Author Topic: First Trump came for Portland  (Read 730 times)

1 Member and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline RavynousHunter

  • Master Thief
  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 8069
  • Gender: Male
  • A man of no consequence.
    • My Twitter
Re: First Trump came for Portland
« Reply #45 on: July 30, 2020, 09:54:10 am »
See, that's what gets me every fuckin' time someone brings up "duh riotars:" they make it sound like there's a band of barbarians running rampant, raping and pillaging everything in sight.

YES, THERE ARE SOME PEOPLE, WHO ARE CUNTS, THAT ARE USING THE CIVIL UNREST AS AN  EXCUSE TO BE CUNTS.  However, that does not excuse the pigs and other nice, jackbooted thugs our society enables from using chemical weapons on innocent civilians, assuming they're all potential rioters before any crimes are actually committed.  Well, other than being out during doughnut time "duh cur-foo," "disrespecting" a pig, or happening to be black while in the presence of a pig.

Fuck, lemme put it another way: if its okay for the pigs to assume we're all potential looting rioters and to detain us without a crime having been committed, then why not preemptively arrest people that might murder someone?  Why not arrest random poor people on the assumption that they might one day become drug dealers?  Why not just go full on Minority ReportBECAUSE THAT'S NOT HOW JUSTICE FUCKING WORKS.
Quote from: Bra'tac
Life for the sake of life means nothing.

Offline niam2023

  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 4154
  • Gender: Male
  • The Forum Chad
Re: First Trump came for Portland
« Reply #46 on: July 30, 2020, 12:12:27 pm »
In fact, considering he's using his time here to now basically play "but we must be moderate!" and thus cover for Trump going literally full on fascist, I think this constitutes enough of a transgression to ban Vanto right the fuck on outta here.
Living Life, Lifting, Waiting for Summer

Offline Vanto

  • Bishop
  • ***
  • Posts: 218
Re: First Trump came for Portland
« Reply #47 on: July 30, 2020, 06:39:24 pm »
I can respect someone who is in the political center because their ideology and values position them where the center happens currently to be. I have zero respect for someone who actively measures where center is and makes sure their current position is always within that range. Vanto would literally try to defend the Nazi death camps from leftist criticism in the name of balance if he was in WWII Germany.

No, I'm not. I'm just pointing out facts that contradict the IMO alarmist "fascist stormtroopers brutalizing peaceful protesters and kidnapping people" narrative that's being pushed and taking a position on these events based on all the available evidence. You should've seen me say that I'd be against this if we knew the feds were taking these people to Gitmo and black sites, and if it comes out that they are, I'll side with you. I don't make wild assumptions about your positions based on zero evidence as an excuse to demonize you, so I'd appreciate you not doing that to me.

Oh, so now we've gone from "they're not identified" to "their identification is too hard to read". Maybe that's a valid criticism, but if this is a problem, it's one that predates these riots by some time.

And are you talking about that time a cop in Portland threw someone's phone at a window? I thought that guy was a local, not a fed.

As I noted: there is no effective difference between "no identification" and "can't see the identification".

As for this being an ongoing problem, yes, it is. And if you're trying to defend it on those grounds, I can only refer you to Shirley Jackson's "The Lottery" for why the appeal to tradition is stupid.

On the last point, whether it was a local or a fed, it doesn't much matter; the tactic is used to discourage people from attempting to hold law enforcement accountable for their brutality.


1. Guess that's fair. Have any suggestions on making the ID more visible? I can think of some. Maybe making it larger, putting it on their chests, use of different colors? What do you think of those ideas?

2. I'm not trying to defend bad identification. You're not wrong, if it's as hard to read as you say it is, it should be changed. My point was that if it's a longstanding issue, you could say the people in charge should change it, but it wasn't their idea.

3. You're right; in that regard, it don't matter. But it does matter when it comes to assigning blame. If it wasn't a fed doing that, why should we blame the feds? We don't blame the FBI for enhanced interrogation, we blame the agencies that actually do that shit.

So how many of the deaths were from 'Rioters'. You only identified deaths caused during the riots. The information there isn't enough to say that the killers were participating in the riots or were in response to the riots. The only ones that definitively fit your scope are the ones caused by the CHAZ security teams.

Also The Week (that famous leftwing mouthpiece) appear to think it's fascism : https://theweek.com/articles/927661/why-trumps-invasion-portland-textbook-fascism

I'd say if you kill people during a riot, you're at the very least taking advantage of the unrest.

