Quantcast
Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
    1. Welcome to GTAForums!

    1. GTANet.com

    2. GTANet 20th Anniversary

    1. GTA Online

      1. The Cayo Perico Heist
      2. Find Lobbies & Players
      3. Guides & Strategies
      4. Vehicles
      5. Content Creator
      6. Help & Support
    2. Red Dead Online

      1. Frontier Pursuits
      2. Find Lobbies & Outlaws
      3. Help & Support
    3. Crews

    1. Red Dead Redemption 2

      1. PC
      2. Help & Support
    2. Red Dead Redemption

    1. Grand Theft Auto Series

      1. St. Andrews Cathedral
    2. GTA VI

    3. GTA V

      1. Guides & Strategies
      2. Help & Support
    4. GTA IV

      1. The Lost and Damned
      2. The Ballad of Gay Tony
      3. Guides & Strategies
      4. Help & Support
    5. GTA San Andreas

      1. Guides & Strategies
      2. Help & Support
    6. GTA Vice City

      1. Guides & Strategies
      2. Help & Support
    7. GTA III

      1. Guides & Strategies
      2. Help & Support
    8. Portable Games

      1. GTA Chinatown Wars
      2. GTA Vice City Stories
      3. GTA Liberty City Stories
    9. Top-Down Games

      1. GTA Advance
      2. GTA 2
      3. GTA
    1. GTA Mods

      1. GTA V
      2. GTA IV
      3. GTA III, VC & SA
      4. Tutorials
    2. Red Dead Mods

      1. Documentation
    3. Mod Showroom

      1. Scripts & Plugins
      2. Maps
      3. Total Conversions
      4. Vehicles
      5. Textures
      6. Characters
      7. Tools
      8. Other
      9. Workshop
    4. Featured Mods

      1. Design Your Own Mission
      2. OpenIV
      3. GTA: Underground
      4. GTA: Liberty City
      5. GTA: State of Liberty
    1. Rockstar Games

    2. Rockstar Collectors

    1. Off-Topic

      1. General Chat
      2. Gaming
      3. Technology
      4. Movies & TV
      5. Music
      6. Sports
      7. Vehicles
    2. Expression

      1. Graphics / Visual Arts
      2. GFX Requests & Tutorials
      3. Writers' Discussion
      4. Debates & Discussion
    1. Announcements

    2. Support

      1. Court House
    3. Suggestions

That Thread about US current events


Raavi

Recommended Posts

17 hours ago, Mister Pink said:

 

Going to be accused of being some right-wing fascist for agreeing with this very fact but it's irresponsible comments like these (AOC's), which the phrase "the left eats itself" is very applicable. 

 

 

It's shocking.. reposting part of the tweets for context again.

 

If you are going to advocate for violent protests then be prepared to advocate for people's right to be violent on things you don't support. Either you support violence or you don't. I thought we live in a civilized society where protest should and could be peaceful. AOC advocating or being apologetic to violent protest in only comes back to bite her in the ass. I think it's irresponsible for people in office to be advocating for violence. You can't say it's OK only when you want it. It's everyone or nothing. Personally speaking, I choose non-violence. I'm against it by principle. But if you gave AOC her own logic back to her and said these Capitol building rioters were just doing as she said "protesting to make people uncomfortable" I bet she couldn't defend it. Because she's not saying it on principle. She's saying with her team in mind. 

 

I think it's people doing things like harassing politicians at restaurants, or the people that vandalized Mitch McConnell's home, that were setting precedents for what happened at the Capitol, which was like a parody of a coup, both frightening and hilarious.

I think Trump being banned from Twitter had become inevitable after what happened. I have always been an opponent of banning Trump, but social media platforms should not let themselves be used for very pernicious and damaging misinformation campaigns that lead to large upheaval. Those who support some type of 'absolute free speech' on social media should consider the fact that social media have been weaponized in ultra violent and genocidal events like what was done to the Rohingya. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-46105934

Social media is like a massive human experiment that is hard to control. But bad faith actors should be equally punished on all sides. In my view Twitter should not exist at all and I consider a majority of what happens on Twitter politically to be in bad faith, to be some kind of trolling, or posturing. Twitter in my view is a cancer that should be rooted out in its entirety.

