There are more of us than there are of them

[Lexicus]

The fact is, there are quite a few rap and dancehall performers using their visible, celebrity status to spread this crap, and that just can't be ignored, and say, "we must focus on the White Devil, and just brush that under the carpet." It's counter-productive.

Yeah, I kinda think what you're doing here is a just a taaaaaad more counterproductive

 

[MaryKB]

I felt it's the other way around, looking at groups like Neo Nazis and identifying their targets to show why we need to oppose them. I feel like what you're doing is whataboutism, saying "Well black people hurt transgender people too!", and I don't believe that has anything to do with Neo Nazi crimes, right?

I feel sort of like ... well imagine you're on trial for armed robbery. You wouldn't use as a defense "Other people commit crimes."

Thanks about Cloud ... I could even possibly be wrong, I thought you were doing that on purpose.

 

[Patine]

I felt it's the other way around, looking at groups like Neo Nazis and identifying their targets to show why we need to oppose them. I feel like what you're doing is whataboutism, saying "Well black people hurt transgender people too!", and I don't believe that has anything to do with Neo Nazi crimes, right?

I feel sort of like ... well imagine you're on trial for armed robbery. You wouldn't use as a defense "Other people commit crimes."

Thanks about Cloud ... I could even possibly be wrong, I thought you were doing that on purpose.

I didn't see or hear the word "whataboutism" again in my life, it'd be too soon. It's become this magical belligerent term to railroad debate to one's desires, chasten those who go off the tracks, and avoid answering any real touch questions that are not pre-scripted, or at least partially or effectively. A despicable word that killing discussion. Is there any way I can block individual words on this words? Even if I only got to have a few of them...

 

[Cloud_Strife]

They or she is cool, I personally don't pass all the time so sometimes I have to switch pronouns depending on the situation.

 

[El_Machinae]

If the violence is statistically predictable, then crafting memetics that dissuade the violence is probably possible

 

[Patine]

If the violence is statistically predictable, then crafting memetics that dissuade the violence is probably possible

Yes, but not if you're polemically insisting on ONLY dealing with one potential source of violence and ignoring the others as even being legitimate sources on misguided principal, which seems to be @Cloud_Strife's tactic and desire.

 

[Cloud_Strife]

False equivalency, there just isn't a good faith comparison between the violence committed by the left vs the right, even at their worst, leftist violence has been nowhere near as bloody as the right, this isn't opinion this is fact, this year alone right wing terrorism has killed more people than leftists in God knows how many years.

In the context of America, the violence, discrimination and desire to restrict rights to and against minorities has and does come from one specific side of the political isle.

Nevermind that its long been since co-opted as a goal in of itself by the right to attack physically and legally minorities.

 

[Patine]

False equivalency, there just isn't a good faith comparison between the violence committed by the left vs the right, even at their worst, leftist violence has been nowhere near as bloody as the right, this isn't opinion this is fact, this year alone right wing terrorism has killed more people than leftists in God knows how many years.

In the context of America, the violence, discrimination and desire to restrict rights to and against minorities has and does come from one specific side of the political isle.

Nevermind that its long been since co-opted as a goal in of itself by the right to attack physically and legally minorities.

Politicizing your views of the causes, solutions and methods of dealing with violence into a simplistic, binary, and - yes - Neo-Manichaean "left vs. right" viewpoint, where only the "side" causing more violence should be addressed or tackled, or called out for such, is one of the most braindead, ridiculous, and socially-destructive ideals I've heard proposed for quite a while - and I've heard of a lot of boners lately. How can you type that with a straight face any conviction. I'm REALLY glad you have no legal or judicial power. I believe, like most sane, rational human beings with a desire for safety, security, law, and order, that all violent criminals are taken to task and punished for their crimes - and not based on some ludicrous politicized quota or basis to increase or decrease harshness (or let people completely off the hook) because of where they stand on the political spectrum. Do you realize how you sound here.

