Politics Discussion

Discussion in 'Politics, Etc. (Archived)' started by Waterd, Dec 18, 2014.

  1. Erenan

    Erenan Well-Known Member

    Boxing mitts are fine. Pistol whipping is cheating. You can use the gun for intimidation though.

    Clown shoes are clown shoes.
  2. keithburgun

    keithburgun Administrator, Lead Designer Staff Member

    Let's keep the conversation on topic, please.

    I think the conversation about nazi-punching is actually pretty interesting and more complicated than most people think so I'd love to hear more about that.

    (If you think that conversation is stupid, the really simple way to deal with that is to not post about it.)
  3. SwiftSpear

    SwiftSpear Active Member

    Way to take the high ground.
  4. keithburgun

    keithburgun Administrator, Lead Designer Staff Member

    Let's all take the high ground from now on in this thread. Try to assume the best of the people you're disagreeing with if possible. Otherwise it's really just not worth the time and effort to type stuff.
  5. -Y-

    -Y- Active Member

    I don't think it is. Only thing Nazi punching is good for is Feels Good™.

    There is this narrative, that if only others countries/people/institutions stopped Hitler, the horrors of WWII could have been averted. But that narrative is false. Mein Kampf was written in a jail; Nazis were frequently attacked; and there were numerous attempts at Hitler's life.

    I think there's too much emphasis in America on importance of individual, versus importance of societal movement. And that makes people think, if only we punch/kill/stop this guy, the rest of the movement will be halted. It's akin to trying to stop a tsunami with a pistol.

    Right now, there's a hunger for change in America, and the only one offering bread are alt right. Solution for this hunger is not, breaking a stall, but offering something better.
    Last edited: Feb 17, 2017
  6. Lemon

    Lemon Well-Known Member

    Promoting violence will NOT work out well for the left. There was a stream today where Sargon, JonTron, Boogie2988 and Philip Defranco (4 huge youtubers) talked about the recent "controversy" involving PewDiePie (the biggest youtuber of all). The left is hemorrhaging young people by the million and it's accelerating now that the left is hosting riots and advocating for violence. Since the UC Berkely riots Milo's new book Dangerous has become the #1 bestseller in the Ethical Issues category. The book doesn't even release for another month!

    The writing is on the wall. If the left doesn't shape up soon it's in for collapse.
    Last edited: Feb 17, 2017
  7. -Y-

    -Y- Active Member

    Neither will reducing people's right to be heard help. Sure you don't want Milo to be heard, but tomorrow, it won't be Milo facing Riots. It will be you. And let's be clear. Right can be REALLY good at riots.
    Lemon likes this.
  8. Plumlum

    Plumlum Well-Known Member

    Maybe if the Democratic party falls, a progressive party will take it's place.
  9. Lemon

    Lemon Well-Known Member

    I think the Democrats are a progressive party, and a liberal party will take their place.
  10. -Y-

    -Y- Active Member

  11. garcia1000

    garcia1000 Guest

    Is boxing mitts when you make mitt romney fight against his clone
    Erenan likes this.
  12. Bucky

    Bucky Well-Known Member

    Talks of a Democratic party collapse ignore one of the major constraints in American politics: inertia. In order to be successful in an election, a party needs to have had significant presence in the previous election. This is enforced locally by fundraising concerns and party loyalty - having a D or R by your name gets you a bunch of free money and at least 20% of the vote - and federally by state election laws that require considerable expense and effort for third parties to even get on the ballot in the first place.

    That said, if by 'collapse' you mean 'continues to bleed influence for a few election cycles', that might happen.
  13. Erenan

    Erenan Well-Known Member

    I would submit that liberty minded people (i.e., libertarians, but not necessarily the LP) are offering something much much better than the status quo.

    Also, the Punchyists. But that goes without saying.
  14. -Y-

    -Y- Active Member

    Yeah, but they don't allow guns 0/10. Also not sure if your allow people to carry Mitts*.