Edited by Eutyphro
  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

Lol at the absolute dumbass saying Obama was the closest America got to fascism. Absolutely lol. Imagine thinking that unironically. Must have been living under a rock for the past 4 years.

  • Like 1
  • YEE 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, E.A.B. said:

In other words, Obama wasn't a fascist, but he's the closest in terms of proper control of all levers of power, including those that are supposed to objectively report on him.

I'm sorry but if you honestly, genuinely believe this, then I can only conclude that you have either zero factual appreciation for American political history, or no real understanding of the definition of Fascism.

 

Put simply, there is not a single aspect of the Obama administration which even conceptually skirts fascist ideology. It was not ultranationalist, it did not seek to striate society on the basis of ideology or other determining factors, it was not characterised by suppression of individual liberty or authoritarianism. In fact most relative measures of freedom show the US either remaining static or improving broadly across a number of indices and metrics between 2008 and 2016, only for that to be reversed enormously under the Trump administration, which has done far more to suppress individual liberties than any administration since the end of the Cold War.

 

Nor was the Obama administration "more" fascist than preceding ones. You could quite literally pick any presidency after 1945 and before 1990 and it would be closer to fascism. You seem to have forgotten the decades of Red Scare bullsh*t which were used to sanction far reaching state oppression, the use of federal law enforcement and intelligence services to harass, denigrate and in some instances murder political opponents, sweeping attacks on press freedom and use of the education system to instill politically motivated false narratives about American ideological and cultural supremacy.

 

Even Kennedy, the darling of American Liberals, was far closer to a fascist than Obama.

 

 

 

Also, whilst we're on the subject of questionable assertions, drawing any kind of analogy between the events that took place on the 6th and Trump's role in inciting them, and the BLM protests and comments made by ideological supporters of the movement is absolutely absurd. In one instance you have a primarily peaceful movement (93% of the circa 2,500 BLM protests saw zero recorded instances of violence) addressing legitimate societal grievances, and on the other you have an army of far right, neo-Nazi and white supremacist goons equipped with firearms and IEDs who attempted to overthrow a legitimately elected political administration, kidnap and kill government employees they saw as traitors, and who in about three hours of violence in one location resulted in more fatalities and more dead law enforcement officers than have been attributed to the actions of BLM and their supporters in over 2,400 protests across 5 months.

 

Quite aside from the obvious differences between the events themselves, the comments and actions made by Trump and the likes of AOC could not be more unalike. AOC's expression of support for the ends of direct action is not an incitement to violence. She hasn't committed seditious conspiracy by claiming herself the rightful leader of the US and actively encouraged her followers to perform actions specifically designed to undermine the elected leadership and the US Constitution. AOC did not use her powers to prevent the involvement of the National Guard  or federal law enforcement until after an attempted insurrection had failed. 

 

 

The politest way I can describe the suggestion that some fairly wishy washy comments of the ends of direct action are akin or comparable to inciting and enabling an armed insurrection is "ridiculous".

 

 

That's before we get onto the claims about race and crime which are construed in such a way as to ignore the core issues. Multiple academic studies have demonstrated that US law enforcement disproportionately targets ethnic minorities in their actions, with analysis suggesting that as many as 40% of police interactions with black Americans would not occur if the individual was white. Comparing outright numbers of police shooting victims ignores that demographics of the US, and comparing crime rates to shooting rates commits the double fallacy of ignoring the fact that commission of crime is not in itself a justification for shooting (only the specific circumstances of the incident are), and that the reasons for higher crime rates amongst ethnic minorities are chiefly a result of economic, political and social suppression. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Eutyphro said:

think it's people doing things like harassing politicians at restaurants, or the people that vandalized Mitch McConnell's home, the were setting precedents for what happened at the Capitol, which was like a parody of a coup, both frightening and hilarious.

I think Trump being banned from Twitter had become inevitable after what happened. I have always been an opponent of banning Trump, but social media platforms should not let themselves be used for very pernicious and damaging misinformation campaigns that lead to large upheaval. Those who support some type of 'absolute free speech' on social media should consider the fact that social media have been weaponized in ultra violent and genocidal events like what was done to the Rohingya. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-46105934

Social media is like a massive human experiment that is hard to control. But bad faith actors should be equally punished on all sides. In my view Twitter should not exist at all and I consider a majority of what happens on Twitter politically to be in bad faith, to be some kind of trolling, or posturing. Twitter in my view is a cancer that should be rooted out in its entirety.

