Franco will move.

[Timsup2nothin]

I can save you some wondering, dude. Patine is a decent dude and is against the jackboot crazies as any of us.

Hmmmm...remind me if I ever feel like I need someone to vouch for me why you should be someone I would call?

 

[CurtSibling]

lmao @CurtSibling. Typical conservative rhetoric. "well what if a minority was a bad person, checkmate liberals".

It was a valid question. Your mutterings about conservatives and liberals has no meaning to me. Neither apply.

 

[Cloud_Strife]

The extra waffle was not required, but you answered without delay. Good work.

You clearly asked with the expectation of me saying "no".

 

[Zardnaar]

Answer my question.

What is the end result of allowing Neo-Nazis and bigots to spread, grow and recruit @Patine?

What would happen to people like me and PoC? What do they groups explicitly say about minorities and what do they intend to do if they gain ANY foothold in society?

They're gonna do that regardless.

The reason is every now and then Democracy throws up a lemon.

Hitler being the prime example, Trump being another.

As outrageous/useless/offensive Trump is the constitution is holding.

Other countries don't have those safeguards prime example Poland, Hungary, Turkey. Venezuela is another

Otherwise Democracy is fairly easy to subvert. You don't even need to win 51% of the vote.

So yes free speech does give the Nazis a voice. But look at Germany bigger Nazi problem than NZ and we don't have the laws Germany does. It also keeps the Nazis out of power because you can't censor the Washington Post or BBC etc.

Obviously things like the FBI need to step up and there game, obviously they're going to fail here and there.

NZ does have an obscene materials law but it was aimed at pedophilia. They used it on some of the fascist inclined here who spread the shooters video. They didn't use it on whot people saw it.

But a future authoritarian government can use that law or modify it. We don't have a constitutional right of free speech.

NZs democracy would actually be fairly easy to subvert. Culturally extremists don't do that well here though.

(Aussies are more casually racist than Americans, Americans are crazy).

 

[CurtSibling]

Hmmmm...remind me if I ever feel like I need someone to vouch for me why you should be someone I would call?

That would be relevant if I even knew who you were.

While this thread is off topic, that's a terrible derail not rooted in anything being discussed

It was following on from the off-topic yelling you fellows were engaged in.

You clearly asked with the expectation of me saying "no".

I was hoping you'd say no. You passed a test.

 

[Zardnaar]

So colleges should let them host functions, businesses shouldnt choose to shut down their sites at will, news media should invite them to share their views, not crimes, just bring them on to share their views openly, and when they organize publicly to advocate their cause parents should just let them be and not counter protest?

And when anyone does any of the above, you will loudly and proudly argue that we shouldn't censor these types right?

Free speech doesn't mean you have to give them a megaphone. It just means the government can't lock you up.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

That would be relevant if I even knew who you were.

The issue isn't who I am. My point was about who you are. In short, you stepping up to vouch for Patine as "not favoring the jackbooted crazies" is of pretty dubious value since I'm not in any way sure that you yourself don't favor the jackbooted crazies.

 

[Gorbles]

It was a valid question. Your mutterings about conservatives and liberals has no meaning to me. Neither apply.

I mean, I didn't speak the words, nevermind mutter them, but I don't really care what things have meaning to you. I'm calling the rhetoric as I see it; you're under no compunction to agree.

And no, it wasn't a valid question. It couldn't possibly be, because that would bely a complete lack of understanding of how people can do bad things regardless of how marginalised they are. Which most definitely rules out most of the left-leaning ideological spectrum by default. So at least in either case, my label was on the mark

 

[Dekker]

Free speech doesn't mean you have to give them a megaphone. It just means the government can't lock you up.

Lol at how you and Patine continue to prove the failure in your arguments.

Because Cloud was going around saying people should be locked up just for having certain ideologies. You fascist Cloud.

But really, thanks for disagreeing with yourself and making my point.

Strange that you can see that way for pedophiles but not Nazis.

 

[Patine]

lmao @CurtSibling. Typical conservative rhetoric. "well what if a minority was a bad person, checkmate liberals".


Genuine question: why do you not consider a right-wing populist authoritarian embedded in an increasingly nationalist party not a Nazi?

Because he doesn't have the right regalia? The correct insignia? Because people don't call him a literal Führer? You always claim your superiority in your ideals, beliefs and general knowledge, and yet you can't seemingly see the obvious parallels between Trump, the party that enables him, their increasing disregard for the law and disdain for "other" kinds of people . . . and Hitler, the party that enabled him, their disregard for the law and disdain for non-Aryan folk.

Like, uh. Help folks out, if you're just that much better at knowledge than the rest of us. Or don't, but then don't moan when people make the simplest correlations they can with the limited data they have available.

