The Atlas Asylum of absurd/ignorant posts IX

[CumbrianLefty]

Tbh if French food is anything, its just a tad over-rated?

Heh, thought that might evince a response

[Pro-Israel, anti-Bibi]

Republicans aren't suppressing the votes of minorities.

I almost posted a South Park gif involving Mr Garrison and a triangle as a response, but thought better of it.

[brucejoel99]

Republicans aren't suppressing the votes of minorities.

I almost posted a South Park gif involving Mr Garrison and a triangle as a response, but thought better of it.

The perfect missed opportunity.

[Pro-Israel, anti-Bibi]

Not sure why this thread was ever renamed.

I can own a gun, don't need a license to breathe, don't have to partake in the weird worship of a random 100 year old woman, drive on the right side of the road, and can't be arrested for mean tweets.

[GeorgiaModerate]

Possibly a new low here:

I just dont care if the delta variant is vaccine resistant.

Keep everything open. This variant was probably created by teachers unions in order to avoid going back to the class room in the fall

[RFK Jr.’s Brain Worm]

Possibly a new low here:

(Snipped)

There’s a reason he’s on my ignore list even after I trimmed it down a lot.

[beesley]

Not sure why this thread was ever renamed.

I can own a gun, don't need a license to breathe, don't have to partake in the weird worship of a random 100 year old woman, drive on the right side of the road, and can't be arrested for mean tweets.

yawn... I thought those Americans who said things like this were restricted to the comments section of the Fox News Instagram account

[Pro-Israel, anti-Bibi]

How someone apparently reacts when they feel the need to comment on something they know nothing about and somebody else calls their bluff.

https://ra.nea.org/business-item/2021-nbi-039/


To Blarite

B. Provide an already-created, in-depth, study that critiques empire, white supremacy, anti-Blackness, anti-Indigeneity, racism, patriarchy, cisheteropatriarchy, capitalism, ableism, anthropocentrism, and other forms of power and oppression at the intersections of our society, and that we oppose attempts to ban critical race theory and/or The 1619 Project.

I think everyone here can agree White supremacy is bad, so the goal here would be to teach that. So why are they keeping capitalism in the same line?

That page, especially that paragraph, is one of the best things to show to drive people to vote Republican. This is absolutely insane indoctrination. I didn't realize how serious this problem was

The evils of capitalism are just as dangerous as the evils of racism and of militarism.

Do you know who said that, DTC?

MLK had a lot of moronic ideas

[Pro-Israel, anti-Bibi]

Not sure why this thread was ever renamed.

I can own a gun, don't need a license to breathe, don't have to partake in the weird worship of a random 100 year old woman, drive on the right side of the road, and can't be arrested for mean tweets.

yawn... I thought those Americans who said things like this were restricted to the comments section of the Fox News Instagram account

Alben revels in sharing that type of ignorance with many on the right.

[ꙮ]

How someone apparently reacts when they feel the need to comment on something they know nothing about and somebody else calls their bluff.

https://ra.nea.org/business-item/2021-nbi-039/


To Blarite

B. Provide an already-created, in-depth, study that critiques empire, white supremacy, anti-Blackness, anti-Indigeneity, racism, patriarchy, cisheteropatriarchy, capitalism, ableism, anthropocentrism, and other forms of power and oppression at the intersections of our society, and that we oppose attempts to ban critical race theory and/or The 1619 Project.

I think everyone here can agree White supremacy is bad, so the goal here would be to teach that. So why are they keeping capitalism in the same line?

That page, especially that paragraph, is one of the best things to show to drive people to vote Republican. This is absolutely insane indoctrination. I didn't realize how serious this problem was

The evils of capitalism are just as dangerous as the evils of racism and of militarism.

Do you know who said that, DTC?

MLK had a lot of moronic ideas

You realize that quoting MLK doesn’t automatically make you correct, right? Saying that MLK had some bad ideas or disagreeing with his position on capitalism isn’t “absurd” or “ignorant” lol.

[Pro-Israel, anti-Bibi]

How someone apparently reacts when they feel the need to comment on something they know nothing about and somebody else calls their bluff.

https://ra.nea.org/business-item/2021-nbi-039/


To Blarite

B. Provide an already-created, in-depth, study that critiques empire, white supremacy, anti-Blackness, anti-Indigeneity, racism, patriarchy, cisheteropatriarchy, capitalism, ableism, anthropocentrism, and other forms of power and oppression at the intersections of our society, and that we oppose attempts to ban critical race theory and/or The 1619 Project.

I think everyone here can agree White supremacy is bad, so the goal here would be to teach that. So why are they keeping capitalism in the same line?

That page, especially that paragraph, is one of the best things to show to drive people to vote Republican. This is absolutely insane indoctrination. I didn't realize how serious this problem was

The evils of capitalism are just as dangerous as the evils of racism and of militarism.