Absolutely. It almost makes me wonder if there's such a thing as too much freedom in the context of freely voicing opinion on such a platform? I don't mean I'm advocating for censorship. If asked, I'll lean towards freedom and non censorship but.. in the state that Twitter is in and as you said, how it's been weaponized, it's almost a romantic notion to think of times when someone was an influencer back in the day (before Twitter/internet)  - they had to really fight to get on TV or do something special to make earn an appearance on TV and have such a large reach of the ears of 1000's or 100's of thousands. Now, anyone and everyone and as you said, bad-faith actors have a voice on Twitter or Facebook. There's no filter.  I try stay away from it, except for some business interests I may have. 

 

It's not easy, all right. I don't know the solution. I also don't know how much we are benefiting from Twitter versus the damage it could be potentially or all ready is doing. 

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

The issue with platforms like Twitter now is that we can't really put the genie back in the bottle. We've already seen a wholesale move to other platforms from those on the far right as their ability to use the larger social media platforms as a mouthpiece for their hate has been eroded. That's a bad thing for everyone because it creates fragmented echo chambers away from the direct oversight of the likes of LE. In some ways it's better to keep them around spewing their hate publicly on platforms that are in cahoots with LE and the IC and where mechanisms exist to identify and disrupt genuinely malicious plots. But on the flip side, that's pretty much exactly how we ended up where we are now.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Personally if i see opinions on here that are different to my own I don’t assume the reason that person hasn’t come to the exact same conclusion as me is because they don’t know enough about the current subject being discussed 🤷‍♂️ 

 

Maybe it’s because I’m not an egotistical know it all that only accepts people being in exact aggreement with me.

 

So yes that does apply to the situation with BLM and Trump supporters...tbh They have fed off each other and you wouldn’t have one without the other.

 

They do have one thing in common though...BLM have done nothing to truly help the black community and have received sh*tloads of money...Trump has done nothing to help poor uneducated rednecks despite receiving sh*tloads of donations to “fight” the “rigged” election.

 

Yes I feel this way and its my opinion that I have come to...it doesn’t mean I need to do more research.

  • Like 2
  • YEE 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Craigsters said:

I don’t know much about that App but is it really just a Nazi hideout?

 

If it is merely alt-right like Ben Shapiro etc but they’ve banned it because of Trump that’s really not the place of an App Store to decide.
 

Also Hitler was a socialist.

Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Halal Cyborg said:

Personally if i see opinions on here that are different to my own I don’t assume the reason that person hasn’t come to the exact same conclusion as me is because they don’t know enough about the current subject being discussed

I would posit that this is because you have enough of a degree of awareness about your own knowledge or lack thereof, and therefore don't overestimate your own competence to the point at which you think you know more than others.  By your own subsequent admission the conclusion you reached was based on no real evidence so it's not really reasonable to argue the toss about it being "differences of opinion" and makes my initial read that your supposition that "something was off" about the set of events being primarily a product of ignorance accurate. That difference most likely wouldn't exist were we privy to the same information when the initial statements were made. 

 

28 minutes ago, Halal Cyborg said:

Maybe it’s because I’m not an egotistical know it all that only accepts people being in exact aggreement with me.

There's a difference between accepting informed and well-articulated opinions that contrast with your own and accepting any old speculative tripe someone magics out of thin air.

That you can't see the difference, and apparently believe that there's parity of value in our views despite admitting yours are not informed, is quite telling.

 

28 minutes ago, Halal Cyborg said:

So yes that does apply to the situation with BLM and Trump supporters...you wouldn’t have one without the other.

BLM has existed since July 2013; that's three-and-a-half years before Trump's administration started. 

 

28 minutes ago, Halal Cyborg said:

BLM have done nothing to truly help the black community

On what are you basing that assertion?

 

5 minutes ago, Halal Cyborg said:

Also Hitler was a socialist.

No he wasn't. National Socialism is not socialism. In fact, German economic policy under the NSDAP was the literal inverse of socialism inasmuch as it privatised public industry, removed all workers rights, and handed the reigns of industrial power to the leadership of a relatively small number of extremely large companies, most of whom were headed by senior members of the party.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry to go off topic for a sec.