And congratulations. You found an opinion. One based on incorrect information. The rioters in Portland have been caught on video doing far worse than just "vandalism". They tried to burn down a federal courthouse, for example. So you'll have to forgive me if I'm not inclined to buy into the rest of what he says, especially his "Drumpf is going to declare himself Der Orangefuhrer if this works!" hysteria. I'm sure there are totally legit criticisms to be made of what the feds are doing, but if they really were "fascist stormtroopers", we wouldn't be allowed to make them.

Trump - or at least his administration - has graduated from proto-fascism to actual fascism. He is not just laying the ideological ground for a future fascist regime but is putting the ideology in action. Almost all of Umberto Eco's definitions hit the mark.

Quote from:  Ur-Fascism by Umberto Eco
1. The first feature of Ur-Fascism is the cult of tradition. [MAGA! Bring back the 50's!]

2. Traditionalism implies the rejection of modernism. ...  The Enlightenment, the Age of Reason, is seen as the beginning of modern depravity. In this sense Ur-Fascism can be defined as irrationalism.

3. Irrationalism also depends on the cult of action for action's sake. Action being beautiful in itself, it must be taken before, or without, any previous reflection. Thinking is a form of emasculation.

4. No syncretistic faith can withstand analytical criticism. The critical spirit makes distinctions, and to distinguish is a sign of modernism. In modern culture the scientific community praises disagreement as a way to improve knowledge. For Ur-Fascism, disagreement is treason.

5. ...Ur-Fascism grows up and seeks for consensus by exploiting and exacerbating the natural fear of difference. The first appeal of a fascist or prematurely fascist movement is an appeal against the intruders.

6. Ur-Fascism derives from individual or social frustration. That is why one of the most typical features of the historical fascism was the appeal to a frustrated middle class, a class suffering from an economic crisis or feelings of political humiliation, and frightened by the pressure of lower social groups.

7. To people who feel deprived of a clear social identity, Ur-Fascism says that their only privilege is the most common one, to be born in the same country. This is the origin of nationalism. Besides, the only ones who can provide an identity to the nation are its enemies. Thus at the root of the Ur-Fascist psychology there is the obsession with a plot, possibly an international one.

8. The followers must feel humiliated by the ostentatious wealth and force of their enemies. [The liberal elite / the jews]

9. For Ur-Fascism there is no struggle for life but, rather, life is lived for struggle. Thus pacifism is trafficking with the enemy.

10.  Elitism is a typical aspect of any reactionary ideology, insofar as it is fundamentally aristocratic, and aristocratic and militaristic elitism cruelly implies contempt for the weak. Ur-Fascism can only advocate a popular elitism. Every citizen belongs to the best people of the world, the members of the party are the best among the citizens, every citizen can (or ought to) become a member of the party.

11.  In such a perspective everybody is educated to become a hero. In every mythology the hero is an exceptional being, but in Ur-Fascist ideology, heroism is the norm. This cult of heroism is strictly linked with the cult of death. [Worship of military and the veterans.]

12. Since both permanent war and heroism are difficult games to play, the Ur-Fascist transfers his will to power to sexual matters. This is the origin of machismo (which implies both disdain for women and intolerance and condemnation of nonstandard sexual habits, from chastity to homosexuality). Since even sex is a difficult game to play, the Ur-Fascist hero tends to play with weapons – doing so becomes an ersatz phallic exercise.

13. Ur-Fascism is based upon a selective populism, a qualitative populism, one might say. ... Because of its qualitative populism Ur-Fascism must be against "rotten" parliamentary governments. ...  Wherever a politician casts doubt on the legitimacy of a parliament because it no longer represents the Voice of the People, we can smell Ur-Fascism.

14. Ur-Fascism speaks Newspeak. Newspeak was invented by Orwell, in 1984, as the official language of Ingsoc, English Socialism. But elements of Ur-Fascism are common to different forms of dictatorship. All the Nazi or Fascist schoolbooks made use of an impoverished vocabulary, and an elementary syntax, in order to limit the instruments for complex and critical reasoning.

It's noteworthy that there are aspects that are part of the American political discourse even before Trump. Specially the worship of the military and the heroism cult around it is scary looking at it from the outside. There are aspects that are promoted as parts of every national identity (again, something to think about) but how extreme forms are normalised in American context is worrying when there is the might of a superpower in play.

