You Can Thank Trump For The White Nationalist Rampage

[homersapien 11,371]

1 hour ago, aujeff11 said:

Completely illogical. 

The existence of one has nothing to do with the other. 

You didn't cover analogies in English class?

Boy, you are really getting "schooled" today.

[Brad_ATX 13,654]

28 minutes ago, homersapien said:

You didn't cover analogies in English class?

Boy, you are really getting "schooled" today.

Actually from my logic class at AU, Jeff is right in this instance.  Sure, an analogy can be made, but it doesn't mean that it's a logical one.

In this instance, American Nazi refers to a national identity and then a political ideology.  The former you are born/naturalized into, the other you choose.  There's also not one consistent ideology that makes up "American", so I get what Jeff is saying here whereas the Nazi ideology is very much set in stone.

In the case of Christian Atheists, you are literally talking about two competing ideologies that can be chosen by the individual and are at odds with each other.  However, neither is automatically a Christian or an Atheist by birth as one would be an American.

[Grumps 3,704]

20 minutes ago, Brad_ATX said:

The car was driven into the crowd around 2ish on Saturday.  The video was all over TV.  The AP reported that the driver was in custody several hours later.  I can only assume that POTUS would have had access to the driver's identity much earlier than the AP, so therefore he would have known on Saturday before making his statement.  Considering that the driver went plowing into a crowd of counter-protesters, it's pretty safe to say the motives were clear.

When the deceased family's was notified has no bearing on Trump making a statement to firmly denounce white nationalism.

All groups?  No.  But I do know that this event was created by the White Nationalist movement and they specifically targeted Charlottesville over a freaking statue/park.  This was all over the news prior to Saturday.

As for mentioning others, I really don't see a point.  If there were just fist fights, then whatever.  That happens at protests sometimes for both sides.  However, only one side of this demonstration rammed a car into a crowd and committed murder.  Trying to rationalize this any other way is beyond disgusting.

I also don't think one should assume that everything he does is stupid.  However, when the stupidity is obvious, it should be called out.  I think it's pretty easy to see that racist a-holes targeted a community.  Then, one racist a-hole decided to take it into his hands and plow a car into a crowd of counter-protesters.  Like I said, this was on video.  There's literally nothing to wait for confirmation on.

Some things are just layups for any sitting POTUS.  Denouncing this action immediately and calling it for what it is was one of those times, and Trump blew it.

Trump obviously handled it poorly, but what we KNOW is that he denounced hatred and bigotry and today denounced the white supremacist portion of the crowd. But there WERE fist fights. There WERE two different groups with shields and sticks. Today Trump denounced the half that will get the media off his back. Now maybe everyone will be happy, but I doubt it. Next we will hear what else Trump should have said and didn't, or didn't say fast enough.

[TitanTiger 20,481]

15 minutes ago, Grumps said:

Next we will hear what else Trump should have said and didn't, or didn't say fast enough.

Well that's logical when he fails to say what he should when he should say it, then lets two days go by before finally saying it.

Look, I get pushing back against some of the anti-Trump stuff, but this is losing ground you're planting your flag in on this one.

[homersapien 11,371]

33 minutes ago, Brad_ATX said:

Actually from my logic class at AU, Jeff is right in this instance.  Sure, an analogy can be made, but it doesn't mean that it's a logical one.

In this instance, American Nazi refers to a national identity and then a political ideology.  The former you are born/naturalized into, the other you choose.

In the case of Christian Atheists, you are literally talking about two competing ideologies that can be chosen by the individual.  However, neither is automatically a Christian or an Atheist by birth as one would be an American.

Well, actually, I haven't been arguing the issue of "American as national identity" but "American as political ideology".  (All men created equal....)   In that sense, the analogy holds.

But, as I have alluded to in a different thread, if one objectively considers actual American history, I will concede the  fault in my argument that America as ideal negates the possibility of (actual) American Nazis.  From a nationality standpoint, thats obviously possible.

Our history instructs us that America - as country - was founded on racism and has continued to be largely racist to the present.   All of the ideals that we (or at least I) like to identify as American are, in fact,  largely mythical.

Taken in totality, we are one of the most inherently racist countries in the world's history.

Having said that, there is virtue in valueing the myth.  It's perhaps the only way we can transcend our history.  

Justifying white supremacists as equivalent morally to anti-racists certainly won't help.   

[Brad_ATX 13,654]

1 minute ago, homersapien said:

Well, actually, I haven't been arguing the issue of "American as national identity" but "American as that of political ideology"  (All men created equal....).  In that sense, the analogy holds.

