• Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
  • We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.

Deleted member 31817

Nov 7, 2017
30,876
No he didn't forget but it's not like anyone but his specific supporters even cared.

Identity politics automatically ruled him an enemy for being a cis white male, gg any chance for real leftist policies he would have made and not be corrupted by corporate money.
Jesus Christ almighty that's a lot of shit
 

Deleted member 15326

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 27, 2017
4,219
No he didn't forget but it's not like anyone but his specific supporters even cared.

Identity politics automatically ruled him an enemy for being a cis white male, gg any chance for real leftist policies he would have made and not be corrupted by corporate money.

"Identity politics"

Plenty of non-white people were on board for Bernard
 

Enzom21

Member
Oct 25, 2017
4,989
No he didn't forget but it's not like anyone but his specific supporters even cared.

Identity politics automatically ruled him an enemy for being a cis white male, gg any chance for real leftist policies he would have made and not be corrupted by corporate money.
There it is, a real Bernie stan showing their true colors when it comes to race.
 

EdibleKnife

Member
Oct 29, 2017
7,723
I've still yet to see a single argument as to what this harassment will actually accomplish apart from further galvanize the assholes committing the atrocities in the first place.
Do you understand what a protest is or do you just pretend to understand? Can you square how much you sound like the very people just a few decades ago who shamed black people for holding sit ins, marches and demonstrations? The Trump Administration doesn't need galvanization. It already plans to commit atrocities no matter how nice we are to them. Protest is disruptive and uncomfortable. The protests of the Civil Rights Movement were for the sake of publicly showing solidarity for the marginalized and as a signal to the oppressors that black Americans didn't plan to take abuse lying down. SHS works for the people and the employees at Red Hen wanted to send a message to her, Trump and the rest of the GOP that they shouldn't expect to dehumanize LGBTQ+ people, revel in corruption, support the NRA and in turn enable mass shootings, abuse minorities, and jail children without their lives getting difficult and uncomfortable in response to their inhumanity. You, Thisman, Bernie, Pelosi and on try to characterize actions like this as childish or useless but all you're doing is telling people they should take a beating with a smile. And don't fucking bring up voting again. Nothing about this action is done in place of voting. No one at the Red Hen said they wouldn't vote and just wanted to annoy SHS. You can vote and express openly and loudly your dissatisfaction with this administration at the same time.

No he didn't forget but it's not like anyone but his specific supporters even cared.

Identity politics automatically ruled him an enemy for being a cis white male, gg any chance for real leftist policies he would have made and not be corrupted by corporate money.
Yes it's "identity politics" fault, huh? Black people, LGBTQ+ people and women just hated him for being a cis white male because they're so obsessed with "identity politics"? You do know HIllary was frequently called out and held to account for her previous comments and views on black people as well right?
 
Last edited:

DrROBschiz

Member
Oct 25, 2017
16,494
These three are absolutely right and all the pro anarchy , pro rude folks are absolutely wrong . Most of era will obviously angrily mockingly disagree with this but the time is not to be childish but to vote. Acting out emotionally will only embolden the Trump deplorables. You folks might think this is a winning strategy but its not. Society should be civilized enough to counter policy and laws with elections and due pressure without losing your ground.

What is the "line" then

Are you saying we are beyond the point of potential breakdown

What does it take to spurn a revolutionary level of response from the populance?

I thought a Nazi running over a kid would have been populance outrage worthy but America is just on too solid of ground right? Not even Thousands dead that could have been saved was enough. Hell lets roll innocent children into the mix

Maybe we are so scared to take real action because we dont have the courage to risk what those before us did to enact real change. We dont feel its neccessary. I mean most of us still got it pretty good right? Even the whole world has it better now than ever in history so no reason for alarm! Cant save em all and progress must be inevitable. Play the long game

Am I doing this right?

EDIT: The above response is mostly emotional. Its frustrating to see civil disobedience compared to anarchy. Still would love to modern civil revolution take place to combat this madness
 
Last edited:

Polaroid_64

Member
Oct 25, 2017
1,920
Sorry? The very first tweet in the OP is specifically addressing Waters' comments about harassment.