If the Trump administration really is fascist, it's the most permissive fascist government I've ever heard of. To put it bluntly, if the Trump administration really was fascist, we'd be seeing these people locked away without charge or trial, being sent to kangaroo courts, or just straight-up summarily executed. In fascism, you do not go against the state or the ruling party without suffering severe consequences. When Giacomo Matteotti accused the Fascist Party of committing electoral fraud, he was kidnapped and murdered by Mussolini's goons 11 days later.

How dare you suggest that Vanto's opinion isn't as worthy as the writings of some dead Italian. You're probably some sort of pansy who doesn't support teargassing and beating vandals or the people nearby vandals.

You know, you can stop attacking strawmen and talk to the real me at any time.

You know, for someone who is trying to be "balanced", it's awful funny that Vanto's arguments are the same ones being made by the far-right wackos who are cheerleading for Trump's fascist takeover.

But since you are, Vanto, I'm going to throw a simple question at you that I wanted to ask them, but know I won't get a straight answer for; if all the protesters are rioters, and all the rioters are trying to burn things down, how is there still a City of Portland for the Feds to be "defending"?

Where did I say that all the protesters are rioters? And if this were a "fascist takeover", why hasn't Portland's government been replaced with Trump's sycophants? It's literally in the constitution that the federal government is obligated to step in when the state and local authorities fail to enforce federal law or protect federal property.

See, that's what gets me every fuckin' time someone brings up "duh riotars:" they make it sound like there's a band of barbarians running rampant, raping and pillaging everything in sight.

YES, THERE ARE SOME PEOPLE, WHO ARE CUNTS, THAT ARE USING THE CIVIL UNREST AS AN  EXCUSE TO BE CUNTS.  However, that does not excuse the pigs and other nice, jackbooted thugs our society enables from using chemical weapons on innocent civilians, assuming they're all potential rioters before any crimes are actually committed.  Well, other than being out during doughnut time "duh cur-foo," "disrespecting" a pig, or happening to be black while in the presence of a pig.

Fuck, lemme put it another way: if its okay for the pigs to assume we're all potential looting rioters and to detain us without a crime having been committed, then why not preemptively arrest people that might murder someone?  Why not arrest random poor people on the assumption that they might one day become drug dealers?  Why not just go full on Minority ReportBECAUSE THAT'S NOT HOW JUSTICE FUCKING WORKS.

OK homie, I got no problem with people criticizing the conduct of the feds or the state or local cops. I just want people to have a fucking sense of proportion. This is not fascism.

Side note, I was gonna call you a hypocrite for distinguishing between protesters and rioters while implying all cops are "pigs", but maybe you did that deliberately to make a point. I will say, however, that I have a brother who's a police officer, so I'd appreciate it if you showed a little more nuance.

In fact, considering he's using his time here to now basically play "but we must be moderate!" and thus cover for Trump going literally full on fascist, I think this constitutes enough of a transgression to ban Vanto right the fuck on outta here.

Are you willing to be accused of supporting the riots and all the terrible things that go with them?

Let me make myself perfectly clear. There are valid criticisms to be made. Maybe Trump's acting beyond his authority. Maybe his motives are self-serving. Maybe these measures are doing more harm than good. But this ain't fascism. Fascism is not arresting criminals in a way you don't like. Fascism is a totalitarian system where everything is obligated to be not only completely obedient to the ruling party and the central government, but also to dedicate its entire being to supporting them. Under fascism, you're either part of the state, or you don't deserve to exist. The fact that countless politicians and talking heads are able to criticize this move without fear of being up in front of a firing squad really doesn't gel with the idea that Trump is going "full fascist". Remember when everybody made fun of the wingnuts who said Obama was a far-left radical/Islamic extremist/black supremacist who was going to make himself president for life? You're acting like the leftist equivalents. So many people have pointed out that if Alex Jones was right about Obama, he'd be stone dead right now. Were Trump a fascist, we'd have seen his political opponents die in droves or just disappear by now. Fascists don't fuck around.
All Rioters Are Bastards

Offline davedan

  • Lord Cracker
  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 3443
Re: First Trump came for Portland
« Reply #48 on: July 30, 2020, 07:05:06 pm »
Is that the same brother who is a cousin who is trans?

