Ed Dueling protests spark state of emergency in Virginia.

[BobTheCoward]

It would, which is why laws have been created to prevent it. We have not done so for political affiliation.

Those laws are wrong.

 

[sadhatter]

I don't understand the need to have an additional reason to fire an employee after you discover they are an active member of a Neo-Nazi group. That just being a Nazi isn't a good enough reason.

I imagine all the American men and women who fought the Nazis in WWII must be turning over in their graves.

their political views, by and large would disgust you and most like you.

So which is it? Is anyone who is very conservative a Nazi? Or should we listen to all voices because even someone who we politically disagree with may have a valid idea?

I always find it strange when anti free speech folks try and appeal to the views of the ww2 generation. They fought the good fight, but they also were the same folks being racist as hell when they got back.

 

[caveman1917]

My point is simply that dudalb's original position would apply equally to race, sexual orientation, and so on.

I'm sure he misspoke.

Are you claiming to have no conscious control over your political ideology? Because if you do have control over it then you should surely see that being a Nazi is a free choice, like being a cop, as opposed to being black for example, which isn't.

 

[Delphic Oracle]

France outlawed anarchist literature.

The anarchists started making libertarian publications.

This is not a problem you can legislate away.

 

[Giordano]

their political views, by and large would disgust you and most like you.

So which is it? Is anyone who is very conservative a Nazi? Or should we listen to all voices because even someone who we politically disagree with may have a valid idea?

I always find it strange when anti free speech folks try and appeal to the views of the ww2 generation. They fought the good fight, but they also were the same folks being racist as hell when they got back.

How dare you speak for my parents, or the many of their contemporaries who came back from fighting the Nazis and took up the fight against racism here! Sure racism was prevalent in the USA but it was from within the generation you just smeared that the seeds against it began to sprout. They saw the racism and anti-Semitism of the Nazis and what it led to. Many saw the parallels in racism in the USA. WIithin this group are the people who began the re-thinking, who began the change. Sure it was very slow to overturn 100s of years of prejudice and many, many remained racists, at least at first. But the ideas took hold and were passed on to the next generation to be spread much more wildly.

It took the children of the people you disparage to get to the gains in Civil Rights achieved in the 1960s. But they were continuing a battle started by many of the prior generation. And much of what ignited the initial flames and helped people see the moral outrage of racism came from the returning veterans who saw ithe parallels Nazi Europe.

 

[Stacko]

With friends like these.

“The only group he identified by name as evil and causing what happened in Charlottesville were the Nazis, the KKK, and the white supremacists,” Falwell Jr said Sunday. “That’s what I thought was bold.”

But as host Martha Raddatz pointed out, Trump said Tuesday that there were “very fine people” on both sides of the clashes in Charlottesville.

“Do you believe there were very fine people on both sides?” Raddatz asked.

“I have no idea. He has inside information I don’t have,” Falwell Jr. said. “I don’t know if there were historical purists there who were trying to preserve some statutes. I don’t know, but he had information I didn’t have.”

Maybe you shouldn't claim the president is plugged into the Nazi community.

 

[Cl1mh4224rd]

With friends like these.

“Do you believe there were very fine people on both sides?” Raddatz asked.

“I have no idea. He has inside information I don’t have,” Falwell Jr. said. “I don’t know if there were historical purists there who were trying to preserve some statutes. I don’t know, but he had information I didn’t have.”

Maybe you shouldn't claim the president is plugged into the Nazi community.

I think he's trying to imply that Trump has secret, detailed dossiers on each of the participants in the "Unite the Right" camp, and that this information shows that some of the participants have an objectively high quality of character.

Falwell's just blowing smoke, of course, if only because it implies that Trump pays any attention to what our intelligence agencies provide him.

 

[Giordano]

I've been alive for over 6 decades. "The President has information you don't." has been trotted out to defend insane, irrational, or immoral policies for as long as I can remember. In the vast majority of the cases history has shown that either this secret information did not exist at all, or was more than balanced out by information, secret or not, that countered it. A standard smoke screen.

 

[Fast Eddie B]

They fought the good fight, but they also were the same folks being racist as hell when they got back.

To be fair, some were.

 

[Trebuchet]

Trump's "inside information" comes from Fox News, of course.

