Which of these groups is the worst?

[PSOL]

By any chance was the bookstore named Revolution Books

[AlterEgo]

Islamophobia isn't a real thing.

On another thread, I said some views you were espousing were examples of islamaphobia. You said you were and that you would proudly wear that badge. Now it doesn't exist? Hmm.

[Samof94]

Islamophobia isn't a real thing.

On another thread, I said some views you were espousing were examples of islamaphobia. You said you were and that you would proudly wear that badge. Now it doesn't exist? Hmm.

Trump rallies are full of them.

[ingemann]

Out of these group the militant vegans are the worst, not that militant vegans are really that bad, they're simply people with some good points, a annoying selfrighteousness, too few brain cells and too much free times. They could be much worse.

The liberal "islamophobes" suffer from taking their own ideology (liberalism) seriously. They don't get that politic is a team sport, where you have to accept and stay silent twhen one of your team member beats his wife and children.

TERF is simply a slur against women.

Tankies can be horrible, but it also often just a slur against people who doesn't simply accept whatever conflict Washington drums up.

Dolezal-esque appropriators are just mental ill people, but honestly it far easier to defend transracial people than transgender people, race is far more a social construct than gender is. 

[John Dule]

Islamophobia isn't a real thing.

On another thread, I said some views you were espousing were examples of islamaphobia. You said you were and that you would proudly wear that badge. Now it doesn't exist? Hmm.

You can call it whatever you want, but it is impossible to be "bigoted" against a belief system.

[Santander]

Islamophobia isn't a real thing.

On another thread, I said some views you were espousing were examples of islamaphobia. You said you were and that you would proudly wear that badge. Now it doesn't exist? Hmm.

You can call it whatever you want, but it is impossible to be "bigoted" against a belief system.

It is if you aren't sufficiently knowledgeable about it.

[President of the great nation of 🏳️‍⚧️]

TERF is simply a slur against women.

Gonna start calling my girlfriend TERF. After all, she already calls herself one, so it's only natural that, if TERF is a slur against women, I join in.

[SWE]

TERF is simply a slur against women.

Any word that accurately describes what TERFs are is going to necessarily be insulting because they are terrible people - to be kind to them would be denying that they hold the opinions they hold. You're telling on yourself if you're misogynistic enough to think that applies to all women

[Diabolical Materialism]

TERF has been redefined to mean anyone who doesn't agree with liberal positions on trans issues.  It's very annoying.  The "RF" in TERF stands for Radical Feminist, and the entire point of the term was to attack feminists who were trying to carve out trans issues from the massive smorgasbord of wokethought that is intersectional feminism.  It's an extremely inside-baseball term and I doubt there are more than like 1,000 actual TERFs in the entire country because radical feminism is such an extremely online phenomenon.

But now people attack, like, JK Rowling for being a TERF.  JK Rowling was never a radical feminist so by definition she can't be a TERF.  She's just a UK liberal whose sociopolitical views have only received minor updates since 2002.

As usual, when you dilute terms like this it means that there's now no actual terminology for the hyper-woke hypocrites who are actual TERFs.  It's the same way with tankies.  I knew a guy in college who worked at a radical-left bookstore, wore a military beret with a bunch of communist pins on it, and loved him some Stalin, Mao and Ho Chi Minh.  Like, that's an actual tankie.  Your dumbf--k sister going through her "maybe we were lied to in history class and the communists were actually the good guys" phase at age 14 is not a tankie.

Which of these do the Nevada DSA fall under?

[If my soul was made of stone]

TERF is simply a slur against women.

Gonna start calling my girlfriend TERF. After all, she already calls herself one, so it's only natural that, if TERF is a slur against women, I join in.

I'm probably the closest thing to a genuine TERF on this site that I've seen, but my transphobia is solely reflexive. Trans people are wonderful and sacred, unless they're me, in which case they're bloodless frauds.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

TERF is simply a slur against women.

Gonna start calling my girlfriend TERF. After all, she already calls herself one, so it's only natural that, if TERF is a slur against women, I join in.

I'm probably the closest thing to a genuine TERF on this site that I've seen, but my transphobia is solely reflexive. Trans people are wonderful and sacred, unless they're me, in which case they're bloodless frauds.