Offline DarkPhoenix

  • Bishop
  • ***
  • Posts: 217
Re: First Trump came for Portland
« Reply #49 on: July 30, 2020, 09:39:02 pm »
You know, for someone who is trying to be "balanced", it's awful funny that Vanto's arguments are the same ones being made by the far-right wackos who are cheerleading for Trump's fascist takeover.

But since you are, Vanto, I'm going to throw a simple question at you that I wanted to ask them, but know I won't get a straight answer for; if all the protesters are rioters, and all the rioters are trying to burn things down, how is there still a City of Portland for the Feds to be "defending"?

Where did I say that all the protesters are rioters? And if this were a "fascist takeover", why hasn't Portland's government been replaced with Trump's sycophants? It's literally in the constitution that the federal government is obligated to step in when the state and local authorities fail to enforce federal law or protect federal property.

Never mind.  You appear to be using the far right's entire book of arguing techniques; deflection, hampering on small irrelevant points to avoid answering the actual fucking question, downplaying everything...

Oh, and uh, in case you somehow missed history, Hitler and the Nazis didn't START with the concentration camps.  And the argument that it's not fascism until they do is a bullshit argument that shows you aren't taking any of this seriously... Because by the time they get to the concentration camps, it's already too late.

What Trump is doing is fascism.  It's using goverment-ordered force to crack down on protesting by those who don't agree with the government by claiming those protesting are "destroying the country" (which is what YOU do when you insist that only rioters are getting nailed by the new Gestapo, and that they deserve it for "rioting"), and in case you didn't know, this was a technique used by Il Duce as well as Adolf himself; it's a common technique of early fascism.

As for "where did I call all protesters rioters", you seem to assume that the new Gestapo are only going after rioters for "breaking the law."  But the new Gestapo are firing tear gas and rubber bullets at everyone protesting.  Your justification only works if you assume that all protesters are rioters by default.

Offline niam2023

  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 4154
  • Gender: Male
  • The Forum Chad
Re: First Trump came for Portland
« Reply #50 on: July 30, 2020, 10:42:14 pm »
"Fascists don't fuck around".

You seem to be arguing from a position here that says fascism is strong, fascism is powerful, fascism would just make everyone opposing it go away. And its not. Fascism is a losing ideology, it's cowardly and only exercises those extreme actions when it has complete state power. Its followers first start with irony, then downplay and finally just try and make the case its not so bad if they were serious. They're spineless racist fuckups that corrupt people at their lowest. And right now, Vanto, you playing BOTH SIDES BAD and covering for Trump's invasion is just playing right into the established fascist tactic of portraying both sides as equally wrong.
Living Life, Lifting, Waiting for Summer

Offline Vanto

  • Bishop
  • ***
  • Posts: 218
Re: First Trump came for Portland
« Reply #51 on: July 31, 2020, 03:20:02 am »
You know, for someone who is trying to be "balanced", it's awful funny that Vanto's arguments are the same ones being made by the far-right wackos who are cheerleading for Trump's fascist takeover.

But since you are, Vanto, I'm going to throw a simple question at you that I wanted to ask them, but know I won't get a straight answer for; if all the protesters are rioters, and all the rioters are trying to burn things down, how is there still a City of Portland for the Feds to be "defending"?

Where did I say that all the protesters are rioters? And if this were a "fascist takeover", why hasn't Portland's government been replaced with Trump's sycophants? It's literally in the constitution that the federal government is obligated to step in when the state and local authorities fail to enforce federal law or protect federal property.

Never mind.  You appear to be using the far right's entire book of arguing techniques; deflection, hampering on small irrelevant points to avoid answering the actual fucking question, downplaying everything...

Oh, and uh, in case you somehow missed history, Hitler and the Nazis didn't START with the concentration camps.  And the argument that it's not fascism until they do is a bullshit argument that shows you aren't taking any of this seriously... Because by the time they get to the concentration camps, it's already too late.

What Trump is doing is fascism.  It's using goverment-ordered force to crack down on protesting by those who don't agree with the government by claiming those protesting are "destroying the country" (which is what YOU do when you insist that only rioters are getting nailed by the new Gestapo, and that they deserve it for "rioting"), and in case you didn't know, this was a technique used by Il Duce as well as Adolf himself; it's a common technique of early fascism.

As for "where did I call all protesters rioters", you seem to assume that the new Gestapo are only going after rioters for "breaking the law."  But the new Gestapo are firing tear gas and rubber bullets at everyone protesting.  Your justification only works if you assume that all protesters are rioters by default.

