Jump to content

Tonight’s debate.


Dark_Knight

Recommended Posts

Antifa/Proud boys (and anyone else who acts out political violence) is retarded. I'm neither left, or right leaning, and def not even a smidge minarchist. So when two of my enemies are fighting one another, I let them. I do consider favoring one, or speculate which enemy views me more favorably because I know my enemies very well. Aside from each other, the freedom I enjoy has always been a the 2nd biggest threat to either one, and fulfilling their vision. Let them fight.

 

This is why I don't vote. Seems like the only useful method for effecting political change is buying politicians, not voting for them. If either candidate promised to lower gov spending, stop going after non-criminal undocumented immigrants, end the drug war, or anything else I worth giving a fuck about I'd register to vote but we all know that shit isn't happening with either bullshit, anti freedom candidate.

Edited by Mercer
  • Truth 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This forum is supported by the 12ozProphet Shop, so go buy a shirt and help support!
This forum is brought to you by the 12ozProphet Shop.
This forum is brought to you by the 12oz Shop.
7 hours ago, ndv said:

This just in, hot off the press!

20201002_000839.jpg

Choose your next adventure:

 

1) Biden was exposed at the debate. Biden dies.

2) Both Trump and Biden die.

3) Trump recovers from a mild case and uses it to win the election.

Edited by 6Pennies
  • Like 1
  • Truth 1
  • Props 1
  • LOL! 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Surprised to not see more commentary on my last post. Took me a little time to dig all that shit up, but mostly I found it super interesting so surprised more people didn't jump in on it.

 

@Mercerpost that followed it seems to have jumped back onto the original tract or maybe you didn't read it? Its not really about which of the two camps is right. Like you, I believe they're both clown shows. That's really shouldn't even be the conversation despite it being solely what is occupying everyones attention. Lie so many other contentious topics of the last few years I feel we are all missing the heart of the matter, which I would guess is why the discussions become so contentious. Doesn't anyone else see the programming happening with how these types of topics are communicated? Even after taking the time to layout an alternate narrative to whats clogging the MSM and social airwaves and even laying down tangible evidence that points to how everyone is being programmed, there's still the few people that pop up and fully embrace that programming. No counter argument, let alone any sort of exploration or suggestion of evidence to support their view... Simply a response that is clearly rooted in an emotional reaction that continues to perpetuate the narrative. 

 

In this case... Proud Boys must all be racist. They "look" like racists and the media has been repeating it like a mantra since they first popped it, so it must be true even though my own eyeballs can see that so many of them are not even white.

 

It's like we can all look up at the sky... We see its blue, but the MSM and memes all tell us It is indeed red. Then an echo chamber develops around it with the usual gaslighting and social pressures that if you don't acknowledge that the sky is red and rally behind that fact that, that you must be evil. Only an evil person would see the sky as anything except red. And for those of you on the fence that are unsure what color the sky is, you guys are all a part of the problem. The fact that you don't heed the calling and help us convince everyone else that the sky is red, means you're as bad as those that keep claiming its blue. Oh, and if you decide to try and question if the sky is anything except red or try to understand what leads to the color of the sky, you must be one of those kooky conspiracy nuts and by default, those guys are part of the evil crowd too.

 

See how that works? It's literally cult like behavior. You create a dynamic in which there is no viable alternative except to join the cult. If you disagree, you're wrong. If you sit it out, you're essentially even worse.

 

Anyhow, we can keep going in circles about how stupid either group is, which will obviously be split into the same tired partisan lines or we can have a far more interesting conversation about what is really going on here.

 

@6Pennies... I'm sure you have more to say on this subject. Lets hear it.

 

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, misteraven said:

So for fun and to further our exploration of this topic, lets take a brief look at how core information / media outlets on the internet are covering these two concepts (Antifa / Proud Boys). And again, I don't support either group. This is simply us exploring a topic and me attempting to look past the surface as to what is driving what we're seeing... The beginnings of an attempt to look at the framework and engineering with less emphasis on the details of the facade that covers that framework. From this exploration, we can made a jusgment call as to whether we're seeing bias, which in turn can be interpreted as what might be shaping opinions, especially when this is likely the basis for all the conversation on social that has largely replaced any widespread attempts at applying reason, logic or the sort of healthy skepticism that leads individuals to challenge narratives and seek truth.

 

Wikipedia's result when you search "Proud Boys"... Link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proud_Boys

 

screenshot-en-wikipedia-org-wiki-Proud_Boys-1601572316022.gif

imageproxy.php?img=&key=ebd33b30216a051bWikipedia's result when you search "Antifa"... Link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antifa

 

screenshot-en-wikipedia-org-wiki-Antifa-1601572347783.gif

 

Now we don't have to take this very significant difference at face value. A reasonable argument for why searching "Antifa" takes you to an index instead of a page is that there is more history and therefore more usage / context. But from this index, we have 13 options that describe the organization. The only one that seems to apply to the subject here is possibly the last option, "Rose City Antifa". I've never really seen it designated as such in the mainstream media, which begs its own question, but lets have a look at the entry... Link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rose_City_Antifa

 

screenshot-en-wikipedia-org-wiki-Rose_City_Antifa-1601573049864.gif

 

Now, putting a little more effort into it, I was able to come across what appears to be an official Wikipedia entry for the "Antifa" as it relates to the discussion. Curious why it wouldn't be a primary link on the index when searching this subject from within the USA, but I won't speculate. On first glance, it appears to be pretty thorough, judging its length. We all know that the basic summary is the entry block of text, so to not extend my little dissertation to a true wall of text, we'll simply focus on that and you guys can continue our research and see if you can gather more insight into what motives might exist behind these entries.

 

screenshot-en-wikipedia-org-wiki-Antifa_-United_States-1601574207196.gif

 

Pretty interesting to see how both organizations are described.

 

Opening line for the Proud Boys entry: "The Proud Boys is a far-right[1][2][3][4] and neo-fascist[5][6][7][8] male-only[9][10] organization that promotes and engages in political violence.".

 

Opening line for the Antifa entry: "Antifa (/ænˈtiːfə, ˈæntiˌfɑː/)[1] is an anti-fascist action and left-wing political movement in the United States[2][3][4][5] comprising an array of autonomous[6][7] groups that aim to achieve their objectives through the use of both nonviolent and violent direct action rather than through policy reform."

 

Now attempting to truly set any bias aside, do these descriptions match up with what we've been seeing so far? Even accounting for heavy bias in coverage and opinion, has anyone seen less than a dozen individual instances of violence from protests that clearly show mobs dressed in black and carrying shields and waving flags bearing the Antifa logo? Can anybody dig up even a single similar video of mob violence on behalf of the Proud Boys, let alone many?

 

Did you happen to notice that the Proud Boys entry also includes related entries at the bottom of the page for "White Nationalism"? There is a brief mention in the opening block about it "Officially rejecting white supremacy", but it is interesting to analyze the description of them and that other than that single sentence, the entire description is that they're white supremacists with really only the single takeaway that they are indeed a racist organization bent on violence, rooted in neo-fascist ideology. Would indeed seem an odd pairing when we can see so many of the members of Proud Boys are clearly not even white. Also interesting is even after digging around, I can't find a website for them or even any kind of official account for them. Curious how the entries author was able to so clearly define them as having a "neo-fascist" ideology or that women aren't allowed to be members when again, we can identify females mixed into the crowd shots that show their groups. Obviously that isn't irrefutable evidence, but with no official website or account pages I'd be curious to know how thy were able to so clearly define these very significant characteristics, especially at a time when most of these fringe groups / movements - from Antifa to BLM to Proud Boys - seem to not be centrally controlled or posses an obvious command and control structure. Also interesting to me Is that besides being described as racists when there's clearly minorities in their makeup, not having women members when you can see women in their mob, or being fascist when I'm not seeing much evidence of them bullying people to accept any sort of ideology at all, that there isn't much of the same rush to categorize Antifa or BLM as violent or extremists or fascist when we can see videos that could serve as a strong argument for it (even if its the exception and not the rule for those organizations).

 

In fact, I've heard this fact exactly used to explain away some of the bad behaviors of both Antifa and BLM... A few bad apples that don't represent the organization /  movement and that the protests are mostly peaceful.

 

Again, not trying to encourage any sort of support or hostility towards either group here. Only attempting to analyze how they're being positioned by authoritative information sources and media. So for those all important "undecided" we spoke of early on in this discussion, what do you think the take away is if your basing opinion on the official narrative?

 

Continuing on...