This was exactly my perspective during the period that I identified as trans (I'm still dysphoric but making it my identity didn't work out well for me). No longer identifying as trans myself actually made me a lot more gracious towards both myself and other trans/dysphoric/GNC people, although I still have issues with the now-standard trans identity narrative ("always-already", gender preceding sex, deadnames as unacceptable to use even when discussing pre-transition periods of the person's life, etc.) just because, well, my own experience hasn't borne it out.

[If my soul was made of stone]

TERF is simply a slur against women.

Gonna start calling my girlfriend TERF. After all, she already calls herself one, so it's only natural that, if TERF is a slur against women, I join in.

I'm probably the closest thing to a genuine TERF on this site that I've seen, but my transphobia is solely reflexive. Trans people are wonderful and sacred, unless they're me, in which case they're bloodless frauds.

This was exactly my perspective during the period that I identified as trans (I'm still dysphoric but making it my identity didn't work out well for me). No longer identifying as trans myself actually made me a lot more gracious towards both myself and other trans/dysphoric/GNC people, although I still have issues with the now-standard trans identity narrative ("always-already", gender preceding sex, deadnames as unacceptable to use even when discussing pre-transition periods of the person's life, etc.) just because, well, my own experience hasn't borne it out.

The experience is profoundly different for everyone, naturally. I never felt that I fit cleanly into the narrative of identity, either; there were some precocious instances of me being interested in alternate gender expression from a very young age, but I think that was more out of curiosity than it genuinely manifesting then, since my experience of dysphoria has been grounded much more in physicality and sociality than my manner of dress or anything like that. I oscillated consistently on whether or not I identified as trans for the better part of four years, mainly because I felt like I would be a fraud identifying as anything else because I was in an embryonic naturalist stage of identifying sex and gender differences as biological rather than psychosocial (this is why I always make such a clear point of this when talking about matters of gender with others). Ultimately, I decided that I was non-binary female rather than simply a woman for a few reasons, perhaps not the most sound ones in most eyes:

The internal running joke that I'm a TERF is rooted in this reflexive policing of my identity that was rooted in my envy of my female peers when I was a teenager, which neared a religious reading of sacred/profane or pure/impure, as well as my on-off misandrist impulses that are in many ways an expression of anger at the schema that I was born and raised into that is so out of touch with my identity. I worry at times that my conception of self is too essentialist, as from the physical sensation elucidated in my current screen-name here and my longtime fascination with such qualities I do consider my identity profoundly physical and expressed in the domains of the uterine, even menstrual. Unfortunately, 90 years come this summer since Lili Elbe's immune system went haywire and took everything down with it as the result of an attempted uterus transplant, we still don't know how to do it properly, so that's a part of myself that I only can express through face paint (or, at least currently, cryptic forum signatures).

I live with it, I guess.

[🦀🎂🦀🎂]

Dolezal-esque appropriators are just mental ill people, but honestly it far easier to defend transracial people than transgender people, race is far more a social construct than gender is. 

Doesn't the bolded actually make it far easier to explain transgender people as opposed to the "transracial"?

[ingemann]

Dolezal-esque appropriators are just mental ill people, but honestly it far easier to defend transracial people than transgender people, race is far more a social construct than gender is.  

Doesn't the bolded actually make it far easier to explain transgender people as opposed to the "transracial"?

Not really plenty of people try to find themselves by changing identity and this is far smaller change. I must admit that the fog of war in the whole gender debate have become so thick, thanks to pseudo science which are allowed to get a free pass, that I have dropped finding out what’s up and down, at a personally level I believe that transgender people exist and suffer from a real condition, but I also believe that some transgender and non binary people are like Dolezal, people who don’t feel at home in their identity and try to find a new one and they find one in transgenderism or in being non-binary, which is more social acceptable than the one Dolezal found. But that’s only my belief.

[GeneralMacArthur]

By any chance was the bookstore named Revolution Books

No, it was like a normal proper bookstore but they stocked a lot of radical-left stuff and highlighted it to shoppers and the employees were allowed/encouraged to wear pieces of flair to demonstrate their radical-left political views.  But it wasn't like there was a communist flag in the window or anything like that.

I guess it wasn't a "radical-left bookstore" so much as a normal bookstore whose owner was radical-left and wanted his bookstore to be a home for radical leftists.

[I’m not Stu]

Tankies also support extremely anti-gay far-right politicians like Ali Khamenei and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

[Associate Justice PiT]

     Tankies, since they defend regimes that murdered millions of innocent people.

[I’m not Stu]

Do tankies tend to be rude and have bad tempers?

[Horus]

Tankies are more harmful but vegans are more annoying.

