Jump to content

Time to resurrect Rock Against Racism?


scrippit
 Share

Recommended Posts

38 minutes ago, zahidf said:

Or self confessed white nationalist Bannon, one of the main people behind the Alt right(nazis by an other name)

Those poor trump voters. All they did was vote for a racist, pussy grabber side by side with the KKK and the American Nazi party, and now all these nasty liberals want them on a register and to make their lives worse.

Boo, nasty liberals. Boo. The real bad guys during cable street were those nasty working class people stopping Mosely's blackshirts from marching. Boooo

Out of interest, had the white nationalists, Brietbart and the Alt Right come out in favour of Clinton, would you have voted for Trump then?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 249
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

1 minute ago, stuartbert two hats said:

yep, I'm aware of him being alleged to have used the most minor possible of racial slurs against Jews, of a lesser derogatoriness than calling someone a snowflake.

An allegation made by his ex-wife, about a school.

A school where Bannon sends (sent?) his kids.

And which is the ONLY thing which can be pinned to his whole lifetime, and where his just-finished employment was working for Jews.

It's hardly the most damning thing in the world, and is waaaaay short of anything which proves him as dangerous or the "literal nazi" that zahidf insists you all think of him as.

I'm not pretending Trump and sidekicks are pleasant, but we're into a whole new league with the bullshit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The internet is chock full of evidence of Bannon's views. Are you suggesting that Breitbart, under his leadership, has not spouted some pretty vile anti semitic, anti woman and anti immigration views? The site that is now the go to alt-right website for racists nationalists, with charmers such as Milo Yiannopolous given a space to air his opinions dressed up as rants against political correctness.

Here is a summary of some headlines under Bannon's leadership:

https://mediamatters.org/blog/2016/08/17/breitbart-news-worst-headlines/212467

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, scrippit said:

The internet is chock full of evidence of Bannon's views. Are you suggesting that Breitbart, under his leadership, has not spouted some pretty vile anti semitic, anti woman and anti immigration views?

They're INDISPUTABLY Bannon's views? I asked you for proof, not more bullshit. :rolleyes:

I'll point out that Breitbart was founded by Jews, is run by Jews, and is owned by Jews.

And yes, i'm quite happy to agree that it's spouted plenty of the more extreme views of the right, but it's only the same as Fox News, or the Daily Mail - views from the side of the spectrum you don't align with. Funnily enough, they feel much the same about your (and my) views.

Are views you disagree with to no longer be allowed? Who are the fascists, again? 

 

Just now, scrippit said:

The site that is now the go to alt-right website for racists nationalists, with charmers such as Milo Yiannopolous given a space to air his opinions dressed up as rants against political correctness.

Sites for the opinions of the raving right exist because people on the raving right exist - and existed long before Trump thought of being President.

In fact, these views are so very standard in the USA they're the standard platform for the Republican Party.

Nothing of the existence of such things is about fascism - tho wanting them silenced very definitely is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

yep, I'm aware of him being alleged to have used the most minor possible of racial slurs against Jews, of a lesser derogatoriness than calling someone a snowflake.

An allegation made by his ex-wife, about a school.

A school where Bannon sends (sent?) his kids.

And which is the ONLY thing which can be pinned to his whole lifetime, and where his just-finished employment was working for Jews.

It's hardly the most damning thing in the world, and is waaaaay short of anything which proves him as dangerous or the "literal nazi" that zahidf insists you all think of him as.

I'm not pretending Trump and sidekicks are pleasant, but we're into a whole new league with the bullshit.

I've been listening to your calls to only make precise and corroborated statements.  Hopefully, by and large that's all you'll see from me here.  I'm only getting started with the research.  I may turn up more, I may not - I'm trying to keep an open mind.

Some evidence of Trump's personal prejudice, from his speech announcing his run for the presidency, source http://www.breitbart.com/live/vice-presidential-debate-fact-check-livewire/fact-check-donald-trump-not-call-mexicans-rapists-criminals/:

Quote

When Mexico sends its people, they’re not sending their best. They’re not sending you. They’re not sending you. They’re sending people that have lots of problems, and they’re bringing those problems with us. They’re bringing drugs. They’re bringing crime. They’re rapists. And some, I assume, are good people.

 

However, according to the Washington Post:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2016/03/22/all-of-donald-trumps-four-pinocchio-ratings-in-one-place/

Quote

a range of studies shows there is no evidence immigrants commit more crimes than native-born Americans. Moreover, the vast majority of unauthorized immigrants in prison do not belong in the category that fit Trump’s description: aggravated felons, whose crimes include murder, drug trafficking or illegal trafficking of firearms.

I'm happy to find examples of these studies if required.