But as I have alluded to in a different thread, if one considers actual American history, in a purely objective way, then I will concede the  fault in my argument that America as an ideal negates the possibility of American Nazis.

Our history instructs us that America - as country - was founded on racism and has continued to be racist up to today.  All of the ideals that we (I) like to identify as American are, in fact,  mythical.  Taken in totality, we are one of the most inherently racist countries in the world's history.

Having said that, there is virtue in valueing the myth.  It's perhaps the only way we can transcend our history.   Justifying white supremacists as equivalent morally to anti-racists certainly won't help.   

Makes sense.  I just think in reading you and Jeff's back-and-forth that there was a miscommunication, as to me, it was evident that Jeff is arguing American as national identity.  I think when looked at from that perspective, you can see why he says American Nazi and American Confederate are essentially no less American than American Democrat or Republican.

[aujeff11 6,243]

3 minutes ago, homersapien said:

But as I have alluded to in a different thread, if one considers actual American history, in a purely objective way, then I will concede the  fault in my argument that America as an ideal negates the possibility of American Nazis.

Our history instructs us that America - as country - was founded on racism and has continued to be racist up to today.  All of the ideals that we (I) like to identify as American are, in fact,  mythical.  Taken in totality, we are one of the most inherently racist countries in the world's history.

And I've been saying this for two days now. 

 

Thanks for the assist, Mr Brad. 

[homersapien 11,371]

1 minute ago, Brad_ATX said:

Makes sense.  I just think in reading you and Jeff's back-and-forth that there was a miscommunication, as to me, it was evident that Jeff is arguing American as national identity.  I think when looked at from that perspective, you can see why he says American Nazi and American Confederate are essentially no less American than American Democrat or Republican.

I agree.

The problem I have with him is his attaching moral equivalence to white supremacists and anti-racists.

[homersapien 11,371]

34 minutes ago, Brad_ATX said:

Makes sense.  I just think in reading you and Jeff's back-and-forth that there was a miscommunication, as to me, it was evident that Jeff is arguing American as national identity.  I think when looked at from that perspective, you can see why he says an American Nazi and an American Confederate are essentially no less American than an American Democrat or Republican.

Now see, you yourself are equating political philosophy with nationality.  You need to attach an "an" (as indicated).  Such subtlies require precise grammer.  At least if you want to maintain such a distinction.

Nationality aside, I still contend Nazi's or Confederates (pro slavery) have unAmerican values.  God help us if that's not true.

[homersapien 11,371]

I should also mention that I gave Jeff every opportunity to make the distinction between American nationality and American "values".

For example, On p. 5,  I specifically asked emt if he equated the moral position of racists with those who oppose racism.  Jeff jumped in and essentially said yes, even though he disengenuously substituted (the fake) antifa 'platform' for "opponents of racism".

Regardless, that question clearly related to moral positions instead of nationality.  And he never responded to the actual question.

That was a perfect opportunity for him to make the distinction between "nationality" and "values" and he passed on it.  

Admittedly, since I was enjoying watching him dig himself deeper, I didn't feel inclined to rescue him.    I do tend to get overly competitive in these "discussions".  It's a weakness of mine.

[aujeff11 6,243]

8 minutes ago, homersapien said:

That question clearly related to moral positions instead of nationality.

I discussed the nationality of their position as well. Please go through the thread, gramps. I said an American Nazi could be proud of American things other than political party or preference. Such as "self advancement, " social mobility, " "venue to practice their beliefs."

 

8 minutes ago, homersapien said:

And he never responded to the actual question.

Yes I did. 

11 minutes ago, homersapien said:

Admittedly, since I was enjoying watching him dig himself deeper, I didn't feel inclined to rescue him.

Deeper into what? I was mistakened on a fake antifa poster with Nazi rhetoric. You call that a win? 

[aujeff11 6,243]

31 minutes ago, homersapien said:

You need to attach an "an", as indicated.  Such subtlies require precise grammer.

 

31 minutes ago, homersapien said:

Now see, you yourself are equating with poltial philosophy instead of nationality.

This has been your argument the past couple days in a nutshell. 

[homersapien 11,371]

Just now, aujeff11 said:

I discussed the nationality of their position as well. Please go through the thread, gramps. I said an American Nazi could be proud of American things other than political party or preference. Such as "self advancement, " social mobility, " "venue to practice their beliefs."

 

Yes I did. 

Deeper into what? I was mistakened on a fake antifa poster with Nazi rhetoric. You call that a win? 

That doesn't make sense.  I was referring to my question - is there a moral equivalence between a racist and someone who opposes racism.   There's nothing about nationality in that question.

