US Presidential Election 2016

[eFestivals]

4 minutes ago, LJS said:

He thinks we are too stupid to twig the flaw in his argument which can be summed up as "we're all by nature a bit selfish therefore we can't criticise the selfishness of others"

You're perfectly welcome to criticise others.

But when you say "everyone's a racist" when they're not, those 'racists' think you're as big a c**t as you think them. You're proving yourself the c**t you say they are. 

I'm quite happy for Trump's racism to be called out, but you don't stop at that, you decide everyone's a racist.

By your own logic all indy supporting Scots must be racists too - you included - because you're siding with the anti-English racists that you've been happy to admit exist within the indy side.

Or doesn't your own logic count for anything in the myth-infested make-it-up world you inhabit?

[zahidf]

6 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

But he's played others too. You, for example.

Playing the others was no less an important part of his victory. Every time someone like zahidf popped up and said anyone who found anything good within all of what Trump said was a racist, it made the good people amongst Trump's supporters less likely to swap sides.

It hardens the polarisation, it doesn't bring people together ... and it was the polarisation what won it.

'That racist man said a racist thing'

'How dare you focus on his loud racism and ignore his bullshit rhetoric on 'Best jobs coming back bigly'. You are worse than the racist man'

http://mobile.nytimes.com/2016/11/13/opinion/sunday/2016-election-thank-you-notes.html?_r=0&referer=http://lwlies.com/articles/read-ethan-coens-darkly-hilarious-new-york-times-editorial/

[LJS]

32 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

Yep, I can see what you're saying.

And what you're saying is that some people are more deserving of equity and fairness than others - who you want no equality and fairness for.

You stated it categorically in the past, by using words that proved your vision of equality stopped at the borders.

Funny thing is, I don't ever remember feral saying any such thing.

Is this one of your special paraphrases?

[eFestivals]

6 minutes ago, zahidf said:

He has been campaiging on a fascist programme

Care to say what your ddefinition is fascism is here?

Cos it's not a version with death camps or demonising a segment of the country's population.

6 minutes ago, zahidf said:

and he decides to stick with that.

he's already shown he's not sticking with everything he said. That fact is clear.

 

Edited November 13, 2016 by eFestivals

[eFestivals]

1 minute ago, LJS said:

Funny thing is, I don't ever remember feral saying any such thing.

Is this one of your special paraphrases?

If you care to notice, feral is able to defend herself, and isn't disputing what I said.

Sexist misogynist man who thinks he has to step in for the poor little weak woman who can't defend herself....?

 

[LJS]

9 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

You're perfectly welcome to criticise others.

But when you say "everyone's a racist" when they're not, those 'racists' think you're as big a c**t as you think them. You're proving yourself the c**t you say they are. 

Except no one says "everyone's a racist" except you who invent it to attack others.

Quote

I'm quite happy for Trump's racism to be called out, but you don't stop at that, you decide everyone's a racist.

Repeating a lie doesn't make it true, it makes you a twat.

Quote

By your own logic all indy supporting Scots must be racists too - you included - because you're siding with the anti-English racists that you've been happy to admit exist within the indy side.

What utter Tosh, & "happy to admit" is the toshiest of it all.

Quote

Or doesn't your own logic count for anything in the myth-infested make-it-up world you inhabit?

Neil, you wouldn't recognise logic if it grabbed you my the pussy.

Edited November 13, 2016 by LJS

[LJS]

3 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

If you care to notice, feral is able to defend herself, and isn't disputing what I said.

Sexist misogynist man who thinks he has to step in for the poor little weak woman who can't defend herself....?

 

I'm sexist & misogynist now. Wow, I should be locked up!

At least I don't invent things other people say in order to defend the choices of chose who elect racist, sexist & misogynist leaders.

Edited November 13, 2016 by LJS

[eFestivals]

2 minutes ago, LJS said:

Except no one says "everyone's a racist" except you who invent it to attack others.

 

YOU have said that those who side with racists can only do because of their own racism.

Which MUST be YOU by YOUR own words.

Never mind, small mind.

 

[eFestivals]

5 minutes ago, LJS said:

At least I don't invent things other people say in order to defend the choices of chose who elect racist, sexist & misogynist leaders.

I haven't invented anything of what you feral or zahidf have been saying.

I'm simply pointing out that not all those who side with racists do so because they're also racist.

Unless you're admitting to your own racism?

PS .... tho you're two out of three with Trump today, even if you're not going for the full set.

 

Edited November 13, 2016 by eFestivals

[zahidf]

9 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

I haven't invented anything of what you feral or zahidf have been saying.

I'm simply pointing out that not all those who side with racists do so because they're also racist.

Unless you're admitting to your own racism?