In any event you're presenting a false equivalence. In no way am I saying that getting kicked out of a restaurant or being harassed - again, per Maxine Waters - is equivalent to what's going on in the detention camps.

I'm asking how the former is going to positively impact the latter.

My mistake.

And we have evidence that no pushback brings zero results. Time to up the pressure until we can stop this train.
 

Orin_linwe

Member
Nov 26, 2017
706
Malmoe, Sweden.
I definitely wasn't trying to retranslate or be condescending in my post. Hope it didn't come off that way.

I understood your overall point and largely agree, however, I have a hard time defining a restaurant owner telling a customer that they were making the staff uncomfortable and might want to leave as "civil disobedience". This just feels like another attempt at taking "the high road" that will in fact prove pointless and self-defeating.

Ultimately I'm just disappointed but unsurprised. Gotta vent somewhere.

It's civil disobedience in the sense that it's an unorthodox way for a restaurant to handle a customer. Restaurants generally don't give you a first-hand-experience of the values the owner/host/staff holds.

You might be interpreting civil disobedience in another way than how it is commonly talked about. Civil disobedience, in this context, is generally seen as the act of a civilian perfoming an unorthodox- and sometimes illegal - action because of sincerely held moral convictions.

This is probably not a great definition, and in this particular case, what happened wasn't illegal. But what did happen was civil disobedience in the way that it deviated pretty radically from how a restaurant host would generally treat a customer, and was motivated by sincerely held convictions.

Not to necessarily be a corrective, but the wikipedia-page for civil disobedience is pretty good and well-written:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_disobedience
 

Polaroid_64

Member
Oct 25, 2017
1,920
By the way, we can still vote while we are getting in their faces. Don't have to give up one for the other.

And in my opinion if we don't get up and push back hard right now, in a few years that voting option will be worthless. We can see how it is being neutered already.
 

EdibleKnife

Member
Oct 29, 2017
7,723
Posting this Citations Needed podcast episode (Episode 40: The Civility Fetish) along with clips from the transcript because it really highlights how disengenuine this whole call for civility is:
Citations Needed said:
Adam: But the point is to sort of say, 'Oh, there's these loony crazies who have sort of gone too far.' And what's never really reconciled is that through this time period this raises the question of was it considered crazy or insane or delusional to kill three million Indochinese in Vietnam? Was the CIA's use of torture and coups and dirty wars and executions, are these things considered crazy? And of course the answer is no, because they're sort of factored in. That violence is factored into the system. And that the only people who can be uncivil or be conspiracy theorists are by definition people who are not factored in.

Nima: Right. And those who are then challenging that, which is why certainly from the Sixties and beyond, and I'm sure before that as well, protestors and definitely when it came to civil disobedience, that people that challenged power, that took to the streets, that actually challenged and fought against these policies, whether it was for civil rights, whether it was against Vietnam, etcetera, etcetera. And you can take that all the way up the decades, you know, since, those are often deemed to be kind of too loud, too radical, they're not inclusive enough even though they're pretty much the most inclusive of, you know, marginalized and vulnerable communities. And yet protests are seen like, 'Oh well, you know, are they going to shut down traffic? Is my commute going to be fucked up because like I think there are better ways to do that.' And so what you see is the policies that are being challenged, right? The wars, the invasions, the deportations, etcetera, whatever it may be, those are never uncivil. Those are never uncouth. But challenging them in certain ways is insufficiently respectful.

