Well at least as far as illegal, there were certainly some proportion who were sympathetic to Cliven Bundy’s actions.
His membership in / participation with / sympathies for the New Black Panther Party and the Huey P. Newton Gun Club, for starters.
You have yet to demonstrate what quality or belief he possessed that makes him left-wing. Or are you arguing that only leftists believe cops shouldn’t kill black people?
ETA: Missed the last post. Response to come after edit timer
The charges against him were dismissed with prejudice back in January. I’m pretty sure “illegal” is not the correct word to describe those actions.
(emphasis mine)
Kuchiyose no Jutsu!
Go ahead, Robin. Take it from here.
Let’s start with something more basic, just to see if there’s any common ground at all here. I’ll give you a list of individuals & organizations and you can tell me which, if any, you think are accurately described as landing somewhere on the left side of our political spectrum:
A) Malcolm X
B) the Nation of Islam
C) Louis Farrakhan
D) the Black Panther Party
E) Huey Newton
F) Khalid Abdul Muhammad
G) the New Black Panther Party
H) Quannel X
I) the Huey P. Newton Gun Club
Well, upon further review, we might just to give HD a single murdering leftist. All that work, for one point.
editing, brb.
Bravo! We agree on something. Hallelujah!
OK, given that we now have agreed upon at least “a single murdering leftist”, would you describe a source that says “During this period [9/12/2001 - 12/31/2016], no persons in the United States were killed in attacks carried out by persons believed to be motivated by extremist environmental beliefs, extremist “animal liberation” beliefs, or extremist far left beliefs” as
A) accurate
or
B) inaccurate
?
That’s not left, that’s Berkeley Batshit. That’s out there where people seriously argue about Marxist theory.
Look Hurr, you know some lefties now, we’re here, you could ask us. I know oodles of lefties, I don’t know anybody in antifas, or the New Black Panther Party. And the Huey P. Newton Gun Club? Are you sure you aren’t being trolled? Check your chain, has it been yanked recently?
Your insistence to boiling down everything to left and right is slightly infuriating; though, I suspect, me referring to white folks as white folks is equally infuriating to you. My suspicion is that this is a wash and you’re engaging in equivocation. What side of the political spectrum did most of these people fall under? None. It falls under separatism.
Though I know you’ll blow pass this point, please know that if white folks had deigned to treat blacks like human beings after 1865, these groups would’ve never formed. These groups formed in opposition to the continued dehumanization and violence perpetuated by white folks. This dehumanization continues to this day. It’s like Freddy Kruger or Jason referring to the teenagers who fought back against them as a “left-wing mob”; it defies reason.
The “left and right” aspect of this discussion was going on before I got involved. At the latest, it started in post #3.
I would say inaccurate. Would you describe the statement “Far right violence if more prominent, happens more often, and is more likely to result in deaths than far left violence” as
A) accurate
or
B) inaccurate
?
I genuinely do not know. At the start of this tangent, I said this:
Since then Ravenman has provided a source that we’ve confirmed is inaccurate. I haven’t seen anyone else provide, and I’m not aware of, a source that I have confidence has done a good job of tallying up far right vs far left violence. Do you have another source you’d like to recommend?
ETA: I’ll say this - it’s my vague, unscientific hunch that leftist violence was more of a problem in the '70’s and right-wing violence was more of a problem in the '90’s, and that in the last couple of decades violence from both sides has been, thankfully, rather on the low side. Sorry if you find that answer frustrating, I’m not trying to be evasive.
I’ll say again, it won’t.
Because people are looking at their own news sources and discounting others as all propaganda.
Because people are willing to stay on their echo chambers and never look for common ground.
People refuse to look critically at their preferred groups or objectively at others.
People are willing to accept vilification and lies about opposition. If someone objects to defamation, it’s just more evidence of their hatefulness.
Because it’s easier to call the opposition stupid, backward, Nazi, or evil than it is to talk things through. And once the opposition is labeled Nazi, it’s OK to kill them.
People will read this and be certain it applies to the others, not to themselves.
Right-wingers are more violent than left-wingers. The right-winger-in-chief, Donald Trump, has called on his supporters to use violence against protesters. What’s your Tu Quoque for that? I won’t bother to keep Googling, especially since each side discounts half the news sources. But one little factoid should show what truth-seekers are up against:
During the Nazi vs Antifa riots, Yvette Felarca, a very petite woman who probably can’t even do a push-up, gently shoved a big strong Nazi. This was, in law, assault. James Fields also committed assault, plowing his car into a crowd and killing a woman.
Do these two incidents wash out? 1 to 1: “both sides are the same”? The assault by Ms. Felarca attracted far more shrieking from the right-wingers at SDMB than the murder by Fields.
What’s your source for this claim? Trump said something mean?
She’s facing a felony charge of “assault with force likely to produce great bodily injury” (and I hope she goes to prison for it). You might want to re-evaluate your “gently shoved” description.
I hope he goes to prison too.
If I’d seen anyone here, uh, “shrieking” in favor of Fields, I’d have gladly replied by explaining (a) that I hope Fields never breathes air as a free man again, as well as (b) why I hope Fields never breathes air as a free man again.
But since I don’t recall anybody hereabouts saying a good word about Fields, why the heck would I bother shrieking to the choir? Is that even a thing? Do I start threads by saying, “so, arson — that’s bad, right? Like, reckon that we’re all on the same page about whether arson should be illegal — so shouldn’t I, right here and now, make a bold and emotional post about the thing that we agree on?”
But if someone talks up Felarca, of course I say wait, what?
I watched a video of the assault, did you? “Gently” shoved" may be a slight understatement but “likely to produce great bodily injury” is a huge overstatement. But it’s good, I guess, to see you think the murderer should go to prison along with Felarca.
We don’t get a lot of right-wingers here willing to admit to Republican misbehavior. Would you deign to comment in this thread on Governor Bevin’s recent policy, Hurricane ?
This all applies to white folks.
There is no common ground between white folks and their white liberal counterparts because white folks erased it all. What white folks will never understand is that Republicans reflexively oppose everything Democrats do, even if they once held that belief. Global warming a good example.
Before the Second Apocolypse: first black President, white folks were screaming about trying to fix global warming. John McCain famously stated that global warming was a “national security issue”. He even went ahead and advocated for cap and trade. It wasn’t just him, Chris Christie once said “When you have over 90 percent of the world’s scientists who have studied this stating that climate change is occurring and that humans play a contributing role it’s time to defer to the experts.” Chris no longer holds this view. He’s abandoned the harbor of science to drown in the shallow pool of Trumpism. (See this Vox Video Special for more information: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O4Q8Nm4ksVU)
Both parties agree on that ending the War on Drugs and a pathway for citizenship for Dreamers but refuse to play ball. White folks have boiled politics down into a zero-sum game where the other side must lose and/or be humiliated. There only common ground between Republicans and Democrats is the shifting sands beneath their feet.
There are two solutions. The first is separation, which I’ve highlighted previously. The second solution is for white liberals to become full-fledged white folks and join the conservative movement. Better figure it out sooner than later because white liberals are next on the menu for white folks. Just ask Jane Sanders. Nomnomnom.