 

Google search for "Proud Boys"... Link: https://www.google.com/search?hl=en&source=hp&ei=gA12X67ROtHL-gST1JuADg&q=proud+boys&oq=proud+boys

 

Versus Google search for "Antifa"... Link: https://www.google.com/search?source=hp&ei=aw12X-H1LMbH-gSElL2ADg&q=antifa

 

screenshot-www-google-com-search-1601573878784.gif

 

screenshot-www-google-com-search-1601573850973.gif

 

Even discounting the actual result contents, does anybody find it unusual that the Proud Boys, an organization that according to Wikipedia was founded in 2016, but only has really been a conversation for a couple weeks now has 515,000,000 results versus "Antifa", an organization with roots going back to pre WW2, but with a history in the USA that certainly far predates 2016 and a large focus of the cultural conversation and news for many months, it would seem counter intuitive to see 2139.13% more entries for Proud Boys versus Antifa. Lets search for BLM, despite it being a tougher comparison since its a 3 letter acronym that until recently was understood to be the federal Bureau of Land Management... Link: https://www.google.com/search?q=blm

 

screenshot-www-google-com-search-1601577254695.gif

 

Again, pretty fascinating result... 116,000 total results for a movement that has dominated media and social attention for at least the last half year and arguably for the last couple years. An organization and movement that has been embraced by corporate America, professional sports and probably center stage since since just after Trump was elected. Do you find it unusual that collectively, Antifa and BLM as topics represent is just over 25% (26.99%) of the results as Proud Boys?

 

Anyhow, I feel the need to again reiterate that I'm not advocating for Proud Boys. I know very little about them. Likewise, I'm not denouncing Antifa or BLM here either. I'm merely attempting to bring attention to what I believe to be a very obvious bias, that in turn, I would speculate is fanning the flames of violence and division. What I've posted here is not the smoking gun, end all - be all irrefutable evidence of this, but merely a first stab and looking past the surface to try and understand the mechanisms behind what we're seeing. Naturally this leads to the next question after the "what", which is "who" and "why". If you guys are at all interested we can keep exploring and discussing and start to speculate on obvious questions such as how can one benefit from the dynamic we're witnessing and who sits in a position to be able to benefit from it when its executed successfully as we're seeing?

 

If nothing else, I sincerely hope I've at least planed a seed in the minds of those that took the time to read this whole thing. Something that will flourish into a healthy skepticism of the world around you, which in turn will compel you to dig beneath the surface and only use the stupid memes everyone embraces as fact as a starting point to dig into the truth behind the who, what and why so you can begin really understand the world around you.

Bumped to the next page for those of you in the back.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, misteraven said:

 

 

@6Pennies... I'm sure you have more to say on this subject. Lets hear it.

 

 

 

I saw it.  I couldn't get into at the time.  Really struggling from eye strain since I'm all online and remote (since March, and at least until Fall 2021). Too much small print to sift through on white background. Fuck, I'm old.  My daughters are wearing blue light blocker glasses.  I need a pair to wear over my spectacles.

 

That being said. Stand by after my 5 Zoom meetings today.....

Edited by 6Pennies
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, 6Pennies said:

Choose your next adventure:

 

1) Biden was exposed at the debate. Biden dies.

2) Both Trump and Biden die.

3) Trump recovers from a mild case and uses it to win the election.

I am going with to go with answer # 4)  Trump recovers from a mild case and uses it to win the election. Biden  Dies. 

  • LOL! 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/1/2020 at 1:28 PM, Kults said:

Is he though? just playing devils advocate here but he’s designated the kkk down as a terrorist organization. Obama didn’t do that. 

 

Sure the proud boys are chauvinists and nationalists. I don’t think you could qualify an org with members of all races as ‘white supremacists’ though. 

[furious jackoff motion]

 

the "designation" doesn't do anything by itself. we'll see who gets charged with domestic terror and who doesn't; ask bill barr what he thinks.

 

re: "obama didn't do that": he never had to. hate crimes statutes already exist to magnify what the kkk (and other groups!) do and are almost certainly more versatile/prosecutorially useful for charging kkk members. and obama's DOJ did pursue hate crime cases and charge them at the federal level. case in point 

 

 

On 9/30/2020 at 12:19 PM, misteraven said:

Off topic, but who were you on here before your current user name? 

its injury! it's good to be back. thanks man! 

 

On 9/30/2020 at 12:28 PM, misteraven said:

 they've used Qanon as a vehicle to dub anyone that discounts the official narrative as a "right winger" or even "racist" if they don't fall in line. Scary shit.

are you a q anon er? i go to that pizza place; the bullet holes are still in the ceiling. qanon is deeply embarrassing and we should ostracize and mock them

 

On 9/30/2020 at 11:30 PM, misteraven said:

... Doesn’t really look like the types you’d expect in a white power gang

 

to take the position that the proud boys are racist is to understand that fighting for white hegemony is fighting to uphold systemic racism and institutions of white supremacy. so yes, there are people of color who are part of the proud boys, who are useful cooperators, and welcome perpetrators of extrajudicial violence. modern day brownshirts for the "law and order" crowd. same type of self-deputized people who chase and shoot people crossing the southern border, convinced of their moral supremacy. 

 

on their values that were posted here: is anyone here not bright enough to read how they talk about "western" people and what they "did" to understand the dog whistle? c'mon now 

Edited by Elena Delle Donne
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Elena Delle Donne said:

[furious jackoff motion]

 

the "designation" doesn't do anything by itself. we'll see who gets charged with domestic terror and who doesn't; ask bill barr what he thinks.

 

re: "obama didn't do that": he never had to. hate crimes statutes already exist to magnify what the kkk (and other groups!) do and are almost certainly more versatile/prosecutorially useful for charging kkk members. and obama's DOJ did pursue hate crime cases and charge them at the federal level. case in point 

 

He never had to be also never did. We’ll see what Barr decides to go after. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I generally avoid talking about politics on the internet, it is better that way. 

 

If I were more invested and a better at expressing myself with the written word I might mix it up, but as it is I do my best to refrain. Especially when dealing with folks who get off on the trolling aspect of it, a fascination that I do not share.

 

As far as what is up, not much. Doing the mid-life thing, no major crisis yet but I can see how they happen.

 

It would be fun if we could scare up a couple of the other tc heads. Beer shits is here, where of course, lugr posts spradically, no bags, no shai,  and a tragic number of deaths, spectr, poz, swamp, the guy who started his own special effects studio and some others. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Elena Delle Donne said:

[furious jackoff motion]

 

the "designation" doesn't do anything by itself. we'll see who gets charged with domestic terror and who doesn't; ask bill barr what he thinks.

 

re: "obama didn't do that": he never had to. hate crimes statutes already exist to magnify what the kkk (and other groups!) do and are almost certainly more versatile/prosecutorially useful for charging kkk members. and obama's DOJ did pursue hate crime cases and charge them at the federal level. case in point 

 

 

its injury! it's good to be back. thanks man! 

 

are you a q anon er? i go to that pizza place; the bullet holes are still in the ceiling. qanon is deeply embarrassing and we should ostracize and mock them

 

to take the position that the proud boys are racist is to understand that fighting for white hegemony is fighting to uphold systemic racism and institutions of white supremacy. so yes, there are people of color who are part of the proud boys, who are useful cooperators, and welcome perpetrators of extrajudicial violence. modern day brownshirts for the "law and order" crowd. same type of self-deputized people who chase and shoot people crossing the southern border, convinced of their moral supremacy. 

 

on their values that were posted here: is anyone here not bright enough to read how they talk about "western" people and what they "did" to understand the dog whistle? c'mon now 

Appreciate the responses...

 

Will respond to a few of them, to add in my two cents.

 

2 hours ago, Elena Delle Donne said:

the "designation" doesn't do anything by itself. we'll see who gets charged with domestic terror and who doesn't; ask bill barr what he thinks.

 

re: "obama didn't do that": he never had to. hate crimes statutes already exist to magnify what the kkk (and other groups!) do and are almost certainly more versatile/prosecutorially useful for charging kkk members. and obama's DOJ did pursue hate crime cases and charge them at the federal level. case in point 

It does make a difference. Both legally and in terms of perception. Being officially designated a terrorist group is an entirely different set of protocols from simply a hate crime. For starters, as a designation it means that it does not require a charge, jury of your peers and a conviction to classify. It's a very significant action.

 

2 hours ago, Elena Delle Donne said:

its injury! it's good to be back. thanks man! 

Nice! DM me if you want your old account or want it merged. Welcome back regardless.

 

2 hours ago, Elena Delle Donne said:

are you a q anon er? i go to that pizza place; the bullet holes are still in the ceiling. qanon is deeply embarrassing and we should ostracize and mock them

I've tried most my life to not fall into any classification to be honest. Seems like too much work to call into a specific group and then attempt to uphold its trappings. Just makes sense to me to pick and chose as things present and make judgement calls about what makes sense or what speaks to me. I have no real opinion on Qanon and really don't know a lot about it. That said my instinct is that there likely was an individual or perhaps collective with inside information and that it would inevitably lead to copy cats. That anything like that, which could possibly threaten anyone (and especially many) in any type of powerful position would likely trigger damage control and there's plenty of precedent that is not conspiracy theory but proven fact, where intelligence agencies and third parties working on their behalf would run disinformation campaigns and other measures to muddy the waters or otherwise hide shit in plain site. But mostly, this is only speculation and I try to keep my attention on my circle of control rather than my circle of concern. Gotta say though, the IG account for the guy that owns that place is concerning and seems often when there's smoke, you can eventually find fire.

 

2 hours ago, Elena Delle Donne said:

to take the position that the proud boys are racist is to understand that fighting for white hegemony is fighting to uphold systemic racism and institutions of white supremacy. so yes, there are people of color who are part of the proud boys, who are useful cooperators, and welcome perpetrators of extrajudicial violence. modern day brownshirts for the "law and order" crowd. same type of self-deputized people who chase and shoot people crossing the southern border, convinced of their moral supremacy. 

 

on their values that were posted here: is anyone here not bright enough to read how they talk about "western" people and what they "did" to understand the dog whistle? c'mon

Unsure I'm actually understanding that first sentence, but if so... Where are you gathering that Proud Boys are fighting for "white hegemony". That term in itself is just a synonym for white supremacy. I've stated before that so far, I'm not seeing evidence of that, only mainstream media and social labeling them as such. I've provided several examples to show that many of their members aren't even white, which is absolutely conclusive evidence considering we can look at history and see how Italy was an ally to Nazi Germany despite not bearing the characteristics defined as being inherent to the "master race", but it certainly would make me question that they're white supremacists. Since I can't find any evidence of them announcing any sort of racist rhetoric, let alone inciting violence against people of color or minorities, I'd be curious to know if you've seen evidence that I have not that has led you to that conclusion? If so, please share though my posts have tried to bring focus on how both groups are being positioned and not at all promoting or criticizing either. Your second sentence mentions useful cooperators, which is a much different thing than literal core members being people of color or in one instance married with kids to a women of color. But again, you're making a conclusive statement and I'm hoping you might be able to share the evidence of it. (Side note, I do mean that with all due respect and not as the usual internet bickering to just throw the burden of proof on you. I'm very curious about it as its the dominant narrative out there, yet after extensive searching, I cant find evidence of them being racist. In fact, compared to Antifa, I can't even really find evidence of them being particularly violent either. Kind of makes sense logically that if you got a bunch of dudes open carrying guns, that if there was any expectation, let alone track record for actual violence, they probably wouldn't be allowed to keep showing up and rallying while loaded down with guns and tactical gear. But again, I can't find the evidence so maybe you or another member can share it?). Also, outside of government itself all violence is extrajudicial, but again, where's the videos showing them partaking in violence. Closest I got was the articles about John Kinsman being arraigned for a street brawl he got into in New York. Nobody shot, nobody stabbed, no one dragged from a car, not even much mention of anything other than the broad statement that he was in a street brawl.

 

As for the last sentence, you're again making an assumption. You call it a "dog whistle", which is much different than a statement of fact. It doesn't preclude that its certainly possible, but I believe you can also make an argument that perhaps their ideology is rooted in what we might refer to ass classic American values. Obviously we might also say that racism could be a thread in the fabric of the Nation, but then again, so can apple pie, baseball games and the nuclear family. Same way I wouldn't automatically judge a person of color or a person from the middle east or wherever else, unsure why we should be so quick to judge a white person. Stereotypes seem like a precursor to bias and discrimination yet everyone is quick to assume a white guy with a beard cosplaying in tactical gear must be a racist. But again, many of these guys aren't even white.

 

In any case, I hope to not distract you or those reading along with discussions about how racist the Proud Boys are or aren't. Again, I think the heart of the discussion is really about how the mainstream media is coordinating to position topics in very specific ways as evidenced by how inconsistent it is once you look at the number of references, language used to describe and other mechanisms.

  • Props 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Has anyone stopped to consider another perspective regarding Trump testing positive for Corona?

 

That this story and his progress will very likely dominate the news cycle for the next two weeks. That even according to the CDC and despite his age and the likelihood that he isn't the healthiest human specimen to be found that it is exceedingly unlikely that he'll be hospitalized, let alone die. That most likely he'll reappear having stated that he barely felt and no doubt that inevitably the hydroxychloroquine that he's been touting about all along was the cure. How that in turn might help validate a lot of what the media has slammed him for and that perhaps some of the undecided / swing voters might just be like, "fuck this guy is an ass every time he opens his mouth, but he's not necessarily wrong, at least some of the time."

 

Especially compared to a wet noodle like Biden that might or might not have dementia, but is certainly not one to have a lot of confidence in regards to general health and that has spent 50 years in politics at the most senior levels and still can't really point to any particularly notable achievement and that even most liberals only see as an option because at least he's not Trump?

 

Anyhow, Trump is still a clown, but as a human being I wouldn't wish ill on him. But just thought I'd throw out some food for thought rather than again just looking at the low hanging fruit of this particular topic.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...