Adam: Yeah. You see this over and over and over and over again with the way in which certain liberals talk about protests, that there's this, there's this sort of black and white rose tinted civil rights movement that was nonviolent and anything that involves a burnt trash can or a dumpster turned over is somehow in an affront to all humanity.
...
Nima: There's a book from 2006 called Revolutionary Characters: What Made the Founders Different, written by historian Gordon Wood, and in this book he explains about the founders of the United States, right? Those luminaries the Founding Fathers, and how they really were obsessed with this, with this notion of civility. And so here's what Gordon Wood writes quote, "The 18th Century Anglo-American Enlightenment was preoccupied with politeness, which meant affability, sociability, cultivation; indeed, politeness was considered the source of civility, which was soon replaced by the word civilization." End quote. So you'll see basically how the Jeffersons and Franklins and Adams and Washingtons, especially George Washington was completely obsessed with this idea of etiquette and politeness and you'll see how that was their version of not being this scrappy colonial upstart in kind of opposition to Europe, but of a piece with Europe that they were as civil and as civilized as the Europeans. Meanwhile, these are the people who own fucking slaves. These are the people who were genocide-ing Native Americans. I mean this, so its clear how even in the effort to say 'we are being so polite, we write and we speak with the utmost civility,' policies actually matter. What those people are actually doing to other humans actually matter.

...
Adam: Can you talk to us about what that experience and other experiences, I know that you, you're, you're a frequent right wing punching bag, have taught you about our notions of civility and norms and this obsession with policing people even by supposed liberals and centrists of policing those who have quote "gone too far."

Ashley Feinberg: I mean well liberals and centrists are the ones who love norms the most because it's how they show the right that they're objective and that they care about standards that they are on their side actually because they just want the truth, but I mean it is all done with complete insincerity and in total bad faith on the right because they don't give a shit about how polite you're being to whoever, like they just want some excuse to hammer on you and they'll find it no matter what. And just giving in has already made defeat before you even started fighting.
 

night814

One Winged Slayer
Member
Oct 29, 2017
15,044
Pennsylvania

JustinP

Member
Oct 25, 2017
6,343
What their statements should have been:

But the Congressional Black Caucus says Trump's characterization of Waters' remarks are a misrepresentation.

"In exercising her constitutional right to freedom of speech at a recent rally, Congresswoman Waters did not, as she has made clear, encourage violence, like President Trump has been doing since the election. She, instead, encouraged Americans to exercise their constitutional rights to freedom of speech and peaceful assembly by letting President Trump and members of his Administration know that separating young immigrant children from their parents is not who we are as a country," said Congressman Cedric Richmond, chairman of the CBC in a statement.

Richmond instead pointed to Trump's own language insinuating violence on the campaign trail.

"We cannot forget that President Trump, as a candidate, encouraged his supporters to beat up his detractors at rallies, and, as president, morally equated white supremacists with anti-racist activists and encouraged police officers to beat up suspects. In fact, almost every day President Trump says something that makes this country more dangerous for people who look like Congresswoman Waters and other minorities. Where is the national conversation on civility in these moments?" Richmond said.

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/maxine-waters-face-democrats-trump/story?id=56167909
 

Deleted member 176

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
37,160
There really can't be any more of this while camps are being built and Republicans continue to consolidate power.
 

Hex

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
3,415
Chris Hayes had Bernie on and asked him about this

Basically, "we have to win, yelling in restaurants isn't going to do that", Hayes responds "some people want to do something", Bernie back, "What you can do is win!"

Paraphrased obv, hopefully it's uploaded but... pretty empty stuff. Like he does say "I'm not going to tell them to stop".... but reemphasises it's not gonna win anything, tsk tsk.
Sanders is not someone high on my list of who to ask how to win anything
 

corasaur

Member
Oct 26, 2017
3,988
Act like a nazi, get treated like a nazi.

authoritarianism and white supremacy are core values of the republican party and have been for quite some time now.

she's not some clerk in a low government office just trying to earn a paycheck and keep her head down. she's the propaganda mouthpiece of an aspiring dictator and should be treated as the legitimately evil person she is. Anyone else in a leadership role in this administration and arguably any republican elected official or appointed judge deserves the same level of scorn.

Call them what they are: Chamberlain Democrats.
that's a good phrase.
 