 

[Stacko]

Trump's "inside information" comes from Fox News, of course.

FTFY. Let's not lie to ourselves.

 

[phiwum]

Are you claiming to have no conscious control over your political ideology? Because if you do have control over it then you should surely see that being a Nazi is a free choice, like being a cop, as opposed to being black for example, which isn't.

I believe that if you look back on my posts, you'll see no such presumption.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

 

[quadraginta]

No, many of them are still alive, and some of them have registered their disgust.

And some are Trump supporters.

 

[sunmaster14]

How dare you speak for my parents, or the many of their contemporaries who came back from fighting the Nazis and took up the fight against racism here!

How dare he? It is precisely this kind of faux-sensitivity and sanctimony that impedes discussion and detracts from this forum.

For the record, there was nothing special about the "greatest" generation. They did what was required of them when the circumstances called for it, just as any American generation would have I'll bet. Their performance was not without tremendous fault either. The US was very slow to meaningfully oppose tyranny (most of the actions before the war were undertaken by FDR without congressional or popular support), refused to take refugees fleeing the Nazis, and oppressed Japanese and German Americans for fear of fifth column activities.

Militarily, American soldiers were, pound for pound, perhaps the least effective of any of the major participants, save the French and the Italians. We won because of our industrial capacity, not because of the extraordinary bravery or dedication or skill of our soldiers. This is not to say that we shouldn't be grateful for their service. It is an important part of every culture to venerate its military veterans, and it is right and proper to do so (although without putting on rose-colored glasses). But I would hope that in a discussion on a site for critical thinkers, we could avoid wasting words on emotional nonsense.

Sure racism was prevalent in the USA but it was from within the generation you just smeared that the seeds against it began to sprout. They saw the racism and anti-Semitism of the Nazis and what it led to. Many saw the parallels in racism in the USA. WIithin this group are the people who began the re-thinking, who began the change. Sure it was very slow to overturn 100s of years of prejudice and many, many remained racists, at least at first. But the ideas took hold and were passed on to the next generation to be spread much more wildly.

This strikes me as a baseless assertion. It implies that without WWII, we wouldn't have made as much progress on civil rights as we had. I don't believe it. In fact, I believe the tremendous economic distortions and suffering imposed by the war effort had the opposite effect. I will concede that civil rights for blacks might have gotten a modest boost from US soldiers seeing black soldiers performing admirably in battle. Since the armed forces were still segregated during WWII, though, it's hard to believe this effect was widespread.

It took the children of the people you disparage to get to the gains in Civil Rights achieved in the 1960s. But they were continuing a battle started by many of the prior generation. And much of what ignited the initial flames and helped people see the moral outrage of racism came from the returning veterans who saw ithe parallels Nazi Europe.

You could just as easily argue that the children of those people were rebelling against their parents, and rather than continuing a battle started by the prior generation was actually opposing that prior generation. In either case, I think it's a ridiculous proposition to give the WWII generation credit for the advancement of civil rights for blacks or Jews.

 

[dudalb]

Maybe he doesn't know that Charlotte and Charlottesville are two different places?




There's a South Boston in Virginia. That could really confuse him.

Charlotte and Charlottesville are names after the same British Queen, but still....

 

[jimbob]

I believe that if you look back on my posts, you'll see no such presumption.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

I certainly don't. In fact, it looks a complete non-sequiter.

 

[Giordano]

How dare he? It is precisely this kind of faux-sensitivity and sanctimony that impedes discussion and detracts from this forum.

For the record, there was nothing special about the "greatest" generation. They did what was required of them when the circumstances called for it, just as any American generation would have I'll bet. Their performance was not without tremendous fault either. The US was very slow to meaningfully oppose tyranny (most of the actions before the war were undertaken by FDR without congressional or popular support), refused to take refugees fleeing the Nazis, and oppressed Japanese and German Americans for fear of fifth column activities.

Militarily, American soldiers were, pound for pound, perhaps the least effective of any of the major participants, save the French and the Italians. We won because of our industrial capacity, not because of the extraordinary bravery or dedication or skill of our soldiers. This is not to say that we shouldn't be grateful for their service. It is an important part of every culture to venerate its military veterans, and it is right and proper to do so (although without putting on rose-colored glasses). But I would hope that in a discussion on a site for critical thinkers, we could avoid wasting words on emotional nonsense.