Do you know who said that, DTC?

MLK had a lot of moronic ideas

You realize that quoting MLK doesn’t automatically make you correct, right? Saying that MLK had some bad ideas or disagreeing with his position on capitalism isn’t “absurd” or “ignorant” lol.

"had a lot of moronic ideas" isn't a very bright response to it, and you're not very bright either if that's your reaction to the accurate indictment of unrestrained capitalism as having a destructive influence on marginalized communities.

[Hammy]

ooooo and covid proved that hospitality workers.. many of them are lazy as ****. They are almost as bad as teachers in refusing to go back to work.

Come october they will be begging to get their jobs back. hahahahaha

 

With the wide availablilty of vaccines, I put the economy at a higher priority than public health.

What an utterly disgusting human being we have here.

[jamestroll]

ooooo and covid proved that hospitality workers.. many of them are lazy as ****. They are almost as bad as teachers in refusing to go back to work.

Come october they will be begging to get their jobs back. hahahahaha

 

With the wide availablilty of vaccines, I put the economy at a higher priority than public health.

What an utterly disgusting human being we have here.

There is no need for covid mitigation measures at this time due to wide spread vaccines being available.

The very most I would support at this point would be modest capacity limits and indoor masking if a vaccine escaping variant does come on the table but coronaviruses can  NOT mutate so fast as to render a vaccine useless.

[Hammy]

ooooo and covid proved that hospitality workers.. many of them are lazy as ****. They are almost as bad as teachers in refusing to go back to work.

Come october they will be begging to get their jobs back. hahahahaha

 

With the wide availablilty of vaccines, I put the economy at a higher priority than public health.

What an utterly disgusting human being we have here.

There is no need for covid mitigation measures at this time due to wide spread vaccines being available.

The very most I would support at this point would be modest capacity limits and indoor masking if a vaccine escaping variant does come on the table but coronaviruses can  NOT mutate so fast as to render a vaccine useless.

The problem isn't that you're opposed to restriction measures (as I am as well when it comes to lockdowns--I'm going to continue wearing a mask but I want to get out of the house and do stuff again too.) It's that you're obsessed with opposing them to the point of turning the thread into a personal soapbox against a nonexistent lockdown crusade and sh**tting on people you perceive as being part of said faction, hence their placement here.

[Sir Mohamed]

Context.

However, Hitler genuinely cared about his nation and the well-being of its people, so that's something they don't have in common.

[beesley]

In Maine, you have people playing high school football, going to evangelical church services, and voting for republican candidates for statewide office that would be too radical to be electable in Canada

In New Brunswick, you have people playing Hockey, staying home on Sunday, and conservatives who are fine with Universal Healthcare, Legal Weed, and LGBT people.

[John Dule]

Context.

However, Hitler genuinely cared about his nation and the well-being of its people, so that's something they don't have in common.

That's an objective fact.

[Pro-Israel, anti-Bibi]

Context.

However, Hitler genuinely cared about his nation and the well-being of its people, so that's something they don't have in common.

That's an objective fact.

Only if you only consider white (not Jew or Roma) non disabled Christians of the correct political persuasion to be people, and even then, he was willing to sacrifice them by the truckload to achieve his goals globally.

[John Dule]

Context.

However, Hitler genuinely cared about his nation and the well-being of its people, so that's something they don't have in common.

That's an objective fact.

Only if you only consider white (not Jew or Roma) non disabled Christians of the correct political persuasion to be people, and even then, he was willing to sacrifice them by the truckload to achieve his goals globally.

It isn't contradictory to say that Hitler loved and cared about Germany but also that he horribly abused and murdered millions of its citizens in cold blood.

[Pro-Israel, anti-Bibi]

Context.

However, Hitler genuinely cared about his nation and the well-being of its people, so that's something they don't have in common.

That's an objective fact.

Only if you only consider white (not Jew or Roma) non disabled Christians of the correct political persuasion to be people, and even then, he was willing to sacrifice them by the truckload to achieve his goals globally.

It isn't contradictory to say that Hitler loved and cared about Germany but also that he horribly abused and murdered millions of its citizens in cold blood.

Well I guess it's just semantics then because I don't see how you can love and care about a country while at the same time committing horrendous actions in its name and against your own people. And why that distinction would matter when comparing him to Trump, whose tenure was more defined by being a dumbass and by being very pliable to the banking industry and defense contractors than by whether he genuinely cared about America.

[John Dule]

Context.

However, Hitler genuinely cared about his nation and the well-being of its people, so that's something they don't have in common.

That's an objective fact.

Only if you only consider white (not Jew or Roma) non disabled Christians of the correct political persuasion to be people, and even then, he was willing to sacrifice them by the truckload to achieve his goals globally.