[LM Brazilian Citizen]

Tankies, not only by supporting failed totalitarian regimes, but also because they distill hatred against certain groups of people sometimes unreal, as I have been seen in other topics recently. It's the famous "us against them", that for them any person involved in identity politics is not a leftist because for tankies their focus in just on the correct concept but inflexible and partially old-fashioned of class.

This is one of the reasons that many people in my country don't trust in the left-wing here in Brazil, because the fact that many of these leftists support the regimes of Cuba and Venezuela for example, seeing it as hypocrisy because they are linked to ideologies that they say are perfect but they also oppressed their population; in addition to their intransigence of these with ideas other that aren't "class consciousness", and this helped a good part of the Brazilian population to reject them, being one of the leitmotivs that helped to elect the neo-fascism represented by Jair Bolsonaro.

Finally, they are also annoying because some of them, based on other topics I saw here, are horseshoe theory people who would support Donald Trump against a more neoliberal candidate, just because of economic populism. I wonder how many of these people supported him in 2016 by failing into the siren song and contributing to the degradation of democracy, since dictatorships are his motto.

[I’m not Stu]

Tankies, not only by supporting failed totalitarian regimes, but also because they distill hatred against certain groups of people sometimes unreal, as I have been seen in other topics recently. It's the famous "us against them", that for them any person involved in identity politics is not a leftist because for tankies their focus in just on the correct concept but inflexible and partially old-fashioned of class.

This is one of the reasons that many people in my country don't trust in the left-wing here in Brazil, because the fact that many of these leftists support the regimes of Cuba and Venezuela for example, seeing it as hypocrisy because they are linked to ideologies that they say are perfect but they also oppressed their population; in addition to their intransigence of these with ideas other that aren't "class consciousness", and this helped a good part of the Brazilian population to reject them, being one of the leitmotivs that helped to elect the neo-fascism represented by Jair Bolsonaro.

Finally, they are also annoying because some of them, based on other topics I saw here, are horseshoe theory people who would support Donald Trump against a more neoliberal candidate, just because of economic populism. I wonder how many of these people supported him in 2016 by failing into the siren song and contributing to the degradation of democracy, since dictatorships are his motto.

Donald Trump isn't economically populist, even for a Republican. George Sundheim, who ran for Senate in California in the 2016 primary, is more economically populist. Sundheim supports raising the minimum wage and more regulation of Wall Street. Does Trump also support raising the minimum wage and more regulation of Wall Street?

[LM Brazilian Citizen]

Tankies, not only by supporting failed totalitarian regimes, but also because they distill hatred against certain groups of people sometimes unreal, as I have been seen in other topics recently. It's the famous "us against them", that for them any person involved in identity politics is not a leftist because for tankies their focus in just on the correct concept but inflexible and partially old-fashioned of class.

This is one of the reasons that many people in my country don't trust in the left-wing here in Brazil, because the fact that many of these leftists support the regimes of Cuba and Venezuela for example, seeing it as hypocrisy because they are linked to ideologies that they say are perfect but they also oppressed their population; in addition to their intransigence of these with ideas other that aren't "class consciousness", and this helped a good part of the Brazilian population to reject them, being one of the leitmotivs that helped to elect the neo-fascism represented by Jair Bolsonaro.

Finally, they are also annoying because some of them, based on other topics I saw here, are horseshoe theory people who would support Donald Trump against a more neoliberal candidate, just because of economic populism. I wonder how many of these people supported him in 2016 by failing into the siren song and contributing to the degradation of democracy, since dictatorships are his motto.

Donald Trump isn't economically populist, even for a Republican. George Sundheim, who ran for Senate in California in the 2016 primary, is more economically populist. Sundheim supports raising the minimum wage and more regulation of Wall Street. Does Trump also support raising the minimum wage and more regulation of Wall Street?

No, not at all, but as Trump had a more economically populist speech aimed to the white working class in regions like the Rust Belt, to promote more jobs and revitalize the local industry, due to the abandonment of decades, for example, in addition to economic protectionism, that made a small group of people support him in this aspect with enthusiasm, even if it would mean tax cuts for the rich and an even greater increase in social inequality, in addition to the fact that he's a career billionaire, which makes him very attached to Wall Street as well. And for some tankies it doesn't matter that much.

