• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Portland rose parade canceled after ‘antifascists’ threaten GOP marchers

faithful_servant said:
Well if ther were opposing anything that liberals support, you'd have an argument, but so far, all we've seen from them is the same anti-conservative bent that most liberals have. You can deny that they're your "children" all you want, but the social DNA test came back positive.
Click to expand...

It's really a good thing that conservatives like Sanders, Maher, and Warren have denounced the antifa anti free speech "liberals" then.

Obviously, those people, along with everyone posting in this particular thread, must be conservatives as we all support free speech.

So, buck up! Liberals are pretty scarce, by your definition.
 
Dittohead not! said:
It's really a good thing that conservatives like Sanders, Maher, and Warren have denounced the antifa anti free speech "liberals" then.

Obviously, those people, along with everyone posting in this particular thread, must be conservatives as we all support free speech.

So, buck up! Liberals are pretty scarce, by your definition.
Click to expand...

Except that they didn't. What they did was state what should be a commonly accepted truism - that we shouldn't be allowing anyone to use threats to silence voices they disagree with. They didn't address the liberal antifa thugs directly at any meaningful level. What's needed is a loud and unified voice from ALL politicians and leaders in this country, clearly stating that these threats are unacceptable and demanding that LE do it's job and put these thugs in jail where they belong. This is truly a civil rights issue and it should be addressed as such. If the local LE won't do it, then based on the idea that it's a Fed. civil rights issue, the Feds. should step in. My hope would be that local LE would do their job, free from interference from city leaders who support the same ideas that the liberal antifa thugs support and put these thugs in jail. Right now, what's happening is starting to look like what happened in the South during the Reconstruction thru Civil Rights era. Smaller and much less blatant, but with the same attitude - that it's acceptable to use force to deprive people of their Constitutional rights and that the local gov't will turn a blind eye to it. Yes, it's much smaller in scope and scale, but it's the same mindset all over again.
 
faithful_servant said:
Except that they didn't. What they did was state what should be a commonly accepted truism - that we shouldn't be allowing anyone to use threats to silence voices they disagree with. They didn't address the liberal antifa thugs directly at any meaningful level. What's needed is a loud and unified voice from ALL politicians and leaders in this country, clearly stating that these threats are unacceptable and demanding that LE do it's job and put these thugs in jail where they belong. This is truly a civil rights issue and it should be addressed as such. If the local LE won't do it, then based on the idea that it's a Fed. civil rights issue, the Feds. should step in. My hope would be that local LE would do their job, free from interference from city leaders who support the same ideas that the liberal antifa thugs support and put these thugs in jail. Right now, what's happening is starting to look like what happened in the South during the Reconstruction thru Civil Rights era. Smaller and much less blatant, but with the same attitude - that it's acceptable to use force to deprive people of their Constitutional rights and that the local gov't will turn a blind eye to it. Yes, it's much smaller in scope and scale, but it's the same mindset all over again.
Click to expand...

Probably because the liberal antifa thugs aren't liberals. They're authoritarians.
 
faithful_servant said:
I never thought about them as being authoritarian. That's a really good point IN SUPPORT OF THEM BEING LIBERALS.
Click to expand...

Authoritarian is not the same as liberal, at least not by my definition. The liberal/conservative continuum is not in the same dimension as the libertarian/authoritarian one.

Ever taken the political compass test?

I came out middle of the road on the liberal/conservative continuum, but way down in the libertarian range of the other continuum.
 
Dittohead not! said:
Authoritarian is not the same as liberal, at least not by my definition. The liberal/conservative continuum is not in the same dimension as the libertarian/authoritarian one.

Ever taken the political compass test?

I came out middle of the road on the liberal/conservative continuum, but way down in the libertarian range of the other continuum.
Click to expand...

Yet many (the most influential especially) modern liberals are highly authoritarian. That's what this thread is about - a bunch of authoritarian liberals trying to do through threat of force what liberals have been doing for a couple of decades through threats of litigation, social pressure, activist judges and media saturation - controlling other people's actions. At one time liberals were very anti-authoritarian, but that time is LONG past. It died at about the same time they stopped fighting against oppression and only fought against Reps. It died when the ideals of free thought and free speech butted heads with the idea that people have some right to not be offended and free thought and free speech lost that fight (for liberals at least). All we're seeing here is the worst and most blatant expression of the loss of what was a noble and admirable mindset that turned into 100% pure political hackery.
 
faithful_servant said:
Yet many (the most influential especially) modern liberals are highly authoritarian.
Click to expand...

Yes, that's true. Many modern liberals are gay, some are straight, some are tall, others short, some are religious, others atheists.

And many influential conservatives are also authoritarian.

Because being authoritarian/libertarian has nothing to do with being liberal/conservative.


faithful_servant said:
That's what this thread is about - a bunch of authoritarian liberals trying to do through threat of force what liberals have been doing for a couple of decades through threats of litigation, social pressure, activist judges and media saturation - controlling other people's actions. At one time liberals were very anti-authoritarian, but that time is LONG past. It died at about the same time they stopped fighting against oppression and only fought against Reps. It died when the ideals of free thought and free speech butted heads with the idea that people have some right to not be offended and free thought and free speech lost that fight (for liberals at least). All we're seeing here is the worst and most blatant expression of the loss of what was a noble and admirable mindset that turned into 100% pure political hackery.
Click to expand...

Authoritarianism will do that.
 
Dittohead not! said:
Yes, that's true. Many modern liberals are gay, some are straight, some are tall, others short, some are religious, others atheists.

And many influential conservatives are also authoritarian.

Because being authoritarian/libertarian has nothing to do with being liberal/conservative.




