable assessment of human behavior. If you make the inference from that he’s defending white supremacy I’d say it is fair to take a jab at your reading skills.

Good grief.

Do you really need a qualifier for that? Why do you have to reach for the least generous interpretation of his words as possible?

What's annoying is that I'm reading it the same as everybody else that called him out did but got treated with much less respect.

He always gives Trump and white supremacists a pass or deflects criticism with some whataboutism. It's pretty easy to see the pattern.

He is saying it in response to people who think white supremacy is a problem. Context is everything. It's like the all lives matter thing. Yes we all know all lives matter and we all know that majorities tend to mistreat minorities. But using that as a response completely changes the context. The same way ALM is trying to devalue BLM's message he's saying it to demean the idea that white supremacy is a problem.

I shouldn't have to explain this to you OH.