BBboy20

One Winged Slayer
Member
Oct 25, 2017
22,083
Glen_no-justice-no-peace.jpg
 

UberTag

The Fallen
Oct 25, 2017
15,382
Kitchener, ON
Notice how most (all?) who believe this are white...
Republicans don't have a monopoly on racism.

Some racists pursue otherwise progressive ideals because their racism makes them feel guilty and they want to pursue other just causes as a counter-balance to that... while still taking in lobbyist dollars from the same donors who sponsor their political rivals and championing the greatness of civility and the status quo.
 

SaviourMK2

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
1,711
CT
I'm glad they agree, but this is so fucking irrelevant. I shouldn't be hearing about this fucking story 3-4-5-6- a week later.
 

Rmagnus

Member
Oct 28, 2017
1,923
Really weird coincidence, isn't it, that the people mostly like to tell you to sit down and shut up, be they rude or cordial, have no real skin in the game.

When the orange cunt got elected we were told on the other forum how we need to be polite to racist to show them the error of their ways. Now when fucking families are torn apart, children kept it cages we are told the same fucking shit, surely something is not right?
 

Polaroid_64

Member
Oct 25, 2017
1,920
When the orange cunt got elected we were told on the other forum how we need to be polite to racist to show them the error of their ways. Now when fucking families are torn apart, children kept it cages we are told the same fucking shit, surely something is not right?

Yep, lecture circuit on gaf was vomit inducing after the election.

The moderate blowhards stroking each other as they scolded us to be nice to piece of shit human beings.
 

Daphne

Avenger
Oct 27, 2017
3,694
It's not fucking "disagreeing" when you're talking about violations of human rights and atrocities, for fucks sake. Shunning people is how you peaceably protest against acts of evil. These fuckers should be grateful it's only at that level and not far worse, frankly.
 

Polaroid_64

Member
Oct 25, 2017
1,920
My fellow white liberals being so civil as others are losing everything.

So fucking pathetic. And eventually that hand is going to reach for you. You have given them every notion that you will not resist.
 

Chumley

Attempted to circumvent ban with alt account
Banned
Oct 26, 2017
4,651
No he didn't forget but it's not like anyone but his specific supporters even cared.

Identity politics automatically ruled him an enemy for being a cis white male, gg any chance for real leftist policies he would have made and not be corrupted by corporate money.

Fucking awful post holy Jesus
 

SaviourMK2

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
1,711
CT
It's almost as if the media thrives on selectively sensationalizing outrage

I haven't watched MSNBC, CNN or anything of the likes since the fucking Rosanne shit wouldn't stop. I've just been reading and following politicians social medias, so it annoys me to hear that TV keeps playing this old news filth.
 

Ganransu

Member
Nov 21, 2017
1,270
I understand this whole "they go low, we go high" thing, but to be honest? This entire incident isn't exactly "low" for us anti-trump.

I mean, the owner politely asked Sanders to leave after her staff expressed their displeasure serving Sanders, they didn't even charge Sanders for the things they did consume. There was no verbal insult hurled at SHS, all was civil... Until SHS went on Twitter to complain that she was being disrespected; lying about the person who treated her with respect is the way she shows that respect of hers.
 

GameChanger

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
1,935
As much as I dislike Sarah Huckabee Sanders for being such a vile person, I am inclined to agree with Sanders, Pelosi and Schumer.



"When they go low, we go high."-Michelle Oboma.
 

McMahon

Banned
May 24, 2018
1,603
Los Angeles
As much as I dislike Sarah Huckabee Sanders for being such a vile person, I am inclined to agree with Sanders, Pelosi and Schumer.



"When they go low, we go high."-Michelle Oboma.

and when we go high they'll continue to game the system and make our politics more and more irrelevant to the point that we no longer have any say. but at least we went high and that's what really matters.

they go low we go high is naive. and anyone who espouses this is an enemy of our way of life.
 

Amnixia

▲ Legend ▲
The Fallen
Jan 25, 2018
10,432
How is a company refusing to service you because of your political work harresment?