Time to resurrect Rock Against Racism?

[scrippit]

I said he makes monolithic satements. Fact. I never said he hates all .... as I am being accused!

[waterfalls212434]

12 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

That was normal at Trump's rallies? Really?

Or do you mean it happened at a rally of likeminded neo-nazis who were supporting Trump - just as they normally support a candidate, normally the republican, but you can even find some genuine 'neonazi's for barack' stuff out there if you look.

 

 

no I dont mean that because the rallys in question were normal average trump rallys, not meetings of neo nazi groups at all. 
 

[eFestivals]

Just now, Alex DeLarge said:

Didn't realise Rory Bremner was a political leader. 

can i ask why you think others are able to do better than you might do yourself?

Just to be clear I'm not suggesting you might make a similar joke about the disabled, just that you appear to be holding Trump to higher standards than you do others.

He's not your president, so meeting your standards is nothing of him. The standard he was aiming to meet was one to get the votes he needs from Americans within the rules of that election (and just to be clear, those standards were set by his opponent as much as him).

Expecting others to reach exceptional standards just because they won a popularity contest is setting yourself up for disappointment.

[eFestivals]

1 minute ago, waterfalls212434 said:

no I dont mean that because the rallys in question were normal average trump rallys, not meetings of neo nazi groups at all. 
 

care to show me some supporting evidence?

 

[waterfalls212434]

Just now, eFestivals said:

care to show me some supporting evidence?

 

Im not your personal google, theres loads of examples on youtube and other video sharing platforms of differing venues and rallys where people were seen throwing these salutes........by the way im not claiming the majority were throwing salutes (before you go off on one again at me over something I never said) because that would be stupid and wrong.....but equally stupid is claiming they only ever happened at rallys specific to neo nazi groups because thats also by far not the case.

[waterfalls212434]

11 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

can i ask why you think others are able to do better than you might do yourself?

Just to be clear I'm not suggesting you might make a similar joke about the disabled, just that you appear to be holding Trump to higher standards than you do others.

He's not your president, so meeting your standards is nothing of him. The standard he was aiming to meet was one to get the votes he needs from Americans within the rules of that election (and just to be clear, those standards were set by his opponent as much as him).

Expecting others to reach exceptional standards just because they won a popularity contest is setting yourself up for disappointment.

No matter if you believe its right or wrong to think that way(im not entering that debate spend enough time on here lol) surly even you can understand WHY people may expect someone in trumps position to be held to a very high standard?  I mean the man is president/leader of one of the most powerful nations on earth with the responsibility for the lives of hundreds of millions of his own citizens and the knowledge his actions impact on billions outside of his own country as well. 

 

Edited November 22, 2016 by waterfalls212434

[Alex DeLarge]

16 minutes ago, Cornelius_Fudge said:

As soon as you realise politicians are just like the rest of us, the better

Already realised. If I bullied a disabled person at Uni I would be banned. Others are treating Trump as higher than them by continuing to accept something that if the average person did, they'd be fired for.

13 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

can i ask why you think others are able to do better than you might do yourself?

See above.

Quote

Just to be clear I'm not suggesting you might make a similar joke about the disabled, just that you appear to be holding Trump to higher standards than you do others.

Nope. Trump wasn't making jokes about disabled people, he was targeting and bullying someone's disability. This is unacceptable under any circumstances.

Quote

He's not your president, so meeting your standards is nothing of him. The standard he was aiming to meet was one to get the votes he needs from Americans within the rules of that election (and just to be clear, those standards were set by his opponent as much as him).

Did I say that he should be disqualified for the Presidency due to it? No. I find it abhorrent on a personal level, not all disagreement is censorship. He won the election fair and square, I wasn't disputing that at all.

Quote

Expecting others to reach exceptional standards just because they won a popularity contest is setting yourself up for disappointment.

Strange how 'exceptional standards' is 'don't bully someone's disability'.

Edited November 22, 2016 by Alex DeLarge

[eFestivals]

1 minute ago, waterfalls212434 said:

Im not your personal google, theres loads of examples on youtube and other video sharing platforms of differing venues and rallys where people were seen throwing these salutes........by the way im not claiming the majority were throwing salutes (before you go off on one again at me over something I never said) because that would be stupid and wrong.....but equally stupid is claiming they only ever happened at rallys specific to neo nazi groups because thats also by far not the case.

If you want to make an assertion and for me to believe it's how you say, you need to be presenting me with the relevant evidence. Otherwise i'll just be lost in proper neo-nazi stuff.

But anyway, this new growing racism seems to be very specifically traditionally geographic, based on republican states voting republican and democrat states voting democrat and swing states still being swing states. Are you sure it's all driven by the hardcore racism you're suggesting?

It's worth remembering that racism existed before Trump and will still exist after Trump, and no one woke up on a recent morning and thought "today I'm going to become a racist". So the fact of racists being in the mix isn't new,  and the fact of racists coming out for a particular candidate isn't new. Racists still being racists only proves the thing we already knew before Trump, that there's racists.

