ALL HAIL PRESIDENT TRUMP

"

faerwin wrote:

Fascism is highly complicated as it takes a bunch of views on the far left and use some on the far rights.

Even if fascism itself is generally seen as a far right ideology, it's more accurate to simply say it takes some of the worst elements from the far left and the far right to bring into one ugly system.

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

I thought fascism was traditionally thought to be far-right? Although the uninformed in this thread have been tagging it on the left.

"

Turtledove wrote:

"

faerwin wrote:

Fascism is highly complicated as it takes a bunch of views on the far left and use some on the far rights.

Even if fascism itself is generally seen as a far right ideology, it's more accurate to simply say it takes some of the worst elements from the far left and the far right to bring into one ugly system.

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

I thought fascism was traditionally thought to be far-right? Although the uninformed in this thread have been tagging it on the left.

It's kind of both?

"

The_Impeacher wrote:

Freedom to peacefully protest is one of the few things remaining in the fascist Trump era.

John Lewis calls it "good trouble"

Freedom to protest on an individual is fine. A company isn't an individual.

A company has much MUCH more power than an individual despite representing far fewer individuals.

The problem lies where a company can pressure a government into bending rules for it.

"

faerwin wrote:

A company has much MUCH more power than an individual despite representing far fewer individuals.

Fewer than what?

"

The_Impeacher wrote:

Freedom to peacefully protest is one of the few things remaining in the fascist Trump era.

John Lewis calls it "good trouble"

Still need proof about that fascist card. At this point your nothing more than a communist mouth piece, spewing buzzwords to dehumanise your opponents so violent actions won't cause a ruckus.

Also someone should teach ANTIFA about the virtues of peacefully protesting, because riots ain't working.

"

GusTheCrocodile wrote:

"

faerwin wrote:

A company has much MUCH more power than an individual despite representing far fewer individuals.

Fewer than what?

You need far more individuals to equal the weight of big companies than the amount of individuals that company represent (to obtain the same weight). This is what I mean.

In other words, I wouldn't want to see a situation where the voice of the population have no value compared to the voice of the industry. As such, even if the boycott is done with good intent, I disagree with it.

"

faerwin wrote:

You need far more individuals to equal the weight of big companies than the amount of individuals that company represent (to obtain the same weight). This is what I mean.

In other words, I wouldn't want to see a situation where the voice of the population have no value compared to the voice of the industry. As such, even if the boycott is done with good intent, I disagree with it.

Okay, but that disproportionate concentration of power neither starts with nor ends at boycotts. The company is using its disproportionate amount of power in everything it does every day. It's using it whether it's choosing to stop doing business somewhere because of abhorrent policies, or choosing to continue doing business there despite those policies. That is, politics doesn't only start when you step beyond the status quo. There is no neutral position; supporting the way things are is a political decision too. So we may as well take the political decisions that do some good.

But yes, we should also seize the means of production to reduce those unhealthy concentrations of power and wealth.

"

faerwin wrote:

On one hand, I think these boycotts are justified but on the other hand, I find it very very bad that industries just say "if you don't do X, we leave".

I think that I disagree with this boycott even if I agree that the reason for the boycott is justified...

It's nice to see you haven't sold out completely to the corporatist-SJW-media complex and retain the classic left value of compassion for American labor. That's something we have agreement on, believe it or not; I'm also very wary of corporatist influence.

"

Turtledove wrote:

I thought fascism was traditionally thought to be far-right? Although the uninformed in this thread have been tagging it on the left.

It is, but the "Overton Window" (actually an Overton Rotation) has the true, authoritarian Right holding such precious little power, and is so thoroughly persecuted, that
1. everyone who is actually right-wing hides under the guise of classical Liberalism (aka libertarianism) — or the anonymity of sites like 4chan — lest they be summarily unpersoned for their "fascist" beliefs, and
2. as the Left becomes increasingly authoritarian, genuine liberals are fleeing the Left in droves and temporarily allying themselves with anti-Left movements.

This has created a situation wherein seemingly liberal positions, in contrast to leftist positions, are ROUTINELY referred to, erroneously, as "right-wing." For example, small government is not a right-wing position — no fascist believes in small government, and even populist true-right action, such as the Heartbeat Laws, requires additional government. But because it's right of "center," principled liberalism is currently called "right-wing," if not "far right" (e.g. Carl Benjamin). This has been going on for long enough now that many prominent groups of ardent liberals have embraced the "right" label and have redefined "right" to mean liberal — and sometimes "liberal" to mean socialist. Such folk erroneously cannot imagine a "right" to the right of them (in reality, a liberal more liberal than themselves), so they miscatagorize ALL authoritarianism as leftism.

"

faerwin wrote:

On one hand, I think these boycotts are justified but on the other hand, I find it very very bad that industries just say "if you don't do X, we leave".

I think that I disagree with this boycott even if I agree that the reason for the boycott is justified...

My opinion would be that everyone is free to boycott what the fuck they want even industries. The problem would be if someone inside hollywood would disagree and would be forced still to boycott in order to keep his work.

It goes both ways also, citizens could just boycott anything those hollywood degenerate produce.

I will point out again that those laws are made to protect black people, planned parenthood and co were build to reduce blacks population.

"

GusTheCrocodile wrote:

Spoiler

that disproportionate concentration of power neither starts with nor ends at boycotts. The company is using its disproportionate amount of power in everything it does every day. It's using it whether it's choosing to stop doing business somewhere because of abhorrent policies, or choosing to continue doing business there despite those policies. That is, politics doesn't only start when you step beyond the status quo. There is no neutral position; supporting the way things are is a political decision too. So we may as well take the political decisions that do some good.

But yes,

we should also seize the means of production to reduce those unhealthy concentrations of power and wealth.

Consider the following: https://youtu.be/rq8y-ejapjE