It isn't contradictory to say that Hitler loved and cared about Germany but also that he horribly abused and murdered millions of its citizens in cold blood.

Well I guess it's just semantics then because I don't see how you can love and care about a country while at the same time committing horrendous actions in its name and against your own people. And why that distinction would matter when comparing him to Trump, whose tenure was more defined by being a dumbass and by being very pliable to the banking industry and defense contractors than by whether he genuinely cared about America.

Then I guess you just don't have any interest in understanding what motivates dictators. Many dictators do genuinely care about their country, albeit only their own warped conception of what the country should look like. To pretend otherwise is to ignore a key element of their psychology.

I don't know why people are so offended at the idea that Hitler cared about his country. It's obvious from any cursory look at his early life that that was the case.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Context.

However, Hitler genuinely cared about his nation and the well-being of its people, so that's something they don't have in common.

That's an objective fact.

Only if you only consider white (not Jew or Roma) non disabled Christians of the correct political persuasion to be people, and even then, he was willing to sacrifice them by the truckload to achieve his goals globally.

It isn't contradictory to say that Hitler loved and cared about Germany but also that he horribly abused and murdered millions of its citizens in cold blood.

No Hitler did not love and care about Germany. He loved and cared about some Germans, not the country as a whole.

Also it's incredibly dubious to even say that: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nero_Decree

[Badger]

LA county swung right by 5 points likely due to their large Asian and Latinx population shifting right. White voters in California shifted more left from 2016 and it balanced out almost evenly.

> Latinx

I'm always a bit bemused by the way that a huge majority of even left wing posters on here are so freaked out by that term.

I'm torn between thinking this is more a sheer obstinate refusal to even try and understand the sorts of issues that are  significant outside of the English speaking world (which works the other way round too - see the "how would Belgium vote if it was a US state" type threads, where people try to calque US issues onto a context where they aren't especially relevant); or that it is simply down to the US being much more conservative on issues related to gender and LGBT equality. Nevertheless, it's remarkably different to how I see the issue being discussed by left wingers in French or German.

This isn't really true though. The US got same-sex marriage before a ton of European countries including yours that doesn't even have it yet (though that'll almost certainly change in the fall.)

Polls much higher support here than in the USA (~80% in favour here, which is about normal for W Europe), whereas there was a thread on here celebrating 70% support in the USA just a couple of weeks ago. Or, more to the point, it will be legal here by the end of the year, the reason is an extremely slow political process, and at least we'll have introduced it democratically. There are also some concrete areas where we are even ahead - eg anti discrimination and hate speech laws or conversion therapy being illegal; and of course, no bizarre hate campaigns against transpeople's right to use the toilet or access medical treatment.

It's widely popular and accepted because a fortunately undemocratic Court ruling saying the Constitution required legalization of gay marriage thus made gay marriage popular and acceptable as the de facto status quo. Other country still requiring unpopular legislation to legalize gay marriage haven't gone through that transition yet. This country was obviously nowhere near that level of support for gay marriage until the oberfell decision made it a fait accompli

The Civil Rights Act did the same thing for desegregation, BTW. Amazing how laws can change perceptions

The implication is that same-sex marriage was universally unpopular before the court ruling, which is incorrect, quite a few states had already passed same-sex marriage via the democratic process prior to that or voted down bans on it (like the one I worked against!) and it was supported by almost every notable Democratic politician at that point. Also abortion is still a contentious and controversial issue almost 50 years after its relevant court ruling, so this isn't some sort of magic pill.

Above that though: if this is a reflection of the US being that much more conservative on such issues, then why isn't "Latinx" so widespread and universal in other Anglophone countries? You could point out they don't have as high Latino populations so it's less of a thing to come up, which is true, but it's blatantly incorrect and erasure of quite a few people to say they don't exist at all. The notion that a country like Australia wouldn't have as much if not significantly more backlash against "Latinx" if it was more of a thing there that described a much higher portion of their population is simply laughable.

With respect, you've completely misread what I wrote. First off though, you are incorrect. Gay marriage was by no means popular when the Supreme Court mandated it. It had been enacted in an orgy of states oh, and several those were due to judicial decisions based on state constitutions rather than popular legislative or referendum measures. I'm not going to bother, but I think you would see that as a Time gay marriage support was at best split, and probably not even that Nationwide.

Secondly, and more importantly, you're missing the fundamental Point. Both support and acceptance for a social issue grows once it has the backing of the law and becomes the status quo. Obviously the oberfell decision isn't about to affect the minds of people like fuzzy, or folks like you and me who supported gay marriage well before that. But the vast majority of people who would have walked into a voting booth on a referendum against gay marriage 10 years ago and voted no would never support even a symbolic referendum to repeal it.