[eFestivals]

2 minutes ago, waterfalls212434 said:

No matter if you believe its right or wrong to think that way(im not entering that debate spend enough time on here lol) surly even you can understand WHY people may expect someone in trumps position to be held to a very high standard?  I mean the man is president/leader of one of the most powerful nations on earth with the responsibility for the lives of hundreds of millions of his own citizens and the knowledge his actions impact on billions outside of his own country as well. 

 

I understand why, I just think it's flawed thinking.

The standard of leader anyone gets is the standard of people who are doing the selecting. As the saying goes, you get the govt you deserve.

[Alex DeLarge]

1 minute ago, eFestivals said:

I understand why, I just think it's flawed thinking.

The standard of leader anyone gets is the standard of people who are doing the selecting. As the saying goes, you get the govt you deserve.

I see where you're coming from, but I don't bully disabled people and find Donald Trump (the man, not the President) disgusting for doing so.

[Cornelius_Fudge]

5 hours 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...

 

So, what are you saying then? That he brandishes all those people the same? Are you saying he makes huge generalisations about all people from one group or not with this statement?

[waterfalls212434]

6 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

If you want to make an assertion and for me to believe it's how you say, you need to be presenting me with the relevant evidence. Otherwise i'll just be lost in proper neo-nazi stuff.

But anyway, this new growing racism seems to be very specifically traditionally geographic, based on republican states voting republican and democrat states voting democrat and swing states still being swing states. Are you sure it's all driven by the hardcore racism you're suggesting?

It's worth remembering that racism existed before Trump and will still exist after Trump, and no one woke up on a recent morning and thought "today I'm going to become a racist". So the fact of racists being in the mix isn't new,  and the fact of racists coming out for a particular candidate isn't new. Racists still being racists only proves the thing we already knew before Trump, that there's racists.

No they didnt.....but like brexit making idiots think its ok to abuse immigrants stupidly thinking that because the yes vote won it means people are on `their` side, I think trumps popularity and associated politics has increased recruitment to these causes and made those who already followed such lines bolder and more likely to air their views in public...and we saw that at trump rallys.

Edited November 22, 2016 by waterfalls212434

[eFestivals]

3 minutes ago, Alex DeLarge said:

Nope. Trump wasn't making jokes about disabled people, he was targeting and bullying someone's disability. This is unacceptable under any circumstances.

I agree. To me it was his biggest crime of his campaign.

It still doesn't make him unelectable by default tho, because it's a contest against the other candidate. 

Just think how bad the candidate who couldn't beat him must have been - and it's worth remembering that we inevitably only pick up on some of it from this side of the pond.

(I'd have still voted Clinton from what I know, tho I've read enough USA comments to know how little I know)

[Alex DeLarge]

Just now, eFestivals said:

I agree. To me it was his biggest crime of his campaign.

It still doesn't make him unelectable by default tho, because it's a contest against the other candidate. 

Just think how bad the candidate who couldn't beat him must have been - and it's worth remembering that we inevitably only pick up on some of it from this side of the pond.

(I'd have still voted Clinton from what I know, tho I've read enough USA comments to know how little I know)

The election in the States made me so glad to be British. Every five years a bunch of pricks come along (but two major ones) and we have about three or four months to choose and even by then we're all sick of it.

In the States they had the choice of: Hillary, Bernie (who I do like a lot unsurprisingly), Cruz, Trump, Bush, Rubio, Carson and O'Malley.

They then have a year of division and squabbling leading to two of the worst candidates of the bunch. Regardless who won, the country would have been bitterly divided for the foreseeable future. I feel sorry for them.

[Cornelius_Fudge]

6 minutes ago, Alex DeLarge said:

Already realised. If I bullied a disabled person at Uni I would be banned. Others are treating Trump as higher than them by continuing to accept something that if the average person did, they'd be fired for.

See above.

Nope. Trump wasn't making jokes about disabled people, he was targeting and bullying someone's disability. This is unacceptable under any circumstances.

Did I say that he should be disqualified for the Presidency due to it? No. I find it abhorrent on a personal level, not all disagreement is censorship. He won the election fair and square, I wasn't disputing that at all.

Strange how 'exceptional standards' is 'don't bully someone's disability'.

Definition of 'to bully'

Bullying is the use of force, threat, or coercion to abuse, intimidate, or aggressively dominate others.

Which is not what he did. He made fun of someone, one time. That's not what constitutes bullying.

I'm not saying I like the behaviour either, but let's not call it something it's not or make it out like that's the only part of his character. If we judge everyone on the merits of one off jokes, we'd get no where.

But if you're going to call someone a bully, make sure it's for bullying and not for one off jokes - again it's just an exaggeration and it doesn't help anyone.