 

Naz1 party member Gregor Strasser said the below in 1926...did they stop being socialists after Krystalnacht?

 

 

[spoiler]we are Socialists, enemies, mortal enemies of the present capitalist economic system with its exploitation of the economically weak, with its injustice in wages, with its immoral evaluation of individuals according to wealth and money instead of responsibility and achievement, and we are determined under all circumstances to abolish this system![/spoiler]
 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Halal Cyborg said:

Sorry to go off topic for a sec.

 

Naz1 party member Gregor Strasser said the below in 1926...did they stop being socialists after Krystalnacht?

They were never actually socialist in the first place. They used the pretext of socialism and wealth redistribution as a means to drum up popular support but had no ideological commitment to it. This is born out by their explicit opposition to actual socialist economic policy in Bavaria in 1921.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

I would argue that that’s what socialist politicians always do...so to me equally socialist.

 

I never said communist.

 

They certainly weren’t capitalist.

 

On a different note I wonder how much COVID19 had a part to play in all the tensions we’ve seen rise this past year?


People locked down with their own personal echo chamber is never a good thing

Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Halal Cyborg said:

I would argue that that’s what socialist politicians always do

I don't think you have a real appreciation of what socialism actually entails.

 

19 minutes ago, Halal Cyborg said:

I never said communist.

I'm not sure what in my comments makes you think I suggested you did.

 

19 minutes ago, Halal Cyborg said:

They certainly weren’t capitalist.

Given that capitalism is defined by private ownership of the means of production I think you'll find they were a lot closer than they were to socialism in which the means of production is socially owned. 

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Halal Cyborg said:

Yes I feel this way and its my opinion that I have come to...it doesn’t mean I need to do more research.

 

You know maybe this practice of regularly meeting an informed, evidenced position purely with unfounded opinion as if it's somehow an effective riposte is exactly what gets you the mockery and derision you seem to be so irritated by.

 

On the one hand, you want to be taken seriously, and on the other you continue to show yourself to be intellectually lazy.

 

I mean.....you don't see the connection between the two?

 

Quote

Also Hitler was a socialist.

 

Oh good lord.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

jyQi58Z.jpg

 

 

 

I wonder if the government well have  manhunts for   those that make hate speech etc or participate in activity's that maybe dangerous  to society, like when they were looking for communist in the 1950's when communist were blacklisted?

Edited by Craigsters
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, E.A.B. said:

That's a very convenient way of getting out of having to argue anything by simply applying a racial requirement to debating. Real convenient for you.

 

Oh, sorry, you're not white. You can't argue taxation with me. too bad.

 

'you just dont get it' isn't a good argument here. If your point has any validity it should be able to stand on its own. Not have some sort of racial requirement. The only people accepting of that racial requirement are either too scared to actually argue with you, or suffer from some complex that leads to racial guilt which just blindly accepts what you just said. No one should rationally accept it. Just explain your position to me reasonably.

That argument is used towards people like you who don't even experience what you're trying to dispute, because you're gaslighting and think using studies and graphs geared towards your narrative will prove your point without any actual experience.

 

10 hours ago, E.A.B. said:

Even if you're law-abiding, the median Black income is lower than any other racial group in the US, and as such their communities tend to be in poorer areas with higher crime rates. Of the most dangerous US cities, the most dangerous neighborhoods are overwhelmingly Black. As such, just in pure numbers, Blacks are more likely to run into encounters with police officers in areas where cops would face the most danger. So even if you're law abiding you're just more likely to run into cops as a Black person.

That is a crock of sh*t. My family is pretty upper middle class, we live in a nice area and you can still face prejudice here even from the police. It can and does happen anywhere and if anything it feels more uncomfortable being in nicer areas as a black person. It feels like you're more likely to be monitored and treated like an outsider. I used to shop at our outdoor mall a lot and the security just eyeballed me like a hawk and always seems to be wherever I am. And I've been stopped multiple times to ask why I'm out there so much...

 

Honestly, I think the consensus in this thread is that you're spewing nonsense so I don't know why I'm even bothering. Hell this isn't even about BLM it's about that failed coup on Tuesday that I repeat, isn't even comparable to the July protests.

Edited by ddarko12
Link to post
Share on other sites
make total destroy
7 hours ago, Halal Cyborg said:

 

Also Hitler was a socialist.

