• 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!

Berkeley protest organizer supports the violence, "united" with anarchists

ocean515 said:
How? Oh I don't know, the fact the protestors would eagerly block traffic, obstruct commerce, and completely disrupt the lives of those trying to go about their day, probably indicates a level of emotion and anger that will easily trip into more dangerous and violent outcomes.
Click to expand...

and now you back into being agaisnt protests in general
 
blarg said:
and now you back into being agaisnt protests in general
Click to expand...

Perhaps I'm not making myself clear. It's been known to happen every decade or so.

Like everyone I know, I have no problem with peaceful protest. In the current environment spun up by propaganda and radical activists with an agenda, such a thing does not seem probable.

I don't not support aggressive protests that infringe on other peoples rights to peaceful transition of public land, or the right to conduct business free from interference and intimidation.

Get permission to congregate in an approved area, and protest to your hearts content. Damage, infringe, destroy, I would prefer mass arrest with painful fines and/or imprisonment.

Applies to all people from all political persuasions.
 
Grand Mal said:
Do you think that 'liberal' covers everything on the left? Progressives, socialists, radical leftist agitators, communists, are they all liberals to you?
Click to expand...



Not sure what you are on about, but yes, all those you listed are "liberal" in the modern sense of the word. yes.
 
ReverendHellh0und said:
Not sure what you are on about, but yes, all those you listed are "liberal" in the modern sense of the word. yes.
Click to expand...

No, they're not. Clueless conservatives think they can just gather every social and political evil they can think of into a pile and call the heap 'liberalism'. Problem is, that way they can only communicate with other clueless conservatives because nobody else knows what the hell they're talking about.
 
Grand Mal said:
No, they're not. Clueless conservatives think they can just gather every social and political evil they can think of into a pile and call the heap 'liberalism'. Problem is, that way they can only communicate with other clueless conservatives because nobody else knows what the hell they're talking about.
Click to expand...



Define "liberalism".
 
Grand Mal said:
Ohfergawdssake.
Here. https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/liberalism
Click to expand...



**Sigh****


"c : a political philosophy based on belief in progress, the essential goodness of the human race, and the autonomy (see autonomy 2) of the individual and standing for the protection of political and civil liberties; specifically : such a philosophy that considers government as a crucial instrument for amelioration of social inequities (such as those involving race, gender, or class"



Let's look at your list....



1. Progressives:

From your link: "a political philosophy based on belief in progress,"

Check.


2. socialists,
"a political and economic theory of social organization that advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole.
synonyms: leftism, welfarism; radicalism, progressivism, social democracy; communism, Marxism, labor movement"


Check.

3. radical leftist agitators:

if they are of the ilk you listed, absolutely.


4. communists:

See "socialists"....



" are They all liberals to you?"




Yup. That was ez.
 
ReverendHellh0und said:
**Sigh****


"c : a political philosophy based on belief in progress, the essential goodness of the human race, and the autonomy (see autonomy 2) of the individual and standing for the protection of political and civil liberties; specifically : such a philosophy that considers government as a crucial instrument for amelioration of social inequities (such as those involving race, gender, or class"



Let's look at your list....



1. Progressives:

From your link: "a political philosophy based on belief in progress,"

Check.


2. socialists,
"a political and economic theory of social organization that advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole.
synonyms: leftism, welfarism; radicalism, progressivism, social democracy; communism, Marxism, labor movement"


Check.

3. radical leftist agitators:

if they are of the ilk you listed, absolutely.


4. communists:

See "socialists"....



" are They all liberals to you?"




Yup. That was ez.
Click to expand...