It's a bad joke, yes, I accept that, I don't like the joke either, but it's not bullying and obviously all the people who voted for Trump did so, not because of a one off joke. It really is a nothing issue, except for some on the Left

[zahidf]

45 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

Fuck me, a 35 year old can of worms - because there's fuck all else to attack him with from what he's done in the 35 years since.

He may or may not have had those people wrongly prosecuted. It all depends on whether that original unproven allegation was really true or not.

It's not something that cannot be resolved, and despite a clean record since, you're determined that he's damned forever on the basis of a 35 year old unproven allegation. 

Care to tell me how that's showing yourself as liberal or progressive, and therefore a better person than the man you condemn?

 

He called a white lawyer a 'disgrace to his race' after that for working for a black client. And voted against every piece of legislation to promote equality between races.

He is also on record as supporting the muslim ban.

'Clean record' is a push

Edited November 22, 2016 by zahidf

[zahidf]

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/nov/22/white-nationalists-alt-right-nazi-language-trump

[Alex DeLarge]

Just now, Cornelius_Fudge said:

Definition of 'to bully'

Bullying is the use of force, threat, or coercion to abuse, intimidate, or aggressively dominate others.

Which is not what he did. He made fun of someone, one time. That's not what constitutes bullying.

I'm not saying I like the behaviour either, but let's not call it something it's not or make it out like that's the only part of his character. If we judge everyone on the merits of one off jokes, we'd get no where.

But if you're going to call someone a bully, make sure it's for bullying and not for one off jokes - again it's just an exaggeration and it doesn't help anyone.

It's a bad joke, yes, I accept that, I don't like the joke either, but it's not bullying and obviously all the people who voted for Trump did so, not because of a one off joke. It really is a nothing issue, except for some on the Left

What was the joke? The reporters disability made him shake and speak funny? Not much of a joke.

OED:

[noun] A person who uses strength or influence to harm or intimidate those who are weaker:

How did Trump not do this? He used his influence as a Presidential speaker to mock and intimidate a reporter (someone who's  job means they have less power than a business man and Presidential candidate) with a disability, in a room full of his supporters who wouldn't question him. He disregarded the reporters claims against him by using his influence.

He then lied saying he'd never seen the reporter before and he was imitating him speaking 'grovel', which contradicts the fact he said 'poor guy, you should have seen this guy' before his nasty impression, as well as the fact they had met and were on a first name basis.

I never said all of Trump's supporters loved the joke, nor did I say it was the reason his supporters voted  for him. But I disagree that it's a nothing issue, this type of behaviour should be addressed and condemned. A Bloomberg poll listed it as his worst offence according to voters.

[The Nal]

Alt-Right > Alt-J

[Cornelius_Fudge]

1 minute ago, zahidf said:

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/nov/22/white-nationalists-alt-right-nazi-language-trump

Blanket labelling of all people in the Alt-Right, or just the Right again, doesn't help anyone. It's just lazy journalism.

[eFestivals]

2 minutes ago, waterfalls212434 said:

No they didnt.....but like brexit making idiots think its ok to abuse immigrants stupidly thinking that because the yes vote won it means people are on `their` side, I think trumps popularity and associated politics has increased recruitment to these causes and made those who already followed such lines bolder and more likely to air their views in public...and we saw that at trump rallys.

Yep, I don't doubt a few moron racists feel emboldened by both brexit and Trump, and its to be regretted.

That still doesn't make it typical, and neither can a political leader be held directly responsible for supporters who go further than he has. It's much like trying to pin something of the responsibility of the murder of Jo Cox onto Farage - which I think we'd all rightly say was going too far, even tho I bet we can all see a relationship.

Trump should be trying to reel it back in again, but the reality of that would be calling his supporters idiots so it's just not going to happen. It's for exactly the same sorts of reasons Corbyn has sometimes being hesitant about speaking out about some things and dismissive of others. It's how politics works.

(nothing to do with Trump, but I've just realised I've pretty much contradicted myself there with something else i posted today in a very different topic. I definitely prefer what this version says because it's recognising the reality, so i'll have to revisit that other post).

As for rallies, they're a long way from the everyday Joe Public, and I doubt Trump thinks of those people as anything but useful idiots. 

[scrippit]

9 minutes ago, Cornelius_Fudge said:

So, what are you saying then? That he brandishes all those people the same? Are you saying he makes huge generalisations about all people from one group or not with this statement?

Yes. But I didnt mention hate - you attributed that to me. He has made many generalisations before and during his campaign.

 

[matt2007]

So back to Rock Against Racism, where it Tom Robinson when you need him?

[Mardy]

2 minutes ago, matt2007 said:

So back to Rock Against Racism, where it Tom Robinson when you need him?

As I understand it, he's on a double white line, trucking on through the night. 

[scrippit]

4 minutes ago, matt2007 said:

So back to Rock Against Racism, where it Tom Robinson when you need him?

 

1 minute ago, Mardy said:

As I understand it, he's on a double white line, trucking on through the night. 

This is much more like the sort of quality debate I was hoping to see.