 

No you didn't.  You'd presumably reference it right now if you had. 

 

You were clearly trying to use antifa to attack opponents of racism as if they and the racists were morally equivalent.

 

And I suggest you call me "grandpa" since I am old enough to be your great grandfather.   

[homersapien 11,371]

4 minutes ago, aujeff11 said:

 

This has been your argument the past couple days in a nutshell. 

You're catching on.

Now the question remains how you contrast those values without confusing the issue with citizenship or fake antifa posters.

[aujeff11 6,243]

22 minutes ago, homersapien said:

That doesn't make sense.  I was referring to my question - is there a moral equivalence between a racist and someone who opposes racism.   There's nothing about nationality in that question.

Hence why I didn't say anything about their nationality. 

 

22 minutes ago, homersapien said:

No you didn't.  You'd presumably reference it right now if you had. 

 

I'm on my phone at work. You can go through the thread at the expense of your own time. 

 

22 minutes ago, homersapien said:

You were clearly trying to use antifa to attack opponents of racism as if they and the racists were morally equivalent.

I was attacking the rhetoric of the two. Both the fake poster and the Nazi platform seemed morally deficient to me. Using violence and hatred to attack hatred and violence is only perpetuating the problem. 

 

22 minutes ago, homersapien said:

And I suggest you call me "grandpa" since I am old enough to be your great grandfather.   

Bitter, old, and losing to 28 yo's in arguments is no way to go through life. 

[homersapien 11,371]

6 minutes ago, aujeff11 said:

Hence why I didn't say anything about their nationality. 

 

You didn't answer the question either:

Is there a moral equivalence between white supremacists and the people who oppose them?

(Please note that I never mentioned the organization antifa.)

[homersapien 11,371]

9 minutes ago, aujeff11 said:

I'm on my phone at work. You can go through the thread at the expense of your own time. 

I love this sort of response.

If you actually did address the question directly, all you have to do is quote it.  

I can wait until you get home.

[homersapien 11,371]

12 minutes ago, aujeff11 said:

I was attacking the rhetoric of the two. Both the fake poster and the Nazi platform seemed morally deficient to me. Using violence and hatred is only perpetuating the problem. 

Well, aside from the fact the information you were using is fake,  there was nothing about antifa in my question.

You were evading a direct answer to the actual question by answering a different question, one that substituted "antifa" with what I actually said.

[aujeff11 6,243]

2 minutes ago, homersapien said:

 

You didn't answer the question either:

Is there a moral equivalence between white supremacists and the people who oppose them?

(Please note that I never mentioned the organization antifa.)

Obviously 90+% of the opposition does not have moral equivalence of a Nazi. What are you wanting to hear? Psycho extremists on the other side are no better though. 

[homersapien 11,371]

15 minutes ago, aujeff11 said:

Bitter, old, and losing to 28 yo's in arguments is no way to go through life. 

 

 Yeah, but I just can't resist, which is why I keep responding.

Hint:  Playing on an internet forum at work is not exactly the way to go through life either.  Course, I never had to worry about that at your age.  

[AUDub 11,147]

3 minutes ago, homersapien said:

You were evading a direct answer to the actual question by answering a different question, one that substituted "antifa" with what I actually said.

Speaking of that particular tactic, what has become of Blue?

[aujeff11 6,243]

3 minutes ago, homersapien said:

Well, aside from the fact the information you were using is fake,  there was nothing about antifa in my question.

 

I assumed you knew that the antifa was a group within the opposition that you keep talking about. 

[aujeff11 6,243]

5 minutes ago, homersapien said:

Well, aside from the fact the information you were using is fake,  there was nothing about antifa in my question.

You were evading a direct answer to the actual question by answering a different question, one that substituted "antifa" with what I actually said.

That direct question wasn't even directed to me?? 

[homersapien 11,371]

Just now, aujeff11 said:

Obviously 90+% of the opposition does not have moral equivalence of a Nazi. What are you wanting to hear? Psycho extremists on the other side are no better though. 

I suspect that members of antifa make up way, way less of the total number of Americans that oppose racism than you imply.

But the telling fact is that you felt you had to use them to characterize those who oppose racism, even though your characterization was totally bogus.

And who the hell would go out of their way to characterize opponents of white extremists as "psycho extremists"?  

Hmmmm?

[homersapien 11,371]

7 minutes ago, Bigbens42 said:

Speaking of that particular tactic, what has become of Blue?

I don't know, but if you say it two more times, you're liable to conjure him up.

So keep quiet.