As far as I can see there are two central accusations at play here:

  • Trump and his advisers are prejudiced, perhaps racists, perhaps outright fascists.
  • Alarmed commentators are making wild, unsubstantiated accusations regarding Trump and his team. This affects the credibility of all attacks, accurate or not.

So what we can do to combat both is this - do research.  Do detailed, clear research.  If the accusations of racism hold water, there will be evidence.  Let's not attack each other for not doing the job properly, let's just do it right.

Edited by stuartbert two hats
"This affects the credibility of all attacks, accurate or not."
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Trump is the king of monolithic statements; all blacks, all muslims, all mexicans, all hispanics, all swamp dwellers, all liberals. Let's not be confused about where he stands and why he will not out his extermeist support.

I am surprised that my original statement has been turned into a discussion about whether it is OK to assert a rise in right wing unpleasantness and whether we should be reacting or taking a less emotional and more reasoned position. Well, I have had plently of time to digest the evidence and I am satisfied that we have a serious and potentially catastrophic political shift to the hard right taking place now. We can of course all sit by without comment if we wish, on the basis that the facts are insufficient evidenced and unreliable...

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, stuartbert two hats said:

I've been listening to your calls to only make precise and corroborated statements.  Hopefully, by and large that's all you'll see from me here.  I'm only getting started with the research.  I may turn up more, I may not - I'm trying to keep an open mind.

Some evidence of Trump's personal prejudice, from his speech announcing his run for the presidency, source http://www.breitbart.com/live/vice-presidential-debate-fact-check-livewire/fact-check-donald-trump-not-call-mexicans-rapists-criminals/:

and here we go round again. :rolleyes:

This is already addressed in the other thread.

Yep, it's intensely racist about Mexicans - but it's also VERY clearly about Mexicans in Mexico, and very clearly NOT about Mexicans in the USA.

Without trying to justify anything of his racial slurs, the clear distinction Trump made is no less important for what he said than the rest of it. It's him saying that he'll 'make America great again' by keeping American resources for the people within America.

If you strip the racism about non-Americans from his words, it's as heinous as a tory calling for a reduction in foreign aid. While you might disagree with that foreign aid being reduced, it's a perfectly valid political line for a politician to give.

Yep, he's dog-whistling the racists, but they're not something which don't exist or who don't have a valid vote. He's merely rounding up supporters to vote for him as part of his campaigning. The campaigning is now over.

Nothing of that proves anything of what he'll do in office that's racist - and i'll point out that stopping immigration from Mexico would not be anything racist (it's a valid political angle; all countries have the sovereign power to decide who enters). I'll also point out that his visited Mexico and said some very different things.

 

Just now, stuartbert two hats said:

However, according to the Washington Post:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2016/03/22/all-of-donald-trumps-four-pinocchio-ratings-in-one-place/

I'm happy to find examples of these studies if required.

As far as I can see there are two central accusations at play here:

  • Trump and his advisers are prejudiced, perhaps racists, perhaps outright fascists.
  • Alarmed commentators are making wild, unsubstantiated accusations regarding Trump and his team. This

So what we can do to combat both is this - do research.  Do detailed, clear research.  If the accusations of racism hold water, there will be evidence.  Let's not attack each other for not doing the job properly, let's just do it right.

Trump said loads of outrageous and often-false things. I'm not pretending he campaigned differently.

But that was his campaigning, where he was at a massive disadvantage and had to do something to change the balance in his favour if he was to win.

An outsider is always going to have to surround themselves with outsiders. A 'maverick' like Trump is only going to get the more nutty of those.

That campaign part is over now, and while it's no surprise that he's rewarded his loyal team (it's what all presidents do), what is a surprise is the number of establishment Republicans he's appointing - which demonstrates a big difference between what he said and what he'll actually do.

Yep, he's also giving a nod towards that racist support by doing things such as recommending an attorney general who those racists find acceptable, but it's also a slap in the face to them at the same time - cos he's also black! And anyway, that appointment is subject to (Senate?) politician's approval, so is far from guaranteed.

If Trump is going to get away with being heinously racist he's only going to be able to do it if Republicans help him do it - which means ANY republican president could have done the same, and nothing has changed with Trump.

Like it not, 'the other side' won and that has to be accepted else democracy is dead at the hand of the side who say 'the other side' are the fascists. 

Protest the heinous that Trump does, and let the past go.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was lucky enough to go to one of the original RAR gigs in the 70s, but today I feel it would be an exercise in preaching to the converted. 

Being told what to do by the elite rock stars is liable to backfire these days, just look at the endless list supporting Clinton, Springsteen, Beyoncé, Bon Jovi etc etc, it may even have harmed her candidacy as the existing wealthy establishment  all together 

Edited by Avalon_Fields
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, scrippit said:

Trump is the king of monolithic statements; all blacks, all muslims, all mexicans, all hispanics, all swamp dwellers, all liberals. Let's not be confused about where he stands and why he will not out his extermeist support.

but it wasn't "all" mexicans, not was it "all" Muslims. :rolleyes:

(and no one has claimed anything at all about "all blacks" that I've seen - not even nutty zahidf).