Authoritarianism will do that.
Click to expand...

The recent actions of the most influential liberals in this country has been HIGHLY authoritarian. From the DNC manipulating the Dem. primaries and campaigns to make sure Clinton was the nominee, to liberals attacking a bakery's owners for sticking to their moral standards, to the recent spate of riots and threats of violence to shut down voices they disagree with. The most influential liberals are highly authoritarian and getting worse.
 
faithful_servant said:
The recent actions of the most influential liberals in this country has been HIGHLY authoritarian. From the DNC manipulating the Dem. primaries and campaigns to make sure Clinton was the nominee, to liberals attacking a bakery's owners for sticking to their moral standards, to the recent spate of riots and threats of violence to shut down voices they disagree with. The most influential liberals are highly authoritarian and getting worse.
Click to expand...

OK, if you say so.

the problem isn't "liberals." The problem is authoritarians.

And there are more than enough of those amongst the ranks of conservatives, self described, as well.
 
The methods of antifas and liberals has no distinction.

The ideology of antifas and liberals has no distinction.

And yet we're supposed to believe that the Antifas terrorist organization is not a group of liberals.
 
Dittohead not! said:
OK, if you say so.

the problem isn't "liberals." The problem is authoritarians.

And there are more than enough of those amongst the ranks of conservatives, self described, as well.
Click to expand...

Yet it's not liberals who are being silenced is it. It is conservatives. Show me where conservatives are trying to stop someone from carrying out legal actions by the use of threats of violence. You may be able to find a couple of fringe loons, but nothing like the large scale, well-coordinated efforts we're seeing on the Left. If the Reps. were so authoritarian and controlling, then just how Pres. Trump get elected?? Get in the Way-Back Machine and go back to early 2016 and the last person the Rep. leadership would have wanted in the WH (other than Clinton) was Donald Trump. But they allowed The People to choose. Dem./liberal leaders would have NEVER allowed something like that to happen. Liberal speakers across the country know that they can speak at any college in the country without fear of violent protests, you can't say that about conservatives because of the increasing authoritarianism among liberals. Reps. can't even march in a parade without being threatened with violence (an expression of authoritarianism). Right now, the biggest internal threat to real freedom in this country is coming from the left, not the right.
 
faithful_servant said:
Yet it's not liberals who are being silenced is it. It is conservatives. Show me where conservatives are trying to stop someone from carrying out legal actions by the use of threats of violence. You may be able to find a couple of fringe loons, but nothing like the large scale, well-coordinated efforts we're seeing on the Left. If the Reps. were so authoritarian and controlling, then just how Pres. Trump get elected?? Get in the Way-Back Machine and go back to early 2016 and the last person the Rep. leadership would have wanted in the WH (other than Clinton) was Donald Trump. But they allowed The People to choose. Dem./liberal leaders would have NEVER allowed something like that to happen. Liberal speakers across the country know that they can speak at any college in the country without fear of violent protests, you can't say that about conservatives because of the increasing authoritarianism among liberals. Reps. can't even march in a parade without being threatened with violence (an expression of authoritarianism). Right now, the biggest internal threat to real freedom in this country is coming from the left, not the right.
Click to expand...

It's true that the Republican leadership didn't want Trump as their candidate. That's because he wasn't/isn't really a conservative, plus no one thought he could actually win. Would the Democrats "allow" the voters to choose a conservative as their candidate? Why not, and how could they stop it? They could refuse to endorse said candidate, but then that didn't work so well for the Republicans.

Now, sure. a lot of the authoritarian anti free speech violence is directed at the conservatives/ Republicans, but there is some going the other way as well. It's not "liberals" that are threatening free speech. Here's an example:

SANTA MONICA, Calif. *— A man from Indiana carrying numerous weapons in his car was arrested in Southern California after he told police he was in the area for West Hollywood's huge gay pride parade.
Click to expand...

Other than the fact that this criminal was caught, there's not a whole lot of difference between him and whoever sent that anonymous email that started off this thread, is there?
 
Dittohead not! said:
It's true that the Republican leadership didn't want Trump as their candidate. That's because he wasn't/isn't really a conservative, plus no one thought he could actually win. Would the Democrats "allow" the voters to choose a conservative as their candidate? Why not, and how could they stop it? They could refuse to endorse said candidate, but then that didn't work so well for the Republicans.

Now, sure. a lot of the authoritarian anti free speech violence is directed at the conservatives/ Republicans, but there is some going the other way as well. It's not "liberals" that are threatening free speech. Here's an example:



Other than the fact that this criminal was caught, there's not a whole lot of difference between him and whoever sent that anonymous email that started off this thread, is there?
Click to expand...

..and another pathetic attempt to create a equivalency between an isolated nut job and large scale, organized violence. Seriously, why do people do this stupid crap?? It's not like anyone here would let you get away with such a sad and obviously flawed approach, so why do it?? You don't really think that a couple of solitary nuts is the same as the large scale violence we're seeing, do you??
 
faithful_servant said:
..and another pathetic attempt to create a equivalency between an isolated nut job and large scale, organized violence. Seriously, why do people do this stupid crap?? It's not like anyone here would let you get away with such a sad and obviously flawed approach, so why do it?? You don't really think that a couple of solitary nuts is the same as the large scale violence we're seeing, do you??
Click to expand...

An anonymous email is large scale organized violence, perpetrated no doubt by "liberals."
 
faithful_servant said:
You just keep failing, don't you... You full well what I'm talking about. Without the previous violence, the email would have been ignored.
Click to expand...

Large scale organized violence is what you're claiming, perpetrated by liberals against conservatives.

There's nothing liberal about organized violence.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom