The False Moral Equivalency: Beware Of Those Who Go After Both Sides Of An Issue

Submitted by: bliznik 2 months ago in News & Politics


Trump's latest attempt to blame "both sides" is gaining steam, as evidenced by many news stories in the mainstream media detailing the many violent disturbances occurring throughout the day, instead of focusing on the murder committed by white nationalist James A. Fields.

His words echo a pattern of false moral equivalency to deflect blame by either..

   (a) blaming the victim (the victim is equally at fault); or
   (b) distracting from the criminal by pointing out that "everybody else" (everyone is equally at fault).

But Trump did not invent false equivalencies. FOX did not invent false equivalencies. False equivalencies have been a argumentation tool used by lawyers and poets for centuries -- they're just more common now.

So before you tout an equivalency (e.g. "Obama is just as bad or worse than Trump!" or "White supremacists are just as bad or worse than Islamist extremists!" or "The Avengers are just as bad or worse than Thanos!"), check yourself before you wreck yourself.

Here are some useful guidelines to follow:

(1) Compare actions, not people or groups of people
A person (e.g. Trump, Obama, Oprah) has done a multitude of things in their lifetime. A group of people (e.g. liberals, white people, cosplayers) are far more complex. The chance of your target audience completely missing the whole point of your sentence increases dramatically when you compare people against one another, since you're comparing a multitude of things against another multitude of things.

(2) Maximize commonalities between actions
Practitioners of the scientific method understand this as minimizing variables so that you only have one or two control variables that may explain why one action is different than the other. Opening an umbrella in the middle of a storm has a very different effect from opening an umbrella on a dry, sunny day. Driving a car through a crowd of protesters has a very different effect from thowing a waterballoon filled with paint at a crowd of protesters which has a very different effect from verbally calling someone a "nigger" or a "nigger-lover."

(3) Accept that all equivalencies are inherently false
All metaphors inherently describe two different things. So to call an equivalency "false" is always true unless the equivalency describes a math problem between two formulas. So understand that while your description may be a useful guide that allows your target audience to better understand your point, you're going to be a little wrong somewhere. Someone who disagrees with you may then criticize and attack your entire argument because of that flaw, but just admit that the flaw exists and bring the conversation back to the main point you were trying to make instead of diverging into "whether this equivalency is 100% accurate."
There are 105 comments:
Male 1,416
You MUST beware, because there would NEVER be such a thing as hypocrisy, would there?
0
Reply
Male 40,772
It took Obama 5 days to half-heartedly 'denounce' the violence that raged every single night in Ferguson.
But Trump was 'too slow'...

Ferguson was open and shut: violent rioters and looters were hurting people and destroying things.

Lee Park was less so: legal protestors were attacked by illegal violent leftists and BLM groups. As much as NO ONE supports the message the WP group brought? How can anyone justify supporting those criminals who used violence to deny them their legal and human rights?

-1
Reply
Male 7,943
5cats Oh look a deflection.  Boring.


I have one for you... Trump denounced the Spain terrorism attack the same day.  The same method was used in Charlottesvile but Trump couldn't denounce that the same day?  Why could that be?
0
Reply
Male 40,772
normalfreak2 He DID denounce it the same day, you just didn't like that he also denounced the violent leftists. You are a fucking liar.
-1
Reply
Male 1,798
I can easily sum up who's fault everything was with three words: people are assholes. A person (singular) is usually a decent individual (always exceptions), but people (plural), especially in large numbers, are hateful idiots.
0
Reply
Male 682
Trump's legacy will be the president who emboldens Nazis and racists.
2
Reply
Male 1,687
Who cares what the far left or the far right say there both responsible for horrendous acts of violence, and the president was correct in blaming both sides for any violence committed at any time they have a confrontation. 
0
Reply
Male 3,496
2
Reply
Male 3,496
daegog Trump already working on securing the nazi vote for the next election
2
Reply
Male 4,242
Every equivalency is absolutely true.
They say the Black Panthers are just like the whites supremacist, well they are.

To say feminism is cancer. That would be a metaphor. 
-2
Reply
Male 1,746
dm2754 

Women are just like cats.
Cars are just like guns.
Sharks are just like bears.
Coke is just like Sprite.

Yup, you're right. All of those are absolutely true. I wonder why I didn't see that before. 
4
Reply
Male 5,027
I see our local Nazi apologist is on here in force. I don't have the stomach for this today. I'm heading to the beach.
2
Reply
Male 40,772
One side was there legally, the other were criminals.
One side was attacked repeatedly by the other side while police did nothing.
Anyone who denies the violence of the alt-left in this case has serious issues, like blindness and lack of morality.
To blame the victims of the violence because you dislike their skin colour and message is deplorable.

Jim [email protected]

Antifa is OCCUPY with slightly less shitting on police cars and lots more violence.

This, exactly. Recall when the anti-fas burned and vandalized things to prevent a Gay Immigrant with a Black boyfriend who was speaking by invitation at a University? Yeah, same bunch, same police doing nothing, same politicians (the party) encouraging the violence from ONE side...
0
Reply
Male 20
5cats Do you denounce nazism publicly, here and now? You can answer with "yes" or "no" and using any more words like "but..." will mean you are with them. We are making just sure we know what side you are on. Finally, you have to pick a side.
0
Reply
Male 40,772
SquidCap Nothing to say eh? Well welcome to IAB anyhow.
0
Reply
Male 40,772
SquidCap Yes. Nazis are stupid and evil. They have never had my support and never will.
Happy now? No? Thought not.

Does 'picking a side' mean violating the rights of others through criminal acts of violence? In your mind?
0
Reply
Male 3,410
5cats hey canada cat. what is your motive.
0
Reply
Male 1,746
One side was there legally, the other were criminals.
One side was attacked repeatedly by the other side while police did nothing.
Anyone who denies the violence of the alt-left in this case has serious issues, like blindness and lack of morality..

See, this is the kind of statement that is so broad and vague, that I don't even really understand your argument or what you're comparing.

You're grouping "one side" as one single entity and comparing them against "the other" side, and you're grouping "the violence" of one side against "the violence" of another side. Which is why the argument gets confusing when you start comparing all the actions of a whole group of people against all the actions of another group of people.
0
Reply
Male 40,772
bliznik How is it in any way confusing? The MSM has clearly labeled it, even liberals should be able to figure it out. Honestly, what confuses you?

One side was legally there: the other was illegally attacking them. Simple! One side was lawful, the other was criminal. Easy!

The MSM says that ONLY the legal side is to blame for ALL the violence, no matter which side carried it out.

They also say that anyone who even mentions the violence of the illegal antifas are themselves defending the 'Nazis' and should also be attacked and silenced.

What part of this is hard to understand? There literally hasn't been an issue as obviously 'black and white' as this one in a decade...

0
Reply
Male 3,410
5cats wheres wilt chamberlain
1
Reply
304
5cats HAHAHAHAHAHA

We now have confirmation that the other side had permits allowing them to be there. HAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHA

There goes your ridiculous argument, asshole.

White Power
2
Reply
Male 40,772
pleasestop Not there, in other parks yes, but NOT THERE fuck-wad.
Grow up already. 
Face the fact: the WS had every right to be there in THAT park, it was legal. The assorted leftists did NOT have any right to, they were criminals even before they started attacking people. 
0
Reply
Male 1,746
5cats

You state "The MSM" as if all media has clearly labeled the Charlottesville incident. But that's not true. That's why the statement is confusing.

You can cite an article, and refer to how that article is misleading, or you can cite a group of articles with the same common thread, and refer to how that group of articles are misleading, but when you say "the MSM" I don't even know how to identify what you're referring to.

Let me just identify a single source--CNN--and look at its top story about Charlottesville. Here.

This is an article about how the ACLU was criticized about its free speech defense of white supremacists. That is not a story that says that white supremacists are to blame for all of the violence in Charlottesville.

Let me take the next top story. Here.

This is an article about how Democrats don't like Trump's "both sides" comment. Also not a story that says that white supremacists are to blame for all of the violence in Charlottesville.

So, yes, your argument confuses me.
0
Reply
Male 40,772
bliznik BBC, NBC and CBS all said there was violence by the counter-protestors, and lots of it. Several reporters were attacked by them, none were attacked by the WS.
The various counter groups were planning violence and nothing but since the day this legal protest was announced.

Both side were violent, do you deny this? Yes or no.
0
Reply
Male 1,746
5cats

At least one protester committed a violent crime and at least one counter-protester committed a violent crime.

That is certainly not how most people interpret the statement "both sides were violent." Most people interpret that statement to mean that the violence of the at least one counter-protester is equally as violent as the violence of the at least one protester. That interpretation I certainly disagree with, and that interpretation is the most common interpretation of Trump's words. That moral equivalency is false.
0
Reply
Male 40,772
bliznik I think the antifas were MORE violent and initiated most (not all) of the attacks. Does that make it a fact?

YOUR opinion is not more valid than mine. You OPINION is not a replacement for facts. BOTH sides were violent, period, end of discussion. All else is excuse-making for the violence of the leftists. That is what (and why) the MSM is doing exactly that.
0
Reply
Male 1,746
YOUR opinion is not more valid than mine. You OPINION is not a replacement for facts. BOTH sides were violent, period, end of discussion. All else is excuse-making for the violence of the leftists. That is what (and why) the MSM is doing exactly that.

The phrase "both sides were violent" can be interpreted many different ways. The most common interpretation is a false equivalence. Period. End of discussion. All else is excuse-making for the hate-mongering of the "Unite the Right" speakers. That is what (and why) you, Trump, and Breitbart, are doing exactly that.
0
Reply
Male 40,772
bliznik I disagree.
Yes it is possible that it means "both are EQUALLY responsible" but it can just as easily be divided up otherwise: 60/40 or 70/30, like that. It is not singular, definitively ONE meaning.

It is also a statement of FACT not opinion (which would be the division of responsibility: an OPINION not a fact!). It is without doubt that both sides were violent, and both sides were "prepared for violence" again without saying who threw the "first punch". So yes: both sides were (in fact!) violent. This is beyond question.

Who 'punched first' was undoubtedly the antifas. Dozens or hundreds of acts of violence before any retaliation from the WS side... simply BEING THERE was a crime, correct?

And the police sat there observing the one-sided violence until the WS fought back, under Democrat government's orders...

So it is a perfectly accurate and correct statement. ONLY the MSM can twist it to mean something other than that. Even when it was clarified? They STILL pushed the lies...
0
Reply
Male 1,746
5cats

You are correct that the words can mean many different things. That is a mistake.

You are also completely ignoring how most people who hear those words interpret those words. Just talking to people around me, both liberals and conservatives interpret those words to mean that both sides were equally culpable. That is why those words create a false equivalence even though the words can be interpreted many different ways.

Who 'punched first' was undoubtedly the antifas. Dozens or hundreds of acts of violence before any retaliation from the WS side... simply BEING THERE was a crime, correct?

Cite your source.
0
Reply
Male 40,772
bliznik Most people think that? Cite YOUR source! 
It doesn't matter how many think what, the question is: was it the truth or not. The answer is YES it was the truth. It was a statement of FACT. ANYONE who thinks there was ZERO violence from the antifas is a goddamn liar. To argue about was it 50-50 or 51-49 is... liberal.

And you deny that the antifas were there illegally? That they HAD PERMITS and permission to be there? That the only thing they sought was violent confrontation, and that's exactly what they did (while the police stood idly by and let them). Clearly you are ignoring the whole point here.
0
Reply
Male 1,746
Most people think that? Cite YOUR source! 

Just google "antifa just as bad" and google "antifa is worse than" and you'll see what I mean.

Clearly you are ignoring the whole point here.

Your point dilutes focusing on the worst actors, and distracts from focusing on the worst actors, so yes, I'm ignoring it.

Of course we should stop all protesters from being violent. But if one protester is attacking people with a car and another protester is attacking people with mace, I'm going to focus first on the protester attacking people with the car.

If one protester is attacking people with a gun and another is attacking with a knife, I'm going to focus first on the protester attacking with a gun.

Focus on the worst actors first, and then focus on those who are a little less bad, and then a little less bad, and then a little less bad, and you can actually get anything done. Distribute your efforts across all bad actors equally, and nothing gets done.

Your point is an effort to get nothing done. This is why people love the argument, "But everyone does it!!!" Because it encourages people to throw up their hands and do nothing.
0
Reply
Male 40,772
bliznik The 'worst actors' are the antifas, who broke the law and used violence to try to silence a legal, peaceful and rightful protest. They are far worse than the other side, period, that's all there is to say.

This doesn't make the WS side 'good' but not everyone there was 'a Nazi' ok? Don't believe the lies.

A single individual drove that car, unassociated with anyone else. He is a criminal, yes without doubt, but NO connection to the rest of the rally except his attendance. Hundreds of ORGANIZED and VIOLENT antifas mobsters were there specifically to create a violent confrontation. They intended to use violence, that's FAR worse than anything the WS side did.

One VS hundreds, I choose to blame the hundreds more than the one. How you self-justify doing otherwise is your business. To say they were equally guilty is to lessen the crimes of the various antifas organizations.
0
Reply
Male 40,772
YES when the alt-left is 10x MORE guilty of the violence? They should be 10X to blame!

But that's not what this post is about is it? It is the false justification for blaming the VICTIMS of violence, like liberal-leftists always do...

Mark Romano‏ @TheMarkRomano Aug 15

Two hate-groups fight each other in public. 
Only one side gets blamed. 
Why? 
Because the Media is part of one of the hate-groups.

-2
Reply
Male 3,410
5cats wow.
2
Reply
Male 1,746
But that's not what this post is about is it? It is the false justification for blaming the VICTIMS of violence, like liberal-leftists always do...

Actually this post is about avoiding false equivalences by focusing on actions that can be objectively compared instead of focusing on things like actions that cannot be objectively compared (e.g. a car driving over a woman vs. a bottle thrown by a rioter) or on people that cannot be objectively compared (right media vs. the left media)
1
Reply
Male 287
bliznik Maybe you need to update your knowledge of anatomy, bottles can kill people and if you throw it with full strength at someone's head the chance is pretty high.
-1
Reply
Male 1,746
Fojos You gonna bring a bottle to a car fight? OK, I'll be in my car. Come at me bro'
0
Reply
Male 287
bliznik have you even lived in real life? Is it hard to open a door and smash someone's head with said bottle? 
0
Reply
Male 1,746
Fojos The difficulty ramps up considerably when the car is on and is driving towards you at any speed above 5 mph. Try it. I'll wait...
0
Reply
Male 40,772
bliznik So... huh? Comparing a mob attacking a legal protest with a SINGLE PERSON committing a crime is a bad thing, yes?
Because obviously the organized mobs are far worse than the individual action, and to equate them would be stupid!

But that isn't what the MSM is doing and you know it: it is EXCUSING ALL the violence from ONE side and tarring with a broad brush ANYONE who disagrees with that falsehood.

There's your fallacy: to claim only one side (the ones who were there legally) is to blame for EVERYTHING the other side did. It is beyond FME actually, that would be to say they were equally to blame, they are not.
0
Reply
Male 1,746

But that isn't what the MSM is doing and you know it: it is EXCUSING ALL the violence from ONE side and tarring with a broad brush ANYONE who disagrees with that falsehood.

Again, I don't really know what the argument is here. Who is the MSM? Which action of the MSM are you referring to?

When you speak of "violence," which violent act? How many were done by the Robert E. Lee protesters and how many were done by the counter-protesters?

These statements are incredibly vague, broad, and confusing. It's more useful to have a statement that attacks a single news story or even a group of news stories that all share a common thread or a common theme. 

There's your fallacy: to claim only one side (the ones who were there legally) is to blame for EVERYTHING the other side did. It is beyond FME actually, that would be to say they were equally to blame, they are not.

Actually, I think blaming an entire group of people for the actions of one person or even a few of the people is also wrong. Each individual is responsible for their own actions. Each action can be compared against other actions. I think James Fields is responsible for his own actions and I think that each of the counter-protesters who committed violence are responsible for their own actions. When you start lumping an entire group of people together because of actions they took, some of which that committed an action and some of which didn't commit that action, that things start getting messy.
1
Reply
Male 40,772
bliznik So you agree with Trump that BOTH sides are to blame? Not exactly equally but for sure both are guilty of some of the violence, yes?
 Good.
0
Reply
Male 1,746
5cats

If by that you mean that Trump split all participants in Charlottesville into two factions: protesters and counter-protesters, and that he is saying that at least one protester committed a violent crime and at least one counter-protester committed a violent crime, then yes, I agree with that.

But that certainly is not how most people interpret the statement "both sides are to blame." Most people interpret that statement to mean that the violence of the at least one counter-protester is equally as violent as the violence of the at least one protester. That interpretation I certainly disagree with. If you total up all of the reported injuries that day, the injuries caused by the protesters outweigh the injuries caused by the counter-protesters. 
0
Reply
Male 40,772
bliznik Breaking the law to "prove your political point" is NOT a valid form of protest. Not when legal options were there, in place. This legal way was ignored by a MOB who was organized FOR VIOLENCE and nothing else.

If anything? The  MOB was 100% responsible for all that violence they instigated. Without the MOB there would be NO violence, correct? I didn't see any Nazis attacking police (like the Mob did...).

So the Nazis fought back hard and the antifas were a bunch of pussies, that doesn't make one side morally right at all. Either side. It still makes the side which instigated the violence and broke the law responsible for it, even if they cried all the way home to Mommy because "he hit me back!".
0
Reply
Male 1,746
5cats 

Again, a straw-man argument. Nowhere did I ever write that breaking the law to prove a political point is a valid form of protest.

So instead of reading my words and responding to them, you create a straw-man argument and rail against that. Which, I guess you're entitled to, but all of that railing is completely, 100% irrelevant.
0
Reply
304
5cats Alt-Left isn't a thing you idiot.

Alt-right is a self proclaimed name you idiots gave yourselves. Get that shit straight you idiot.
3
Reply
Male 40,772
pleasestop Just... stop already. You look stupider after every single comment you make.
I didn't think that was possible, that you could in fact look even stupider. But there you are, doing just that!
-3
Reply
304
5cats You literally parrot alt right talking points, that are easily debunked with facts. Not alternative facts that you idiots tout, but actual facts.
1
Reply
Male 3,410
pleasestop the FiveCat lives isolated deep in the heart of rural canada, so he has no referance point to any social issues. he gets all his info from the internet. and that is a tricky thing
2
Reply
304
5cats Who came up with the name alt-left then?

Researchers who study extremist groups in the United States say there is no such thing as the "alt-left". Mark Pitcavage, an analyst at the Anti-Defamation League, said the word has been made up to create a false equivalence between the far right and "anything vaguely left seeming that they didn't like".

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/15/us/politics/alt-left-alt-right-glossary.html?mcubz=0
2
Reply
Male 40,772
pleasestop You really are 'that stupid' eh? Good bye.
0
Reply
Male 5,475
The media is so deluded and pro-its-side that it can't see that there was actually violence from both sides as that video showed earlier here on I-A-B today.
1
Reply
Male 40,772
monkwarrior Neither can the typical IAB Liberal, they are willfully blind.
-4
Reply
Male 6,077
True. On the other hand, it's also true that if a group you don't like was marching, legally and peacefully, down the street and you and your friends started throwing bottles at them, the fact that you got involved in a fight is your fault. If they pull out guns and start killing your group then you were guilty of assault while they were guilty of murder. Absolutely yes, what they did was worse, but both of you carry at least part of the blame. The guy who ran his vehicle into a group of non-violent protesters is guilty of murder as well as multiple attempted murders. It would be humanly appropriate, and maybe even ***presidential*** (god forbid) for Trump to both specifically denounce that guy and to publically express condolences and sorrow for those who were hurt but I still have to say, as much as I hate to, that he was correct that there is blame on both sides. 
2
Reply
Male 1,746
broizfam

As I stated before, Trump was correct that there is blame on both sides. 

But he's never said that before in any terrorist attack, which is something he could have argued. I would argue that every terrorist feels justified in attacking a defenseless citizen because of some bad act that happened in the past.

Trump is essentially shifting the focus away from the murderer and towards the violent rioters.

Also, a counter-protester that throws a bottle isn't the same as a white supremacist who drives a car into a bunch of counter-protesters. Trump may not be saying that they're the same, but he is implying they are by talking about the bad acts of the counter-protesters when the press asks him about the bad acts of the white supremacist.  ...and his followers listen to him. So whenever anyone mentions James Fields, Trump supporters mention the violent acts of the counter-protesters as a counter-argument. They're both treated as equally bad by both sides.
0
Reply
Male 287
bliznik We should focus on the violent rioters on both sides because they're the ones who create this situation.

In any case, in most terrorist attacks, especially when committed by extreme left or an islamist, there is no other involved side. So why would he say this in other attacks?
0
Reply
Male 40,772
bliznik Bottles, pepper spray, clubs, flamethrowers, rocks, bricks... endless all-around violence from one side which the police stood idly by and allowed to happen...

But ONLY the ones LEGALLY there are to blame for all of it
If they weren't out there exercising their Constitutional and Human Rights? None of this would have happened. It is all their fault, they should be silenced, never allowed to speak or even be seen! That is the only justice the alt-left will allow.
0
Reply
Male 1,347
5cats Let's not forget the urine balloons and feces bombs from antifa.
0
Reply
Male 6,077
5cats As a Jew and as a human being, I honestly believe that that's what the Nazis and white supremacists should be allowed...nothing. As an American, though, I have to recognize their right to free speech and to voice their opinion. Note that I'm not asserting that all the marchers were Nazis. Might have been but I don't know.
1
Reply
Male 6,077
bliznik I'm don't think I agree that he's implying that they're equally wrong so much as he's failing to be clear. I certainly at least hope that's correct! I don't think he's particularly good at expressing himself.
0
Reply
Male 40,772
broizfam He was perfectly clear, the MSM mis-quoted and mis-attributed his words to deliberately make them sound like something they were not.
Just like... every other time!
-1
Reply
Male 1,746
I'm don't think I agree that he's implying that they're equally wrong so much as he's failing to be clear.

Oh, I agree with that wholeheartedly. Unfortunately, that vagueness can be misinterpreted many different ways by both Trump supporters and opponents.
0
Reply
Male 1,511
broizfam  He DID denounce the guy. 
1
Reply
Male 6,077
squidbush Good! I hadn't heard that.
0
Reply
Male 40,772
broizfam Of course not, you think the MSM will report ANYTHING positive on Trump, ever?

Hells no! Everything he does is bad or totally ignored. You should have noticed that pattern by now...

Trump thoroughly denounced the White Power people and all their beliefs... not good enough for the liberal-left though! Never will be.
0
Reply
Male 4,153
https://youtu.be/S3I71jqeKz8
0
Reply
Male 260
I seem to remember hearing about American Antifa on Utah and Omaha wanting to inflict extreme harm on nazi white-supremacists; (just Google 6th June 1944).

Did they lose?
-1
Reply
Male 4,952
mikesex They didn't lose. But the shoddy American education system has let us down. It's raised a couple generations filled with people who don't understand who the Nazis were and why they were at odds with everything an American should stand for.

-1
Reply
Male 4,242
squrlz4ever you mean a group of it  antifa being assaulted by US soldiers
0
Reply
Male 287
squrlz4ever To equate Antifa with those who fought against nazis in WW2 is stupid as fucking shit. Especially when you don't understand that Antifa are just as authoritarian, or "fascist" and physically assault and threaten anyone who doesn't agree with their ideology, even more moderate marxists.

Then again, you guys are from the new world and clearly have no real experience of anything.
1
Reply
Male 4,952
Fojos I wouldn't say this meme equates American GIs with the Antifa. It refers to them as "anti-fascists," which they most emphatically were.

In terms of my remark to Mikesex, yes, I guess I did accept his tongue-in-cheek characterization of GIs as Antifa. I took it as a facetious remark that served to make a point. I wouldn't get too worked up about it. I don't think anyone thinks Mike was saying that WW2 American GIs were all strident leftists.

I understand you're from Sweden. I lived in Finland for awhile and traveled a bit in Sweden. Pratar du svenska? Varifrån kommer du?
0
Reply
Male 287
squrlz4ever Göteborg. Neo-nazister är ett problem när de är aktiva. Men överlag så är Antifa och andra organisationer på extremvänstern ett långt större hot mot utomstående och allmänordningen. Inte ovanligt att dessa knivhugger och förföljer folk som är från deras "egna sida" om denna överhuvudtaget har någon kontakt med någon som röstar på SD (som för övrigt kan betraktas som mer "vänster" än moderata republikaner i USA).
0
Reply
Male 40,772
Fojos He is a hate-filled little troll, just ignore him like everyone else does...
-4
Reply
Male 3,410
5cats and you are a level headed canadian intellectual right?
0
Reply
Male 4,952
5cats What's the matter, 5Cats? In a grumpy mood today?
1
Reply
Male 1,511
Fojos Antifa considers Marxists fascist
0
Reply
Male 40,772
squidbush Marx is far too right-wing for them, it's true!
-3
Reply
Male 684
I do find it amazing in the UK at least Jeremy Corbyn was getting praised from his tribe for doing the exact same thing in Venuazala, Gov shooting protesters and arresting and executing people. A week later the same people are rightly attacking Trump for equating the two sides in the US. The mind boggles at the double standard...
0
Reply
Male 40,772
jayme21 They have no morality at all any longer. Whatever their MSM Masters tell them? That is what they believe.
1984 is their guidebook, they think it is a great idea!
-2
Reply
Male 4,952
One of the best quotes I've seen online recently:

When you frame Nazis as just people with different political views, you are legitimizing genocide as a political position.
0
Reply
Male 9,769
Go read breitbart comments. All it is right now is people saying Obama created the racial problem in America and / or BLM and Antifa are JUST as bad as the nazis and the KKK.

It's a scary mixture of bigotry, ignorance, and stupidity.
-1
Reply
Male 1,511
holygod Obama didn't create the racial problem, but he gave it a huge push in the wrong direction.
1
Reply
Male 9,769
squidbush I agree. He became a black president. Then he spoke out on black issues. That caused the white hatred to seethe for 8 years. Then a jackass reality show con artist came down an escalator and told them he was building a wall and getting rid of the mexicans and muslims. He was going to MAKE AMERICA GREAT (WHITE) AGAIN.  
0
Reply
Male 287
holygod If you don't think they are equally reprehensible you seriously need to educate yourself on their roots. Hint: start with Lenin.
0
Reply
Male 9,769
Fojos Vladimir? Did he found Black Lives Matter? You're right I do need to go back and re read my history book.
0
Reply
Male 1,511
holygod Yea! You don't remember the 1933 BLM marches in Russia? It was all over Twitter
1
Reply
Male 7,943
holygod No no, it's worse than that.  They are calling the KKK and  white nationalists LEFTIST.  LOL.  All Breitbart and that echo chamber does is say it's Obama's fault, and they are all Liberals.  Everything is the fault of the Left.
1
Reply
Male 9,769
normalfreak2 They do like to constantly bring up that the KKK was started by democrats. We have our own members here doing that megrendel and 5cats were doing it yesterday as if the political alignment of 100 years ago is more relevant than the political alignment today.
0
Reply
Male 1,347
holygod Truth in history sucks, doesn't it?
0
Reply
Male 9,769
scheckydamon truth in history doesn't suck. It's important to remember.

However, if I have to choose between aligning myself with the party that started the KKK 150 years ago or aligning myself with the party that all the KKK members are currently a part of I'll go with the former. 
0
Reply
Male 1,347
holygod I don't align with any party. I consider myself a conservative. I have to select a party when I registered to vote so I did choose republican at first. At first because when I moved from Florida, in Florida they have a closed primary system and you can only vote in your party's primary. I found out later that here in SC we have open primary's  and changed my affiliation to independent. What sucks here is on presidential elections, you cannot write in the candidate of your choice but have to use the printed (electronic) ballot. I personally supported and voted for Ben Carson but couldn't in the actual election.
Sooooo.... I don't pick either. Nazis = asshats. Seems like I've been saying that alot.
0
Reply
Male 7,943
holygod Well another thing is they (By they i mean our alt right friends) love to correlate Liberal with Democrat.  100 years ago Democrats were a party of many ideas.  Some were Liberal some were Conservative.  The Democrats had a large Conservative wing up until the Civil rights act.  They all bailed.  Most of the people that supported slavery in the Democrats were Constitutionalists It was in the Bill of Rights, etc.  That's a Conservative.  A Democrat is a political party.  A political party that has changed, that used to have Conservative ideals, Today's Democrats definitely lean left.  They aren't the raging "leftists" they are being portrayed as.
0
Reply
Male 1,347
normalfreak2 That's right. Liberal and Democrat diverged years ago. I think when you really, really talk to people heart to heart we find that we're not all that really different. I like to think folks are inherently good although at 61 years old I know better. I just hope when I go that folks remember me as a guy who cared and TRIED to do what's best for all.
0
Reply
Male 7,943
holygod The alternative fact sphere is ridiculous.  I can't believe people first believe what they read from those sites.....The propaganda is amazingly clear to me, but then again I'm dumb libtard.
1
Reply
Male 4,952
holygod I honestly don't have the stomach for it right now. Enough of those far-right and alt-right attitudes are seeping over here into IAB to make me ill.
0
Reply
Male 631
squrlz4ever I used to consider myself a Conservative on quite a few issues, but I don't even know where to situate myself in the political spectrum anymore.  
0
Reply
Male 4,952
faustsshadow Well, I can understand that. These are turbulent political times.

BTW, many months ago, I believe I treated you not very nicely regarding the question, Is America a democracy? I've been meaning to apologize.

I still strongly believe it's important for all Americans to understand and acknowledge that America is a democracy (an indirect democracy, to be specific). Recent events, with Americans marching in pro-Nazi demonstrations, only bolster my beliefs on the matter.

But I didn't need to be so haughty about it when we were disagreeing. So please accept a belated apology. I've been reading your comments in various threads in the months since and you have a lot of intelligent observations.
0
Reply
Male 631
squrlz4ever No worries - and thanks.  I try to practice (and teach my students) fairmindedness.  It doesn't mean that everyone's ideas are of equal merit, but that one should try to question one's beliefs and fairly consider opposing points of view.  There are many here, on multiple sides of issues, that practice this.  There are also several notable exceptions.  
1
Reply
Male 4,952
faustsshadow I didn't know you're a teacher. Go you. My mother is a retired U.S. History and Humanities teacher and (at the latter part of her career) a school district administrator. It sounds like you're doing a great job with your students. You're also the kind of IAB'er that we need more of.
0
Reply
Male 9,769
squrlz4ever Hey man. Nobody seems to be on today. Check out my debate with casaledena. I don't know that I've ever destroyed anyone's argument quite so hard, even 5cats. I need some other people to join in. ;)

http://www.i-am-bored.com/2017/08/ali-velshi-and-stephanie-ruhle-to-trump-advisor-brad-thomas-you-just-cant-lie-on-tv-brad
0
Reply
Male 4,952
holygod I saw it! I've barely been on this past week because I've been on a beach vacation and deliberately left my laptop at home. I read it on my email and exulted in your pummeling. I really wanted to ask Casa what the heck was going on: How did he get such wildly inaccurate numbers? Was he copying some conservative blog he follows? Was he parroting a Facebook post? How in Heaven's name do you get such a jabberwocky-esque mishmash of numbers? WTF?!
0
Reply
Male 1,511
0
Reply
Male 631
squidbush I've always been pretty close to the libertarians.  My dad used to say that the libertarians sound great until they open their mouths - unfortunately I find myself agreeing with that at times!
0
Reply
Male 9,769
squidbush I love a lot of their ideas. Then they start talking about dissolving the social safety net and ending regulation on businesses and it goes a little downhill for me.

I don't really want companies having 9 year olds making 50 cents an hour dumping toxic waste into a river.
0
Reply