1. I did answer your question. Just because you didn't like the answer doesn't make it "deflection" or "downplaying" or whatever.

2. Oh really? Well, let's take a look at what the Nazis did in their first two years of power. In January 1933, Hitler becomes chancellor. In March of that year, the Reichstag passes the enabling act, granting Hitler plenary powers. The first concentration camps are opened. Persecution of political dissidents and known adversaries of the party begins. In July, all non-Nazi parties are formally outlawed, turning Germany into a one-party state. In late June and early July of 1934, they violently eliminate "dangerous" elements within the party and their remaining opponents, and take the opportunity to settle old scores while they're at it. And in August of that year, after Hindenburg's death, Hitler combines the positions of chancellor and president into one office, cementing the Nazi Party's power over Germany.

3. The Gestapo wouldn't have bothered with rubber bullets and tear gas, they'd have just gunned them down en masse. Still, you have a point. While I maintain that I was only defending the arrests themselves, not the harm done to peaceful protesters and innocent bystanders, I will now unambiguously condemn any and all harm done to people who were merely lawfully exercising their constitutional rights and people who just happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time.

"Fascists don't fuck around".

You seem to be arguing from a position here that says fascism is strong, fascism is powerful, fascism would just make everyone opposing it go away. And its not. Fascism is a losing ideology, it's cowardly and only exercises those extreme actions when it has complete state power. Its followers first start with irony, then downplay and finally just try and make the case its not so bad if they were serious. They're spineless racist fuckups that corrupt people at their lowest. And right now, Vanto, you playing BOTH SIDES BAD and covering for Trump's invasion is just playing right into the established fascist tactic of portraying both sides as equally wrong.

Ah yes, whining about "muh bothsidesism" aka "don't you dare criticize MY tribe". Sometimes, both sides are entirely deserving of criticism. I have already condemned police brutality. Are you willing to condemn the rioting? Not even rioting in general, just this rioting?
« Last Edit: July 31, 2020, 03:33:39 am by Vanto »
All Rioters Are Bastards

Offline SCarpelan

  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 1084
Re: First Trump came for Portland
« Reply #52 on: July 31, 2020, 07:27:43 am »
Ah yes, whining about "muh bothsidesism" aka "don't you dare criticize MY tribe". Sometimes, both sides are entirely deserving of criticism. I have already condemned police brutality. Are you willing to condemn the rioting? Not even rioting in general, just this rioting?

You are equating attacking and killing people to property damage. Comparatively, I don't give a fuck about the latter. Defending cops is excusing much greater harm. Without rioting there would be much less press attention, political pressure and attention on the violent response by the cops; riots are something that happens when more peaceful means have failed and as the result the frustration and justified anger boils over.

Also, rioting != murder. Killing is only acceptable as a last resort when defending oneself or another person from immediate physical danger, no matter who does it.

Offline Skybison

  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 1244
Re: First Trump came for Portland
« Reply #53 on: July 31, 2020, 10:51:01 am »
^or as someone else put it.


Offline Vanto

  • Bishop
  • ***
  • Posts: 218
Re: First Trump came for Portland
« Reply #54 on: July 31, 2020, 02:42:04 pm »
Ah yes, whining about "muh bothsidesism" aka "don't you dare criticize MY tribe". Sometimes, both sides are entirely deserving of criticism. I have already condemned police brutality. Are you willing to condemn the rioting? Not even rioting in general, just this rioting?

You are equating attacking and killing people to property damage. Comparatively, I don't give a fuck about the latter. Defending cops is excusing much greater harm. Without rioting there would be much less press attention, political pressure and attention on the violent response by the cops; riots are something that happens when more peaceful means have failed and as the result the frustration and justified anger boils over.

Also, rioting != murder. Killing is only acceptable as a last resort when defending oneself or another person from immediate physical danger, no matter who does it.

You say that like the rioters haven't been killing people. I pointed out that at least 22 people so far have been killed either by rioters or by people taking advantage of the riots.

And you are objectively wrong. There was universal condemnation of what happened to George Floyd before these riots, and the cops responsible for his death are facing trial. These riots have accomplished nothing except hurting innocent people and ruining what could have been a bipartisan effort towards police accountability and reform.

How many people have to die in these riots before you condemn them?

^or as someone else put it.