Oh, please don't. Other than a similar electoral STYLE (but certainly not governing style), and a bad combover, Adolf Hitler and Donald Trump have next to nothing in common. Hitler was a failed painter, WW1 vet, and disillusioned and angry man betrayed by the how he that the world should be after the war, and went steadily off the deep end into ever greater and more extreme rhetoric and decisions, and became very unhinged and very twisted and evil, but methodical (until about 1943, when his seeming self-defeatism seemed to start kicking in). Donald Trump is a filthy rich and narcissistic (and only ultimately, much moreso than he ever lets on) business, and a flamboyant showman who seems to have thrown his hat in the ring for President as a PR stunt, and probably didn't really expect to win, with no coherent or realistic platform (the ultimate phoned-in-cobbled-up, fly-as-you-go agenda), he has no sense of leadership or conviction, he flip-flops worse than a fish freshly caught in the boat, and his inexplicably selected and revolving door shows he has no idea at all what he's doing. The Trump-Hitler comparison, though a growingly popular one nowadays, is an utterly ridiculous farce.

 

[Zardnaar]

Lol at how you and Patine continue to prove the failure in your arguments.

Because Cloud was going around saying people should be locked up just for having certain ideologies. You fascist Cloud.

Not what I said at all.

In America the constitution is holding.
Our arguements aren't hypothetical we can directly look at Poland, Hungary and Turkey as examples of right wing populist conservatives subverting the media etc.

Trump can't do that.

 

[Cloud_Strife]

I was hoping you'd say no. You passed a test.

Oh and what test is that?

 

[CurtSibling]

The issue isn't who I am. My point was about who you are. In short, you stepping up to vouch for Patine as "not favoring the jackbooted crazies" is of pretty dubious value since I'm not in any way sure that you yourself don't favor the jackbooted crazies.

My good fellow - Such outrageous paranoid screeching cannot be treated as anything than the most risible drivel.

A dead German regime that my forefathers helped kill is hardly going to find my favour.

In future, please try talking sense.

Oh and what test is that?

Future worthiness for me taking notice of your posts.

 

[Gorbles]

Oh, please don't. Other than a similar electoral STYLE (but certainly not governing style), and a bad combover, Adolf Hitler and Donald Trump have next to nothing in common. Hitler was a failed painter, WW1 vet, and disillusioned and angry man betrayed by the how he that the world should be after the war, and went steadily off the deep end into ever greater and more extreme rhetoric and decisions, and became very unhinged and very twisted and evil, but methodical (until about 1943, when his seeming self-defeatism seemed to start kicking in). Donald Trump is a filthy rich and narcissistic (and only ultimately, much moreso than he ever lets on) business, and a flamboyant showman who seems to have thrown his hat in the ring for President as a PR stunt, and probably didn't really expect to win, with no coherent or realistic platform (the ultimate phoned-in-cobbled-up, fly-as-you-go agenda), he has no sense of leadership or conviction, he flip-flops worse than a fish freshly caught in the boat, and his inexplicably selected and revolving door shows he has no idea at all what he's doing. The Trump-Hitler comparison, though a growingly popular one nowadays, is an utterly ridiculous farce.

Their circumstances and competencies are most definitely different, I couldn't agree with you more on that. But that has no bearing on their ideological position of nationalistic supremacy, nor the fact neither would exist without popular support of the party. Maybe Trump himself is so incoherent and out of his depth that he personally isn't aware of the increasingly brazen policies his administration is in favour of, but you didn't just limit your claim to Trump. You said neither Trump nor his administration were.

Admittedly, a failure in the phrasing of my question. But I did try to include the state of the relevant (Republican and Nazi) parties in my supporting statements.

 

[Dekker]

Not what I said at all.

In America the constitution is holding.
Our arguements aren't hypothetical we can directly look at Poland, Hungary and Turkey as examples of right wing populist conservatives subverting the media etc.

Trump can't do that.

Dude that is literally what you and Patine are saying with the shrill 'who will they come for next,' idiocy.

 

[CurtSibling]

I mean, I didn't speak the words, nevermind mutter them, but I don't really care what things have meaning to you. I'm calling the rhetoric as I see it; you're under no compunction to agree.

I similarly don't care about anything you are typing, and I am under no compunction of even reading your future output...And won't.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

Trump is a disillusioned and angry man who feels betrayed by a world that doesn't give him the acknowledgement that he genuinely believes he deserves. He has gone steadily off the deep end into ever more extreme pursuits in an effort to force people to give him that acknowledgement. The comparison between his megalomania and Hitler's is extremely apt.

 

[Cloud_Strife]

You literally draw erotica with Nazi imagery for money, @CurtSibling, you think your forefathers wouldn't be looking down upon you with utter contempt and disgust?

You're so adjacent to them that you practically make your living pandering to these people, ironic or otherwise.

Edit:

I just want to make this 100% clear, the reason i am doing this is because the poster in question absolutely has a financial incentive in muddying the waters around who and what is and is not fascist or what counts as fascism and nazism.

 

[Zardnaar]

Trump is a disillusioned and angry man who feels betrayed by a world that doesn't give him the acknowledgement that he genuinely believes he deserves. He has gone steadily off the deep end into ever more extreme pursuits in an effort to force people to give him that acknowledgement. The comparison between his megalomania and Hitler's is extremely apt.

Except he's constrained by the constitution.

 

[CurtSibling]

You literally draw erotica with Nazi imagery for money, @CurtSibling, you think your forefathers wouldn't be looking down upon you with utter contempt and disgust?

My forefathers are too busy getting drunk in Scottish Valhalla to care what their nerdy descendant is drawing.