PS .... tho you're two out of three with Trump today, even if you're not going for the full set.

 

It is reasonable to assume that someone who sides with a racist is probably a racist as well. If they are ignoring the racism for another stronger reason, then it is up to them to explain it. IMO, there are very, very few reasons to vote for a racist and ignore the racism.

[kaosmark2]

LJS, when Neil labels all SNP voters /supporters as something, do you react to cooperate on what you agree with or get more polarised? 

The exact same thing is happening with regards to zahidf's comments about brexit/trump voters. 

Neil is pointing out that zahidf is behaving like he has in the past by labelling everyone who took one part of a political position as identically stupid/selfish. 

It's not completely accurate and is barely constructive. It's a terrible way of engaging people who need to be engaged. 

The Bnp were small enough to disregard all of them. Ukip, brexit voters, republicans are too large a proportion to dismiss every single one as racist. Many are, many are tolerating it, many felt giving a semblance of legitimacy to said racism was an unpleasant cost that was better than the alternative political option. The last group have to be engaged rather than dismissed, and quite possibly the second group. 

[zahidf]

22 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

Care to say what your ddefinition is fascism is here?

Cos it's not a version with death camps or demonising a segment of the country's population.

he's already shown he's not sticking with everything he said. That fact is clear.

 

He certainly demonises Muslims

here you go, a historians view of it

https://medium.com/@theonlytoby/history-tells-us-what-will-happen-next-with-brexit-trump-a3fefd154714#.3iwryvvf6

[LJS]

2 minutes ago, kaosmark2 said:

LJS, when Neil labels all SNP voters /supporters as something, do you react to cooperate on what you agree with or get more polarised? 

The exact same thing is happening with regards to zahidf's comments about brexit/trump voters. 

Neil is pointing out that zahidf is behaving like he has in the past by labelling everyone who took one part of a political position as identically stupid/selfish. 

It's not completely accurate and is barely constructive. It's a terrible way of engaging people who need to be engaged. 

The Bnp were small enough to disregard all of them. Ukip, brexit voters, republicans are too large a proportion to dismiss every single one as racist. Many are, many are tolerating it, many felt giving a semblance of legitimacy to said racism was an unpleasant cost that was better than the alternative political option. The last group have to be engaged rather than dismissed, and quite possibly the second group. 

I agree. One of my constant themes has been the failure of mainstream left of centre parties to make a positive case for immigration & multi-culturalism.

Zahidf may be a bit more extreme in his position than I am, but Neil, in his desperation to attack zahidf ends up justifying the actions of trump voters.

[eFestivals]

18 minutes ago, zahidf said:

It is reasonable to assume that someone who sides with a racist is probably a racist as well. 

That's LJS then.

 

[eFestivals]

16 minutes ago, zahidf said:

He certainly demonises Muslims

he pointed out that (some) Muslims are mass-murdering. He said that no Muslims should be let into the USA "until we know what the hell is going on".

It's certainly not the sweetest thing anyone has ever said, but it's a different message to the "go kill a darkie" one you're accusing him of promoting.

[eFestivals]

16 minutes ago, LJS said:

Neil, in his desperation to attack zahidf ends up justifying the actions of trump voters.

Tiny tiny mind 

I'm merely pointing out that those people self-justify their decision, no differently to how you self-justify your choice to stand alongside racists.

You choose to put aside the racism that you stand beside, because the racism isn't the part of things which joins you together with the racists you stand beside. You regard why you stand beside them as something different to that racism.

But it's impossible for anything similar to go on with Trump supporters, of course.

 

[LJS]

3 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

That's LJS then.

Dearie Dearie me. I assume this is a reference to the fact that a small number of independence supporters are anti-English & therefore by zahidf's logic I must therefore be racist. 

Which is of course Bollox on every level. 

Whatever he may or may not be claiming, he is talking about people supporting a racist platform, the SNP & the broader Indy movement are clearly opposed to all forms of discrimination & prejudice, indeed more so, I would argue than UK labour with it immigration mugs.

Of course this comes from the man who claims that Comfortably numb is racist.

[zahidf]

1 minute ago, LJS said:

Dearie Dearie me. I assume this is a reference to the fact that a small number of independence supporters are anti-English & therefore by zahidf's logic I must therefore be racist. 

Which is of course Bollox on every level. 

Whatever he may or may not be claiming, he is talking about people supporting a racist platform, the SNP & the broader Indy movement are clearly opposed to all forms of discrimination & prejudice, indeed more so, I would argue than UK labour with it immigration mugs.

Of course this comes from the man who claims that Comfortably numb is racist.

Yeah, the SNP arent racist, and unlike the LEAVE campaign, it was not an anti-immigration campaign. My understanding was that the YES campaign wanted more immigration upon independence. 