    Mitts* - two large person called Mitt, that outsource punches.
  15. Erenan

    Erenan Well-Known Member

    RE: Nazi-punching: I'm a Punchyist so I think punching Nazis is good a fortiori because punching anyone is good. But since I'm a grandmaster of hypothetical contingent thinking, I'll offer this: Speaking hypothetically, if I were not a Punchyist, I'd think the problem with the punching Nazis movement is that the definition of "Nazi" is gradually expanding to include people that really needn't be punched. I'm seeing people say that they think it's OK to punch both Nazis and white male libertarians. I'm not sure if that's a joke or not (of course, according to certain people nothing is ever really just a joke, though I disagree strongly with that), but it doesn't matter. Some people seem to think that punching/pepper spraying Trump supporters in general is also fine, and they seem to be serious when they say this because they also actually do it. Are they Nazis? No, of course not. But right now the vocal angry left seems to think so. IMO calling Trump supporters Nazis is kind of like calling Bernie Sanders supporters Bolsheviks.
    Lemon likes this.
  16. Erenan

    Erenan Well-Known Member

    Now I'll temper that by adding what I meant to add in the first place but forgot: I'm not sure to what extent the left thinks it's okay to punch Nazis and I'm not sure how much of the left is expanding who counts as a Nazi. Some of the outspoken Hollywood celebs seem to be included. Not sure how much of the general population is part of that. But I am kind of afraid of a slippery slope thing happening here. I really don't need angry protesters in their anger mistaking me for someone who deserves to be punched because I don't agree with their agenda.

    That's all part of what I'd say if I weren't a devout Punchyist.
  17. SwiftSpear

    SwiftSpear Active Member

    On a Sargon stream no less. Boogie is pretty leftist and Philip is centrist leaning left. I would not have expected them on a Sargon stream. Sargon can be pretty sketchy and Veemonro is filthy, and pretty much full alt-right. There's traditionally a pretty solid split between the Youtube political pundits and mainstream Youtube entertainers. I'm kinda weirded out non-bitter-right-wing-manchildren want to talk with Sargon.

    WallStreet Journal has really screwed the pooch with this move.
  18. keithburgun

    keithburgun Administrator, Lead Designer Staff Member

    I agree with this strongly. To re-state my position on punching: I am against it, in any cases except clear cut cases of immediate self-defense. So, I disagree with elements of the left who are advocating for and celebrating videos of guys with fucking loathsome F- views getting attacked. I am totally against that.


    I also think there is another thing going on here, which is that it's quite easy for me, and people like me, to be against such things and speak out against such things in a time like right now. I think what white upper class dudes can forget is that Trump doesn't threaten them nearly as much as he threatens people of color, women, or anyone else who isn't like them. Maybe it's a little bit understandable that some kinds of people would be acting out of a very real sense of existential fear right now.

    So I think the correct response to nazi-punching is more nuanced than EITHER:

    1). Punching nazis is wrong!, or

    2). We need to punch nazis

    I think the reality is something more like, yes, punching people is wrong and we shouldn't do it, and we shouldn't celebrate it. But it is also a little bit insensitive and myopic to end it there. Maybe we need to have compassion on all sides of this equation: compassion enough for the loathsome-view people that we don't want them to be physically assaulted, but also compassion for those who feel so truly threatened that they feel compelled to use violence.

    My MO on this is basically this: I will never celebrate violence of any kind, with no exceptions. But I also will not necessarily scold people who are engaging in this kind of violence (within some limits).
  19. Bucky

    Bucky Well-Known Member

    I don't see how Trump would be more threatening to people of color than to white people in the same socioeconomic bucket.
    Last edited: Feb 17, 2017
    Lemon likes this.
  20. Erenan

    Erenan Well-Known Member

    I think the concern some people have is that letting them off the hook like this will lead them to commit more and worse acts of violence (i.e., violence other than punching). One fear that I've heard expressed is that as a society we'll become "desensitized" to the violence (and to the property destruction and riots and protests and etc.) to the point where the media won't cover it any more because everyone's like "meh, so what else is new?" And then in order to get people's attention, they'll have to ramp up their level of violence. Alternatively, if the people committing the violence don't receive condemnation for their actions from people they trust and respect, they may feel that they aren't doing anything wrong and continue doing it and possibly even escalate it.

    Not sure how I feel about that concern.
    keithburgun likes this.

Share This Page