The Democratic People's Republic of Korea is a democratic republic.

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, jackedbanan said:

look at the thread name, failed coup attempt? lmfao

Good thing your opinions are as sh*t as your username.

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, E.A.B. said:

 

at least he didnt spy on them and put them on criminal lists

 

u mad? Seriously though calm down.

 

No one should ever take politics that serious where they actually get mad. Honestly its effin pathetic. I hate seeing that.

 

It leads to people actually fighting and arguing and getting all enflamed over differing political views. Thats the problem with this nation.

 

Treat it like sports instead its not that serious. I majored in this topic and spent a looot of time on it so take it from me: it's really not that serious. 

 

 

 

 

 

You are a dimwit. Of course Drumpf was doing that sh*t. He was continuing all of those policies and aspired to ramp things up. Also, I don't treat politics as a sport. You are a f*cking dunce if you think that is what is happening in my post. Both sides f*cking suck. "It's not that serious". Wow. Again, you are a f*cking dimwit. This sh*t IS serious. Anyone who believes otherwise is a pie in the sky moron that understands f*ck-all about anything.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Laura91 said:

 

You are a dimwit. Of course Drumpf was doing that sh*t. He was continuing all of those policies and aspired to ramp things up. Also, I don't treat politics as a sport. You are a f*cking dunce if you think that is what is happening in my post. Both sides f*cking suck. "It's not that serious". Wow. Again, you are a f*cking dimwit. This sh*t IS serious. Anyone who believes otherwise is a pie in the sky moron that understands f*ck-all about anything.

 

15 hours ago, E.A.B. said:

Treat it like sports instead its not that serious. I majored in this topic and spent a looot of time on it so take it from me: it's really not that serious. 

 

Holy f*ck I missed this post when skimming the previous ones to respond to. Majored in politics? From where? Zorban's Grilled Chicken University Kebab Van?

 

Jesus wept.

Link to post
Share on other sites
ṼirulenⱦEqừinox
4 minutes ago, Craigsters said:

kZzSQUf.jpg

 

3. He was never going to get lifetime secret service details, Clinton is the last president who will get lifetime protection, all Presidents starting with W. Bush will only receive SSA Protection for 10 years after they leave Office after that they must provide their own security.

 

Quote

A 1994 statute, Pub.L. 103–329, limited post-presidential protection to ten years for presidents inaugurated after January 1, 1997.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, sivispacem said:

Holy f*ck I missed this post when skimming the previous ones to respond to. Majored in politics? From where? Zorban's Grilled Chicken University Kebab Van?

 

Jesus wept.

 

f*ck you. I don't care if you are a mod or not. You honestly had nothing to say. So, you pulled that out of your ass. Get bent.

Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, ṼirulenⱦEqừinox said:

 

3. He was never going to get lifetime secret service details, Clinton is the last president who will get lifetime protection, all Presidents starting with W. Bush will only receive SSA Protection for 10 years after they leave Office after that they must provide their own security.

 

 

WRONG this was overturned by Obama all future presidents will receive lifetime protection from the secret service.

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Laura91 said:

 

f*ck you. I don't care if you are a mod or not. You honestly had nothing to say. So, you pulled that out of your ass. Get bent.

I forgot that the forum doesn't nest quotes anymore. For posterity, that wasn't aimed at you, it was supposed to be directed at E.A.B. I was supposed to be agreeing with you...

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, sivispacem said:

The politest way I can describe the suggestion that some fairly wishy washy comments of the ends of direct action are akin or comparable to inciting and enabling an armed insurrection is "ridiculous".

"Direct action" which is a euphemism for violent communism. It's confusing how you keep defending this notion. But we should also just call it for what it is, violent communism. Apart from the BLM figure of 93% peaceful protests, to be fair, that's not that low. I consider comparing the toxic side of BLM to the alt right like comparing aids to cancer. They are both absolutely terrible.

I know this is the Sivispacem vs everyone flame war thread by now, but I do wonder about these things. This thread is full of absolutely ludicrous sh*te like someone making a post about how Obama is the most fascist president ever.

Edited by Eutyphro
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • 1 User Currently Viewing
    0 members, 0 Anonymous, 1 Guest

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using GTAForums.com, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.