[eFestivals]

23 minutes ago, LJS said:

One of my constant themes has been the failure of mainstream left of centre parties to make a positive case for immigration & multi-culturalism.

but that assumes immigration to be a good thing in all circumstances.

Care to tell me why it's *ALWAYS* is a good thing?

Would you call immigration to Scotland positive if 5M newbies flooded in, all of who detest Scottish indy and vote tory?

What about if that immigration caused you to end up with no job, and for you and your family to lose your house as a consequence, so your standard of living was seriously downgraded?

There's perfectly valid reasons why any individual might consider immigration to be a bad thing without a jot of those reasons being about racism.

You're simply calling for the left of centre parties to keep on making the mistake they've been doing, which has caused the reaction against it. We're back again to that definition of insanity.

[eFestivals]

5 minutes ago, LJS said:

Dearie Dearie me. I assume this is a reference to the fact that a small number of independence supporters are anti-English & therefore by zahidf's logic I must therefore be racist. 

Which is of course Bollox on every level. 

zahidf is talking bollocks on every level?

Now why didn't I think of saying that...?

[eFestivals]

3 minutes ago, zahidf said:

Yeah, the SNP arent racist

But a not-insignificant number of their supporters are.

And you say that those who stand alongside racists are also racist, so while the SNP might not be racist LJS *HAS TO BE* by your own logic.

Which LJS has just pointed out is bollocks, and I fully agree with him.

So now you're on your own, trying to make your prejudiced view of the world, as heinous as anything of Trump, stand up.

Do carry on.

 

[eFestivals]

Trump: all Muslims are evil

zahidf: all Trumpers are evil.

Spot the difference?

[feral chile]

1 hour ago, eFestivals said:

No shit sherlock.

He might be (is) thinking himself far cleverer than he really is, but I really can't see him wanting himself to go down in history as Hitler 2.

Yep, he played his words fast and loose, and there's already some nasty consequences from that. Where it goes from here we'll have to see, and its not hard to see a version where he doesn't do enough to reign it back in.

But that's still going to be something different from officially sanctioned, which is the version I very definitely can't see (but zahidf says is already happening).

And, it should be noted, there's been a black president for the last 8 years, and even he's not been able to reign in the standard racist policing that happens all over the USA, so while that racist policing is very likely to continue under trump, it's very likely to have continued under Clinton too.

Much MUCH more likely than the apocalyptical stuff is just another republican president.

I agree that we have to cool down, and calling people racist will escalate things.

But if we break this down more.

Do you think Trump's remarks were racist?

If so, do you think he was pandering to racist elements?

Do you think voting for someone who makes racist comments is racist by default?

Do you think that when fears are expressed by focusing on a particular group, that this is bigoted?

Do you think failing to challenge discrimination is a form of discrimination?

[feral chile]

13 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

Trump: all Muslims are evil

zahidf: all Trumpers are evil.

Spot the difference?

see above.

Trump: all Muslims are dangerous.

zahidf: all Trumpers are promoting Trump's racist scaremongering, and are therefore promoting racism.

For starters, you can't claim that all racists are evil. I would prefer to talk about racist behaviour and attitudes, anyway, because all of us are probably racist in some way.

I was waiting for a train on the Underground the other day, and a group of youngsters moved each side of me and the person I was travelling with.

I had to rationalise that spike of fear - was it because they looked Muslim, because they were in London, because there were a lot of them, because they were young?

I'm pretty sure it was based on an 'ism' though.

humans are programmed to react quickly to threats. The way we do that, is to generalise, so we don't waste time analysing. You have to react immediately to a threat.

everything inside me was telling me to run. Everything in me was screaming danger - you've been surrounded and isolated by this group.

was there danger? No.

But I hadn't just elected a president, or voted for UKIP/racial hatred groups, telling me how dangerous these groups were.

It's there. That fear of the different, the unknown, is there.

We shouldn't feed it. We should communicate, understand, make the difference either less different, or less mysterious. And therefore less scary.

This is where I disagree with zahidf, though I understand why he's scared.

We've had the War on Terror, now everyone's acting surprised that we've got racism.

You have to take the fear away, or at least limit it to where it should be located.

The real fear is escalating hatred.

[feral chile]

1 hour ago, eFestivals said:

But he's played others too. You, for example.

Playing the others was no less an important part of his victory. Every time someone like zahidf popped up and said anyone who found anything good within all of what Trump said was a racist, it made the good people amongst Trump's supporters less likely to swap sides.

It hardens the polarisation, it doesn't bring people together ... and it was the polarisation what won it.

ah missed this, see above post.

yes, I agree with you. I don't think enough has been said here though, to put this point across clearly to zahidf, not enough to make it clear that Trump's comments are not acceptable.