Who's the king of the monolithic statements; again? 

 

Quote

I am surprised that my original statement has been turned into a discussion about whether it is OK to assert a rise in right wing unpleasantness and whether we should be reacting or taking a less emotional and more reasoned position. Well, I have had plently of time to digest the evidence and I am satisfied that we have a serious and potentially catastrophic political shift to the hard right taking place now. We can of course all sit by without comment if we wish, on the basis that the facts are insufficient evidenced and unreliable...

A rise in right wing unpleasantness is the default as far as 'the left' is concerned from them losing power.

Funnily enough, it works the other way too. A rise in left wing unpleasantness is the default as far as 'the right' is concerned from them losing power.

Losing an election is not the return of fascism,.

That takes actions. Show me the actions.

</only silence>

 

Edited by eFestivals
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, scrippit said:

Trump is the king of monolithic statements; all blacks, all muslims, all mexicans, all hispanics, all swamp dwellers, all liberals. Let's not be confused about where he stands and why he will not out his extermeist support.

I am surprised that my original statement has been turned into a discussion about whether it is OK to assert a rise in right wing unpleasantness and whether we should be reacting or taking a less emotional and more reasoned position. Well, I have had plently of time to digest the evidence and I am satisfied that we have a serious and potentially catastrophic political shift to the hard right taking place now. We can of course all sit by without comment if we wish, on the basis that the facts are insufficient evidenced and unreliable...

 

Did you just ignore my other post to you that he outright denounced the KKK's support?

Where are his monolithic statements about all the people you just quoted?

He never said all muslims, all mexicans, all blacks etc - you're just putting words in his mouth.

I'm really not trying to defend him, but you're not helping the situation by being in denial.

http://edition.cnn.com/2016/11/01/politics/donald-trump-kkk-crusader-support/

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, eFestivals said:

I dunno about you, but I'm seeing more fascist tendencies from the people labelling others as fascists than I am from those who are being labelled as fascists.

I'd say that needs addressing before those people might be able to launch any successful campaign against fascists.

here we go again. the man who refuses to attack those being racist because hes to busy attacking those who oppose them. 

have you taken your Britain first style `all Muslims are somehow akin to islamic terrorist assholes` hat off yet efests? you never did reply to my last post challenging you on that opinion.....

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, alrapp said:

I believe the question was is it time to bring back RAR ?
 I think now with rising acts of violence against minorities would be a VERY good time, so yes.

Is the Efestivals account the official voice of this site?

while all racist attacks are deplorable, there are not "rising acts of violence".

There was a sharp rise immediately after the EU vote. Since that point they've been falling again, and have (from the last stats I've seen, from August) almost fallen back to where they were (about 10% higher in August).

Even at the peak, they'd risen from a tiny number to still a tiny number.

In no way am I trying to justify any of that, but I am pointing out that some people might suggest the problem is much bigger and much more changed than is really the case.

Having been around at the time of the last RAR, I'm very well aware that absolutely nothing now is in any way similar. There's still a way to travel of course, but the amount of progress since then can't be missed.

Yes, I am the 'official' voice of this site.

I've no problem with a new RAR campaign if that's what someone would like to do, but there's an issue of fascists that exists outside of the racists and to a greater extent, and an RAR campaign infected by that would do no one any favours, it would make the situation FAR worse.

I'm simply saying that some people are in desperate need with getting their own thoughts in order before they start condemning other people's hate thoughts.

Hope, not hate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Cornelius_Fudge said:

Did you just ignore my other post to you that he outright denounced the KKK's support?

Where are his monolithic statements about all the people you just quoted?

He never said all muslims, all mexicans, all blacks etc - you're just putting words in his mouth.

I'm really not trying to defend him, but you're not helping the situation by being in denial.

http://edition.cnn.com/2016/11/01/politics/donald-trump-kkk-crusader-support/

 

 

This ^

It's not even 'denial', it's lies bigger than Trump's own.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, waterfalls212434 said:

here we go again. the man who refuses to attack those being racist because hes to busy attacking those who oppose them. 

have you taken your Britain first style `all Muslims are somehow akin to islamic terrorist assholes` hat off yet efests? you never did reply to my last post challenging you on that opinion.....

 

Oh FFS. :rolleyes:

Zahidf - definitely - and you, I think, have been condemning *ALL* Trump voters as *ONLY* hateful racists, for their choice to support Trump. Such people say it's impossible for anyone to support Trump without 100% agreeing with the most heinous things he said.

I'm pointing out the hypocracy in that angle, because the same logic can be applied to Muslims - but as you're making clear here, you reject that logic for Muslims.

What are you finding difficult about your own hypocrisy?

Hope, not hate.

Edited by eFestivals
Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, Cornelius_Fudge said:

Where are his monolithic statements about all the people you just quoted?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/donald-trump-racist-examples_us_56d47177e4b03260bf777e83  good article that uses supporting evidence to answer that very question and the tacit KKK support and other examples of his bigotry. Enjoy.

25 minutes ago, Cornelius_Fudge said:

I'm really not trying to defend him, ...

And yet here we are.

 

25 minutes ago, Cornelius_Fudge said:

Did you just ignore my other post to you that he outright denounced the KKK's support?

His campaign did. He has not personally shut them down, even since he won. See above.

Edited by scrippit
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, scrippit said:

"I'm not defending but...."

:unsure:

 

Why do you think anyone might defend the bullshit YOU'VE posted?

Bullshit is bullshit is bullshit, whether it's yours or Trump's.

And you dropped in some absolutely massive bullshit above, designed to make people hate Trumpers in the way you say they all hate (to use zahidf's favourite term) 'darkies'.

The world is not made a better place by an increase in bullshit, it's made a better place by dealing with the real issues - and not the self-invented ones.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

The world is not made a better place by an increase in bullshit, it's made a better place by dealing with the real issues - and not the self-invented ones.

Agreed. I have tried to support my assertions.

8 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

And you dropped in some absolutely massive bullshit above, designed to make people hate Trumpers in the way you say they all hate (to use zahidf's favourite term) 'darkies'.

Specifically?

Massive Bullshit?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

23 minutes ago, scrippit said:

Specifically?

Massive Bullshit?

Here;-

 

1 hour ago, scrippit said:

Trump is the king of monolithic statements; all blacks, all muslims, all mexicans, all hispanics, all swamp dwellers, all liberals.

I'm not aware of anything Trump has said that's derogatory to blacks.  That doesn't mean I'm certain that there's none, tho on the basis that zahidf has not tried to present a single thing on that tack I reckon I'm on solid ground.

He's certainly not denigrated *all* Mexicans. His statement was exceedingly clear, in that he was referring to Mexicans in Mexico and not Mexicans in the USA.

That's not me trying to claim it wasn't intensely racist - it was - but the distinction he made and why is of no less importance as the rest. It ends up being about "people within the USA are good, people outside the USA are bad", and certainly not about the "all Mexicans" you claimed.

I'm not going to try and argue that what he said of Muslims couldn't be applied to all Muslims, but again, if you look at what he said it's nuanced by other things, rather than a clear hatred of Muslims in all circumstances. It's about specific circumstances, and where he made clear that a year previously the same thinking of his wouldn't have applied, because that thinking was driven by specific acts of terrorism within the previous year.

(and while i think a register would be a worthless crock of shit for protecting against terrorism, any society would expect its leaders to take actions to stop terrorism - which is the claimed rationale for that register, a register first introduced by GW Bush, and which continued for 3 years into Obama's presidency.)

He used racism. it's wrong, but it's not what you've claimed of it.

As for "all liberals" (whether trump said that or not, i've no idea), there's posts on these forums about "all trump supporters" in *EXACTLY* the same way, of *EXACTLY* the same hatred.

I'm no fan of hatred, whether it's Trump's own or from those who hate Trump. Hating Trump is fine, there's a whole list of indisputable reasons (but not bullshit) that makes him worthy of that response, but to mass-label tens of millions of people as being *ONLY* driven by racism is being no better than Trump's own mass labelling.

Hope, not hate.

Edited by eFestivals
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You get two choices in a US Presidential election. You have to pick the one that fits you best. Even if you think Trump is racist, you may still think everything else he does is better than Hilary. At which point it just depends on how important the issue of race is to you, against every other issue.

If you firmly believe that Hilary's economic plans would crash the economy, bringing on record unemployment, and hence homelessness, poverty and so on (which would of course, disproportionately affect non-whites) you might even believe that Trump is still a better choice for racial minorities than Hilary.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, alrapp said:

I would add that it is likely true that not all Trump suporters are racist extreme right wingers in the same way that not al Germans who suported Hitler hated Jews.

Yep - it's exactly that angle I'm coming from.

And when a future victory of someone better than Trump is dependent on some of those Trumpers switching side, to label them all as irredeemable racists means that the 'better' can never come.

Or, if the worst of Trump is to be stopped, it will need some Trumpers as part of action against that worst - and they will never join the 'righteous' if the 'righteous' have dismissed them all as irredeemable racists.

The future victory of something better than Trump is dependent on those Trumpers. They can't all be written off as beyond redemption.

Hope not hate.

Edited by eFestivals
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
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
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.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...