[I’m not Stu]

Tankies, not only by supporting failed totalitarian regimes, but also because they distill hatred against certain groups of people sometimes unreal, as I have been seen in other topics recently. It's the famous "us against them", that for them any person involved in identity politics is not a leftist because for tankies their focus in just on the correct concept but inflexible and partially old-fashioned of class.

This is one of the reasons that many people in my country don't trust in the left-wing here in Brazil, because the fact that many of these leftists support the regimes of Cuba and Venezuela for example, seeing it as hypocrisy because they are linked to ideologies that they say are perfect but they also oppressed their population; in addition to their intransigence of these with ideas other that aren't "class consciousness", and this helped a good part of the Brazilian population to reject them, being one of the leitmotivs that helped to elect the neo-fascism represented by Jair Bolsonaro.

Finally, they are also annoying because some of them, based on other topics I saw here, are horseshoe theory people who would support Donald Trump against a more neoliberal candidate, just because of economic populism. I wonder how many of these people supported him in 2016 by failing into the siren song and contributing to the degradation of democracy, since dictatorships are his motto.

Donald Trump isn't economically populist, even for a Republican. George Sundheim, who ran for Senate in California in the 2016 primary, is more economically populist. Sundheim supports raising the minimum wage and more regulation of Wall Street. Does Trump also support raising the minimum wage and more regulation of Wall Street?

No, not at all, but as Trump had a more economically populist speech aimed to the white working class in regions like the Rust Belt, to promote more jobs and revitalize the local industry, due to the abandonment of decades, for example, in addition to economic protectionism, that made a small group of people support him in this aspect with enthusiasm, even if it would mean tax cuts for the rich and an even greater increase in social inequality, in addition to the fact that he's a career billionaire, which makes him very attached to Wall Street as well. And for some tankies it doesn't matter that much.

So tankies prefer more Wall Street deregulation over candidates who at least prefer things the way they are? Does Trump go so far as to support Paul Ryan's idea to privatize Social Security and turning Medicare into a voucher program?

[LM Brazilian Citizen]

Tankies, not only by supporting failed totalitarian regimes, but also because they distill hatred against certain groups of people sometimes unreal, as I have been seen in other topics recently. It's the famous "us against them", that for them any person involved in identity politics is not a leftist because for tankies their focus in just on the correct concept but inflexible and partially old-fashioned of class.

This is one of the reasons that many people in my country don't trust in the left-wing here in Brazil, because the fact that many of these leftists support the regimes of Cuba and Venezuela for example, seeing it as hypocrisy because they are linked to ideologies that they say are perfect but they also oppressed their population; in addition to their intransigence of these with ideas other that aren't "class consciousness", and this helped a good part of the Brazilian population to reject them, being one of the leitmotivs that helped to elect the neo-fascism represented by Jair Bolsonaro.

Finally, they are also annoying because some of them, based on other topics I saw here, are horseshoe theory people who would support Donald Trump against a more neoliberal candidate, just because of economic populism. I wonder how many of these people supported him in 2016 by failing into the siren song and contributing to the degradation of democracy, since dictatorships are his motto.

Donald Trump isn't economically populist, even for a Republican. George Sundheim, who ran for Senate in California in the 2016 primary, is more economically populist. Sundheim supports raising the minimum wage and more regulation of Wall Street. Does Trump also support raising the minimum wage and more regulation of Wall Street?

No, not at all, but as Trump had a more economically populist speech aimed to the white working class in regions like the Rust Belt, to promote more jobs and revitalize the local industry, due to the abandonment of decades, for example, in addition to economic protectionism, that made a small group of people support him in this aspect with enthusiasm, even if it would mean tax cuts for the rich and an even greater increase in social inequality, in addition to the fact that he's a career billionaire, which makes him very attached to Wall Street as well. And for some tankies it doesn't matter that much.

So tankies prefer more Wall Street deregulation over candidates who at least prefer things the way they are? Does Trump go so far as to support Paul Ryan's idea to privatize Social Security and turning Medicare into a voucher program?

There are tankies that don't reason, that supported Trump due to his lying speech of economic populism, ignoring the fact that he wants to privatize and eliminate Social Security, or his support for the desregulation of Wall Street, some tankies prefer him just because he didn't initiate any new war in the Middle East, and didn't disclose the drone attacks he was carrying out, supported him for their hatred of Democratic politicians (who are more socially left) out of sheer hypocrisy.

[I’m not Stu]

Would tankies would prefer Tom Cotton over a Democrat? Cotton would start a war with Iran. Do tankies also believe innocent people deserved to die on 9/11?