My point is the Law changes the status quo and gives its blessing of normality upon once controversial Notions, especially those resisted by conservatives incidentally. Marijuana legalization is another example long with gay marriage and segregation.

And I never mentioned the word latinx, dude

[Alcibiades]

Context.

However, Hitler genuinely cared about his nation and the well-being of its people, so that's something they don't have in common.

That's an objective fact.

Only if you only consider white (not Jew or Roma) non disabled Christians of the correct political persuasion to be people, and even then, he was willing to sacrifice them by the truckload to achieve his goals globally.

It isn't contradictory to say that Hitler loved and cared about Germany but also that he horribly abused and murdered millions of its citizens in cold blood.

He may have cared about Germany in the abstract, but he sure as hell didn’t care about “the well-being of its people”.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

LA county swung right by 5 points likely due to their large Asian and Latinx population shifting right. White voters in California shifted more left from 2016 and it balanced out almost evenly.

> Latinx

I'm always a bit bemused by the way that a huge majority of even left wing posters on here are so freaked out by that term.

I'm torn between thinking this is more a sheer obstinate refusal to even try and understand the sorts of issues that are  significant outside of the English speaking world (which works the other way round too - see the "how would Belgium vote if it was a US state" type threads, where people try to calque US issues onto a context where they aren't especially relevant); or that it is simply down to the US being much more conservative on issues related to gender and LGBT equality. Nevertheless, it's remarkably different to how I see the issue being discussed by left wingers in French or German.

This isn't really true though. The US got same-sex marriage before a ton of European countries including yours that doesn't even have it yet (though that'll almost certainly change in the fall.)

Polls much higher support here than in the USA (~80% in favour here, which is about normal for W Europe), whereas there was a thread on here celebrating 70% support in the USA just a couple of weeks ago. Or, more to the point, it will be legal here by the end of the year, the reason is an extremely slow political process, and at least we'll have introduced it democratically. There are also some concrete areas where we are even ahead - eg anti discrimination and hate speech laws or conversion therapy being illegal; and of course, no bizarre hate campaigns against transpeople's right to use the toilet or access medical treatment.

It's widely popular and accepted because a fortunately undemocratic Court ruling saying the Constitution required legalization of gay marriage thus made gay marriage popular and acceptable as the de facto status quo. Other country still requiring unpopular legislation to legalize gay marriage haven't gone through that transition yet. This country was obviously nowhere near that level of support for gay marriage until the oberfell decision made it a fait accompli

The Civil Rights Act did the same thing for desegregation, BTW. Amazing how laws can change perceptions

The implication is that same-sex marriage was universally unpopular before the court ruling, which is incorrect, quite a few states had already passed same-sex marriage via the democratic process prior to that or voted down bans on it (like the one I worked against!) and it was supported by almost every notable Democratic politician at that point. Also abortion is still a contentious and controversial issue almost 50 years after its relevant court ruling, so this isn't some sort of magic pill.

Above that though: if this is a reflection of the US being that much more conservative on such issues, then why isn't "Latinx" so widespread and universal in other Anglophone countries? You could point out they don't have as high Latino populations so it's less of a thing to come up, which is true, but it's blatantly incorrect and erasure of quite a few people to say they don't exist at all. The notion that a country like Australia wouldn't have as much if not significantly more backlash against "Latinx" if it was more of a thing there that described a much higher portion of their population is simply laughable.

With respect, you've completely misread what I wrote. First off though, you are incorrect. Gay marriage was by no means popular when the Supreme Court mandated it. It had been enacted in an orgy of states oh, and several those were due to judicial decisions based on state constitutions rather than popular legislative or referendum measures. I'm not going to bother, but I think you would see that as a Time gay marriage support was at best split, and probably not even that Nationwide.

Secondly, and more importantly, you're missing the fundamental Point. Both support and acceptance for a social issue grows once it has the backing of the law and becomes the status quo. Obviously the oberfell decision isn't about to affect the minds of people like fuzzy, or folks like you and me who supported gay marriage well before that. But the vast majority of people who would have walked into a voting booth on a referendum against gay marriage 10 years ago and voted no would never support even a symbolic referendum to repeal it.

My point is the Law changes the status quo and gives its blessing of normality upon once controversial Notions, especially those resisted by conservatives incidentally. Marijuana legalization is another example long with gay marriage and segregation.

And I never mentioned the word latinx, dude

By about 2013ish gay marriage had majority support nationwide and plenty of states had implemented it via referendums or legislatively. Mine was one.

Also your point at the end falls apart looking at issues like abortion, affirmative action, lots of gun-related politics, etc. that are still controversial today. Abortion is still a hot button divisive issue almost 50 years after the court ruling legalizing it.