Even ignoring the fact that Dr. King said this more than 50 years ago, posting this only proves my point for me. You realize he's condemning the riots too, right? That's literally what he says he's doing. And that in the exact same interview, he said this:

Quote
Let me say as I've always said, and I will always continue to say, that riots are socially destructive and self-defeating.

Imma let DJ Khalded sum this up:

All Rioters Are Bastards

Offline RavynousHunter

  • Master Thief
  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 8069
  • Gender: Male
  • A man of no consequence.
    • My Twitter
Re: First Trump came for Portland
« Reply #55 on: July 31, 2020, 02:53:21 pm »
Say, anyone got any Lay's?  I ran out of the sour cream and onion bag I had and I desperately want crisps as I watch this shitshow.
Quote from: Bra'tac
Life for the sake of life means nothing.

Offline dpareja

  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 5496
Re: First Trump came for Portland
« Reply #56 on: July 31, 2020, 03:43:09 pm »
Yes, Dr. King condemned rioting. And rightly so.

But what he was pointing out is that people do not turn to rioting as a first resort, as a "just for the hell of it" sort of thing. (Unless you're in Vancouver and the Canucks just lost Game 7 of the Stanley Cup Finals.) It's only once they've been ground down so hard had their faces driven into the mud and the shit kicked out of them so much, for so long, that they resort to riots as the only way remaining to them to get any sort of attention from their oppressors, to try to force their pain, their cause into the spotlight, even if the resultant attention is negative as a result of how they sought it.
Quote from: Jordan Duram
It doesn't concern you, Sister, that kind of absolutist view of the universe? Right and wrong determined solely by a single all-knowing, all powerful being whose judgment cannot be questioned and in whose name the most horrendous acts can be sanctioned without appeal?

Quote from: Supreme Court of Canada
Being required by someone else’s religious beliefs to behave contrary to one’s sexual identity is degrading and disrespectful.

Offline niam2023

  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 4154
  • Gender: Male
  • The Forum Chad
Re: First Trump came for Portland
« Reply #57 on: July 31, 2020, 05:45:37 pm »
Of course to someone whose argument is BOTH SIDES BAD, even when 95-100% of the current problem is caused by the fascists in charge, that just means that someone is actually more at fault than the opposite party. Which means there can't be VERY FINE PEOPLE ON BOTH SIDES. Which completely disproves and invalidates Vanto's whole style of argument.

He's the kind of person the Nazis had really appreciated back in the 30s. People like him basically made it seem like there was no clear moral choice, and thus because everyone was equally bad, Hitler could then portray his side as "at least we're effective".
Living Life, Lifting, Waiting for Summer

Offline dpareja

  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 5496
Re: First Trump came for Portland
« Reply #58 on: July 31, 2020, 06:52:05 pm »
Of course to someone whose argument is BOTH SIDES BAD, even when 95-100% of the current problem is caused by the fascists in charge, that just means that someone is actually more at fault than the opposite party. Which means there can't be VERY FINE PEOPLE ON BOTH SIDES. Which completely disproves and invalidates Vanto's whole style of argument.

He's the kind of person the Nazis had really appreciated back in the 30s. People like him basically made it seem like there was no clear moral choice, and thus because everyone was equally bad, Hitler could then portray his side as "at least we're effective".

So basically, a sort of "useful idiot".

Quote from: Jordan Duram
It doesn't concern you, Sister, that kind of absolutist view of the universe? Right and wrong determined solely by a single all-knowing, all powerful being whose judgment cannot be questioned and in whose name the most horrendous acts can be sanctioned without appeal?

Quote from: Supreme Court of Canada
Being required by someone else’s religious beliefs to behave contrary to one’s sexual identity is degrading and disrespectful.

Offline niam2023

  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 4154
  • Gender: Male
  • The Forum Chad
Re: First Trump came for Portland
« Reply #59 on: July 31, 2020, 07:23:51 pm »
And for Trump and his alt-right conservative allies, they see someone like that similarly. People so desperate to have balance and see the "good" in both sides of the argument they're willing to lend credence and ideological equality to literal fascists.

Vladimir Putin was eager to portray everyone as equally culpable, and Trump had eagerly played along to try and impress him.

The Nazis love a sort of "one true liberal" like Dave Rubin - someone describing themselves as a "classical liberal" or a "liberal who's also against political correctness" because that inevitably leads people down the rabbit hole to first ironic / joke fascism then to outright actual fascism.

People like you, Vanto, you might as well be fascist recruiters.
Living Life, Lifting, Waiting for Summer