 

[Cloud_Strife]

Oh do you now? For decades the Right have done their very best to discourage any sort of concerted effort to crack down on right wing violence and the various groups advocating for violence against minorities and society as a whole.

But you don't understand that do you @Patine and you don't care, because you think both sides are somehow equally equivalent, forgetting that law enforcement have no problems whatsoever cracking Dow on the left but won't do so when it comes to the right.

You wa t to espouse the idea that they're somehow morally and ethically equivalent but that would require people to either ignore or be ignorant of history, recorded facts and reality and unfortunately for you the internet exists.

 

[Patine]

Oh do you now? For decades the Right have done their very best to discourage any sort of concerted effort to crack down on right wing violence and the various groups advocating for violence against minorities and society as a whole.

But you don't understand that do you @Patine and you don't care, because you think both sides are somehow equally equivalent, forgetting that law enforcement have no problems whatsoever cracking Dow on the left but won't do so when it comes to the right.

You wa t to espouse the idea that they're somehow morally and ethically equivalent but that would require people to either ignore or be ignorant of history, recorded facts and reality and unfortunately for you the internet exists.

Politicizing crime in it's definition, enforcement, and punishment is one of the signature elements of tyranny and dictatorship - including Fascism.

 

[Cloud_Strife]

ah yes crime, that inherently non-political and non politicized subject

 

[Lexicus]

ah yes crime, that inherently non-political and non politicized subject

Also, you know, accusing you of "politicizing crime" is just absolutely ridiculous, e.g. https://thinkprogress.org/right-wing-domestic-terrorism-rise-obamas-dhs-warned-a57940206352/

In April 2009, the Obama administration’s Department of Homeland Security released a report warning that this would happen. “Rightwing Extremism:
Current Economic and Political Climate Fueling Resurgence in Radicalization and Recruitment” warned that “rightwing extremists may be gaining new recruits by playing on their fears about several emergent issues.” It also predicted that the possibility of new gun restrictions and the return of “military veterans facing significant challenges reintegrating into their communities” might mean “emergence of terrorist groups or lone wolf extremists capable of carrying out violent attacks.” The report called this convergence of factors the “most dangerous domestic terrorism threat in the United States.”

Conservatives went ballistic.

Michelle Malkin blasted it as “one of the most embarrassingly shoddy pieces of propaganda I’d ever read out of DHS.” Rep. Lamar Smith (R-TX) said the administration was “awfully willing to paint law-abiding Americans, including war veterans, as ‘extremists.’” Then-Rep. Steve Buyer (R-IN) — the top Republican on the House Veterans’ Affairs committee at the time — called it “inconceivable” that some veterans could pose a threat.

Most notably, then-Republican Minority Leader John Boehner (R-OH) attacked Obama’s Secretary of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano for releasing the report at all. “[T]he Secretary of Homeland Security owes the American people an explanation for why… her own Department is using [‘terrorist’] to describe American citizens who disagree with the direction Washington Democrats are taking our nation,” he demanded.

 

[Hygro]

into a simplistic, binary, and - yes - Neo-Manichaean

Woooooo!

Best part I’m waiting in like a mini Walmart type and a bell rang right on Neo Manichaean as I read. Blessed life.

 

[El_Machinae]

Yes, but not if you're polemically insisting on ONLY dealing with one potential source of violence and ignoring the others as even being legitimate sources on misguided principal, which seems to be @Cloud_Strife's tactic and desire.

Every message will be different. If there is an identifiable cohort that is more likely to commit violence on non-binary people, then there can be messages that are crafted that should sway that cohort more than it would a different cohort.

You will say different things to White conservatives then you would to members of the black community. But both messages are worth fine-tuning

 

[Patine]

ah yes crime, that inherently non-political and non politicized subject

Also, you know, accusing you of "politicizing crime" is just absolutely ridiculous, e.g. https://thinkprogress.org/right-wing-domestic-terrorism-rise-obamas-dhs-warned-a57940206352/

Woooooo!

Best part I’m waiting in like a mini Walmart type and a bell rang right on Neo Manichaean as I read. Blessed life.

When did I say "right-wing violence" was not a crime. It definitely is. But not because it's right-wing, or because of the political beliefs of the perpetrators. But because their violent crimes and should be punished as such. Just as hate crimes committed by non-White supremacists, or violent crimes committed by Antifa thugs, or simple gangbagers causing trouble, or someone killing someone else over a "bad drug deal," or some guy who kills his wife and her lover and finding them both in bed together, or any other violent criminals, by the same laws, with the same procedures, the same viewpoints, and the same punishments. I have NEVER, once, supported different definition, enforcement, or punishment of these crimes, or priority of enforcement, on politicized grounds. And I don't understand how @Lexicus' is at all relevant is at all relevant as a rebuttal to me, unless he's accusing me of supporting "right-wing terrorism," which I would consider would be vile, loathsome, and highly disingenuous personal slander - and completely unsupportable and unsubstantiated in any of my posts - of the worst sort - of Donald Trump or Fox News show host caliber - and that should be beneath him.

 

[Lexicus]

And I don't understand how @Lexicus' is at all relevant is at all relevant as a rebuttal to me, unless he's accusing me of supporting "right-wing terrorism," which I would consider would be vile, loathsome, and highly disingenuous personal slander - and completely unsupportable and unsubstantiated in any of my posts - of the worst sort - of Donald Trump or Fox News show host caliber - and that should be beneath him.

Okay, I'll spell it out: it is actually the mainstream right which has consistently politicized a more neutral definition of crime in order to, just as @Cloud_Strife said:

discourage any sort of concerted effort to crack down on right wing violence

 

[Patine]

Okay, I'll spell it out: it is actually the mainstream right which has consistently politicized a more neutral definition of crime in order to, just as

But that tidbit you quoted from @Cloud_Strife has nothing to do with my point-of-view. If "right-wing violence" is more prevalent than other types, than I fully believe they should be punished harsher because of greater frequency. That should make sense. I am not in support of, and the find idea repugnant, in fact, of politicized "crime enforcement quotas," or letting people off the hook because they are committing crimes from a political ideology that is committing a "small minority of violent crimes," or of bringing politicization into it at all. But I'm not advocating, nor ever have, letting hate crimes by White Supremacists - or hate crimes by anyone else for that matter - or crime period, "off the hook," or with lighter investigation and punishment, based on such politicization, or to set policing priorities based on it. If indeed you and @Cloud_Strife are correct that "right-wing crime," is on the rise, then I would support more enforcement and punishment of it based on the quantity alone. Now, this is REALLY getting annoying, but STOP putting words in my mouth or arbitrarily deciding my intentions or beliefs, and then using such lies as the basis as fallacious attempts at personal attack. It is really unbecoming.

 

[cardgame]

You shouldn't let violent crime off the hook, but also maybe prioritize the criminals committing up to 100% of violent political extremism instead of focusing the majority of your efforts on smaller fries.

 

[Patine]

You shouldn't let violent crime off the hook, but also maybe prioritize the criminals committing up to 100% of violent political extremism instead of focusing the majority of your efforts on smaller fries.

I would think the claim that the claim that up to 100% of all violent extremism are all White Supremacists and Neo-Nazis a very dubious claim, indeed. I mean, that's a very high percentage for a group that's actually a lot smaller in number of adherents than you, @Lexicus, @Cloud_Strife, and several others here seem to be willing to admit. Most modern, middle-class, suburban or rural White folk in the U.S. today just don't seem to have the motivation, drive, free time, or willingness, or giving a damn, to distract themselves from Netflix, the local bar, professional sports, the job that pays the bills, and their often headaches and drama of family and friends to go participate in an extremist hate group, who actually demand real participation, and potentially criminal acts. These extremists are not nearly as ubiquitous as you all think they are.

 

[cardgame]

It was true of 2018, which was, I may remind you, the absolute latest data available.