Well, now we are getting into the part where I get told to get off the cross, etc., etc.
Maybe it will suffice to say that I agree with you that a poster who behaved exactly as the subject of this Pitting did, but aimed his hate at atheists, gays, and liberals, instead of Christians, Americans, and Republicans, would be banned. Der Trihs, however, has not been banned.
It seems to me, therefore, that whether or not certain forms of behavior are jerkish depends on whose ox is being gored.
:shrugs:
It’s something we have gone around and around on before. It tends AFAICT to wind up like arguments about bias in the media - people wind up believing what they want, and dismissing evidence to the contrary.
I have to admit… I don’t support trolling at all, but I get an evil chuckle out of the thought of someone creating an alt account and, say, resposting Sevastopol’s racist genocidal fantasies with the words “Jews” or “Israelis” replaced by “gays” or “blacks”. I’d like to see someone take Der Trihs’ hate filled spew and repost it with the words “American” or “Christian” or “conservative” replaced by “African” or “non-Baptist” or “those suffering from Bush Derangement Syndrome”.
Then I’d like to see that troll, after their inevitable banning, come back on their main account and add one post, just one, where they listed all of the original posts that were allowed, and then the ban worthy posts that simply had a global search-and-replace performed on them.
I’d also like to see just how little time it took for such a thread to be disapeared.
Ah well. No use trying to change things, it’s Dopertown.
Didn’t december do something similar? He started a thread where he posted a quote about how Iraq had WMD, and asked if this constituted lies from the President. Of course there followed the usual barrage of people insisting “of course it’s a lie!” before someone spilled the beans that it was a quote from Clinton, not Bush.
I think you’re pretty much on the money here. However, I wonder if it’s not so much as bias from the SDMB, but when somebody with righty unpopular opinions shows up there’s more lefty pussies here to cry and whine about their shit getting stirred up by the “obvious troll”. The mods are likely just giving the lefty pussy wheels more grease. since there’s more of them squeaking their ball-less complaints about the mean person with unpopular opinions, who couldn’t possibly actually hold those opinions and therefore MUST BE BANNED!!!
Eh, bullshit. I wasn’t warned or even pitted for my posts to this thread even though a superficial left-wing knee-jerk interpretation of my post #2 was that I was saying gayness could be cured.
Dude, I shot you because you’re a smoker. IIRC, the latest change in California law makes shooting smokers legal to do during daylight hours if I have a permit, which I do.
You also need a smoker tag ( one of 4 types based on buck or doe, cigar or cig - and you can’t hunt pot smokers in California anymore unless you are a federal agent).
Thinking that a lot of armed citizens would result in a dictatorship being overthrown is just delusional.
For a dictatorship to appear, the political situation must be ripe for it. It won’t be Bush crowning himself president for life against the will of 300 millions of Americans. If it were to happen, the junta/dictator/whatever would have a significant support in the population, because otherwise, it would just not be possible. Some kind of “enemy” is probably also required to unite the populace behind the great leader.
So, amongst the gun owners, many would support the fascist state, and many would be undecided. A significant part of the gun owners would agree to join the lauded citizen’s militias who would help round up/shot/hang at the nearest lamppost the enemies of the nations/traitors/whatever. Amongst whose left, many wouldn’t care enough to do anything and/or would let their weapons being taken away from them. Amongst those left, many would be too scared to do anything. Amongst those left, many would want they could do something, but would think that their fist duty is to not put their family at risk and to work to feed it rather than becoming activists Amongst those left, many would try less direct approach than taking up arms, like pointless civil disobedience or such. Amongst those left, many would get killed/caught in quick order because they would prove unable to face the organized and well-armed forces thrown at them.
Only a tiny minority would actually end up fighting the new order. And there’s no guarantee that those would be the people originally most concerned about the right to own firearms. And I don’t think, either, that any prediction could be made about the dividing lines in this hypothetical society. It could very well be that the most active would the former members of the Klu-Klux-Klan allied with the communist party, or the libertarians and the tree-huggers, or the fundamentalist Christians and the members of the ACLU.
The political situation would be so radically different that making a prevision based on the current political lines is just ludicrous IMO.
All the historical precedents, everywhere, show that one shouldn’t put much faith in his fellows countrymen doing the right thing if an oppressive government is installed. Even the current situation, where many Americans are accepting or supporting things that, some years ago, would have you laughed at if you had stated that they could happen in the USA , hint in this direction. If a dictatorship is to come, brace yourself with cynicism and pessimism, for you’ll need them. Alternatively, you can join the new overlords. Your choice. Optimism isn’t on the menu.
So I guess the French Resistance should have just given up and surrendered to the Nazis, instead of even trying.
You come from a country that has firsthand experience with being dominated by Nazi assholes. I’m sure if you ask your grandparents if they’d wished they had a gun in the house during the days of the Nazis, the answer would be yes.