This strikes me as a baseless assertion. It implies that without WWII, we wouldn't have made as much progress on civil rights as we had. I don't believe it. In fact, I believe the tremendous economic distortions and suffering imposed by the war effort had the opposite effect. I will concede that civil rights for blacks might have gotten a modest boost from US soldiers seeing black soldiers performing admirably in battle. Since the armed forces were still segregated during WWII, though, it's hard to believe this effect was widespread.



You could just as easily argue that the children of those people were rebelling against their parents, and rather than continuing a battle started by the prior generation was actually opposing that prior generation. In either case, I think it's a ridiculous proposition to give the WWII generation credit for the advancement of civil rights for blacks or Jews.

I didn't realize you knew my parents, their friends, and their many contempories who partipitated in the civil rights movement! Those are who I spoke of. And of how these people planted the beginnings of the movement for justice that followed. I have an obligation that requires me to leave right now, but you have painted an entire generation with a broad brush, a disparaging brush, while failing to recognize the bright and noble within it. I never claimed they were all magically wonderful, as I will explain more when I can, but what a dim and negative view of a generation of people who made your life, and my life, and that of our own children, as free and as rich as it is.

 

[Lurch]

How dare he? It is precisely this kind of faux-sensitivity and sanctimony that impedes discussion and detracts from this forum.

For the record, there was nothing special about the "greatest" generation. They did what was required of them when the circumstances called for it, just as any American generation would have I'll bet. Their performance was not without tremendous fault either. The US was very slow to meaningfully oppose tyranny (most of the actions before the war were undertaken by FDR without congressional or popular support), refused to take refugees fleeing the Nazis, and oppressed Japanese and German Americans for fear of fifth column activities.

Militarily, American soldiers were, pound for pound, perhaps the least effective of any of the major participants, save the French and the Italians. We won because of our industrial capacity, not because of the extraordinary bravery or dedication or skill of our soldiers. This is not to say that we shouldn't be grateful for their service. It is an important part of every culture to venerate its military veterans, and it is right and proper to do so (although without putting on rose-colored glasses). But I would hope that in a discussion on a site for critical thinkers, we could avoid wasting words on emotional nonsense.



This strikes me as a baseless assertion. It implies that without WWII, we wouldn't have made as much progress on civil rights as we had. I don't believe it. In fact, I believe the tremendous economic distortions and suffering imposed by the war effort had the opposite effect. I will concede that civil rights for blacks might have gotten a modest boost from US soldiers seeing black soldiers performing admirably in battle. Since the armed forces were still segregated during WWII, though, it's hard to believe this effect was widespread.



You could just as easily argue that the children of those people were rebelling against their parents, and rather than continuing a battle started by the prior generation was actually opposing that prior generation. In either case, I think it's a ridiculous proposition to give the WWII generation credit for the advancement of civil rights for blacks or Jews.

While I find myself in disagreement with many of sunmaster's postings, I see here a balanced view that accords with the world as I've discerned it. Every generation has its share of the backward and forward looking. The pushback against integration in the '50s and '60s necessarily involved no small number of "the greatest generation." We must be careful of both lionizing and villifying too broadly.

 

[CapelDodger]

While I find myself in disagreement with many of sunmaster's postings, I see here a balanced view that accords with the world as I've discerned it. Every generation has its share of the backward and forward looking. The pushback against integration in the '50s and '60s necessarily involved no small number of "the greatest generation." We must be careful of both lionizing and villifying too broadly.

We should also note that there was more to push back against in the 50's and 60's than in the pre-war decades, and the pushback was ineffective. Eighty years of Jim Crow ended there. Like Giordano, I'm in my 60's and I've seen astonishing social progress in my lifetime, on racism, sexism and homophobia. My generation may have achieved most of that, but it was primed for it by the previous one.

I think the association of racism with Nazism had a fair bit to do with it. Rising prosperity equably distributed helped as well, but of course that died with Keynesian econimics in '79-80.

 

[Red Baron Farms]

Even if it contradicts the other things that Dear Leader has said.

In terms of slavish devotion to the Party Line, these guys make Stalinists look like amateurs.

What I don't understand is how such a devout cult of personality developed around such an incredibly ****** personality.

Thats easy. It is cool to be ignorant again.