Right. Government ownership or control of the means of production is not a liberal principal. Communism is not a liberal system. Anyone who knows anything about political and economic systems will tell you that. As for the radical left, anarchists etc., gimme a break. That's just Rienoe-type right-wing agitprop.
So you get away with the 'belief in progress = progressivism' because I'm too busy to quibble over silly semantics.
Look at it this way- when people say they hope Cuba becomes a freer society after Raul Castro dies, they say they hope it will become more liberal. Russia became more liberal after the breakdown of the communism there, unfortunately Putin has led it onto a conservative, authoritarian road. When people hope Iranians can get out from under the theocratic thumb, they're hoping Iranian society becomes more liberal. Does this help?
 
Grand Mal said:
Right. Government ownership or control of the means of production is not a liberal principal. Communism is not a liberal system. Anyone who knows anything about political and economic systems will tell you that. As for the radical left, anarchists etc., gimme a break. That's just Rienoe-type right-wing agitprop.
So you get away with the 'belief in progress = progressivism' because I'm too busy to quibble over silly semantics.
Look at it this way- when people say they hope Cuba becomes a freer society after Raul Castro dies, they say they hope it will become more liberal. Russia became more liberal after the breakdown of the communism there, unfortunately Putin has led it onto a conservative, authoritarian road. When people hope Iranians can get out from under the theocratic thumb, they're hoping Iranian society becomes more liberal. Does this help?
Click to expand...



You gave me the definition, you linked to it, I showed you how it's interrelated based on your very definition YOU provided. but sure. liberalism is not all those bad things that come out of it.... duh.... /facepalm
 
ReverendHellh0und said:
You gave me the definition, you linked to it, I showed you how it's interrelated based on your very definition YOU provided. but sure. liberalism is not all those bad things that come out of it.... duh.... /facepalm
Click to expand...

yeesh.
If you can't read and understand simple English and won't be taught what words mean you can 'duh' and facepalm yourself 'till the other clueless conservatives gather round. Doesn't matter, and I wonder why I've given it this much time and effort, but you're obviously free to be as ignorant as you choose to be.
 
ocean515 said:
Perhaps I'm not making myself clear. It's been known to happen every decade or so.

Like everyone I know, I have no problem with peaceful protest. In the current environment spun up by propaganda and radical activists with an agenda, such a thing does not seem probable.

I don't not support aggressive protests that infringe on other peoples rights to peaceful transition of public land, or the right to conduct business free from interference and intimidation.

Get permission to congregate in an approved area, and protest to your hearts content. Damage, infringe, destroy, I would prefer mass arrest with painful fines and/or imprisonment.

Applies to all people from all political persuasions.
Click to expand...

so you support legal protests but dont believe some people can and therefore they should not try or be encouraged to?
 
blarg said:
so you support legal protests but dont believe some people can and therefore they should not try or be encouraged to?
Click to expand...

I don't think it is wise for the EX President to wade into an environment where gasoline is being spread around by radical activists who are playing on the crowds emotions.

"Inciting Riot" is a legally defined violation for a reason.

I'm not suggesting the EX President did anything remotely close to that.

However, the people who are coordinating and funding these protests are including gross misrepresentations of facts, and outright lies, to stir up emotions to levels where one little thing can turn them into dangerous and violent events. Endorsing these events adds to the emotional powder keg that is accompanying them.

Stand on a sidewalk with signs, legally gather in a park and voice objections. All cool to me.

Block traffic, impede commerce, threaten, etc., completely unacceptable. And that is where the left has encouraged people to go.

Stunningly short sighted, and IMO, a fatal effort the rest of Nation will not soon forget.
 
Eric7216 said:
I hear that 1984 is currently a best seller since the Trump Presidency.
Is it too much to hope that the people reading it see the doublespeak with people in masks causing violence, setting fires, and disrupting the freedom of speech condemning others as fascists. "Fascists" who are only there to speak.
Click to expand...

But! But... bu....

That would mean putting rational thought, critical thinking, dedication to the CONSTITUTION, above... Bashing Trump to get him impeached, hating White-Males, and giving pandering benies to "Designated Minorities"!

Good Gods!, the Left CANNOT let that happen!

-
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom