Trump will bring about a new era of prosperity

Conrad

wotsthat wrote: »

It's a bit disingenuous to blame your 'liberals' for the lurch to the right when you fully support the right wing policies and the people spouting them.

'Liberals' ignored public concern over things like mass immigration and privileging of self-framing victims for years. The lies and manipulation from the 'liberal' class are so endemic and entrenched that 'liberals' are profoundly unaware of them.


What you're seeing now is IN PART a response to having to endure years of being ignored and silenced by virtue signalling 'liberals'.




See that Newsnight piece I posted up by Rod Liddle, a life long Labour man

TrickyTree83

Herzlos wrote: »

So you're not at all worried about the idea that being anti-liberal may drive away a lot of the people responsible for making America Great? In that a some of them now aren't allowed into the country?

I appreciate that you don't care about the liberals fears, because you're a rich white man, but there's plenty of other people with deep, deep concern about what's going on in the US.

It's not liberals vs anti-liberal anymore. It's liberal-idiocy against the rest. I'd class myself and have taken tests which put me as a libertarian, sometimes slightly left of centre and sometimes slightly right of centre. I like some social policies but I disagree with full blown socialism. I would say I'm a classical liberal, that I respect your right to do, say and be whatever you want and hope that it's reciprocated.

So for example, I wholeheartedly disagree using the state apparatus to force me to recognise more than two genders. Biology says there's only two, so I'll stick to the science and the facts rather than interpretation. I don't care about the feelings of people who want to be recognised as a non-binary gender since I actively choose not to live in that fantasy world. That's my right under a liberal democracy, if they want to live in that non-binary gender world they should be free to do so too, but under no circumstances will I ever condone their ability to force me to recognise it and bend knee to their model of society. They will have to put up with the fact that they will not be universally recognised as a gender-fluid lesbian-trans whatever by everyone, and that to some, they're either a male or a female.

davomcdave

TrickyTree83 wrote: »

I'd temper that with, I don't think that we don't care about their fears or tears, just that we're far more pragmatic about reality.

This travel ban for instance, it's gone from being widely reported as a Muslim ban, to a travel ban. The people protesting appear to think it's a Muslim ban, because that's what they've been told. The reality of the executive order is different.

So whilst I too would condemn a ban on religious grounds (see banning of Jews because they're Jewish), this travel ban clearly doesn't apply to hundreds of millions of Muslims around the world, so it's clearly not a Muslim ban. Does this not suggest that there are some people in the world either too stupid to see the obvious or too lazy and just follow the narrative of their peers to fit in?

Calling Trump a warmonger couldn't be any further from the truth either. I don't want to defend Trump, I don't particularly like the guy, but the sheer stupidity from some people who claim to be the educated is astounding, particularly in the media perpetrating these myths. I can only conclude they're actually dumb as $#&! or it's an ideological agenda with nothing to do with peoples rights and more about getting one over on the opposition.

Whatever it is, unless they actually get their facts right before they protest then people will grow apathetic towards them, or worse, dislike them for it. And it's nothing less than they deserve in my opinion.

If you're interested in the 'travel ban' then here it is:

https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2017/01/27/executive-order-protecting-nation-foreign-terrorist-entry-united-states

Some of the language is quite interesting, for example there is quite a chunk of it that could have been written by The Guardian's leader writer:

The United States cannot, and should not, admit those who do not support the Constitution, or those who would place violent ideologies over American law. In addition, the United States should not admit those who engage in acts of bigotry or hatred (including "honor" killings, other forms of violence against women, or the persecution of those who practice religions different from their own) or those who would oppress Americans of any race, gender, or sexual orientation.

As many an undergraduate would agree I'm sure, it's great to see POTUS supporting LGBTIQ rights and attacking those that would seek to reinforce with violence the patriarchal heteronormative system in the United States.

Conrad

davomcdave wrote: »

What do you mean by Liberals exactly?

I can see the end of Socialism which I guess is a process that has been going on since the mid-70s and is starting to accelerate. If by Liberalism you mean liberal democracy and capitalism then I disagree. For a start you can't get rid of democracy through the ballot box by definition! It needs a gun and an angry person to wield it.

If by Liberals you mean current establishment US Democrat politicians then yes, I agree but it's hard to see how that applies to the Dutch or any of the rest of the world really as we don't get to vote or Trump or Clinton.

With respect the anti-'liberal', anti-PC tsunami is the political manifestation of the age.
This is a young, dissident movement propelling modern politics. People are sick of being lectured by smug, grandiose 'liberals' and told what to think and how to say it.
'ALT Right' is part of the new politics.


Jordan Peterson - an academic that explains in forensic detail the menance of the modern 'liberal';
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=04wyGK6k6HE




Milo - "BEING A LIBERAL IS BECOMING EMBARRASSING" 2017
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z7HLf1a1UDA&t=113s

wotsthat

Conrad wrote: »

'Liberals' ignored public concern over things like mass immigration and privileging of self-framing victims for years. The lies and manipulation from the 'liberal' class are so endemic and entrenched that 'liberals' are profoundly unaware of them.

What you're seeing now is IN PART a response to having to endure years of being ignored and silenced by virtue signalling 'liberals'.

A right winger doesn't like liberals - when was it ever different? They're just on your list of 'them' and always have been.

The voice of the right is being heard and is winning votes - be proud that people are being persuaded instead of meekly trying to abdicate some responsibility to those who disagree.

Farage, Le Pen, Trump, Wilders are on people like you Conrad. Please don't pretend it's because their feeling have been hurt by a nasty liberal.

Conrad

This British guy puts up an anti-dote to fake MSM news every other day.


Good that people like this are balancing the lies and manipulations spewed by the likes of Channel 4 News and the BBC.




Paul Joseph Watson


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JNu4xU9qOEM

Herzlos

TrickyTree83 wrote: »

I'd temper that with, I don't think that we don't care about their fears or tears, just that we're far more pragmatic about reality.

That's how it feels from the liberal side (assuming we're talking about the same thing) - the terrorist threat is insignificant any any response to it that hinders liberty is a self defeating waste of time. More people are killed by gun-wielding toddlers than terrorists in the US, so all of this "concern over things like mass immigration and privileging of self-framing victims for years." has been blown out of all proportion.

This travel ban for instance, it's gone from being widely reported as a Muslim ban, to a travel ban. The people protesting appear to think it's a Muslim ban, because that's what they've been told. The reality of the executive order is different.

The reality of the order is that it's a mess, and is targeted at majority Muslim states*, by a president who made a big deal about banning Muslims. There's even been talk of allowing exemptions/fast track access for Christians from these Muslim states.
So whilst the order doesn't explicitly call out Muslims, it's still very clearly a ban on Muslims. There's also been various reports of people** having to hand over things like social media passwords to find out their political views, before being allowed back into the country.

Tie that in with other orders like the weekly list of immigrants crimes, and you'll see that it's only going to be boosting anti-foreigner feelings. That sort of thing has been done in the past.

*Conveniently not including ones in which Trump has business ventures, or the ones which are the main origin of US terrorists, but that's irrelevant.

**Exclusively brown people, from what I can tell.

TrickyTree83 wrote: »

So for example, I wholeheartedly disagree using the state apparatus to force me to recognise more than two genders. Biology says there's only two, so I'll stick to the science and the facts rather than interpretation. I don't care about the feelings of people who want to be recognised as a non-binary gender since I actively choose not to live in that fantasy world.

Except biologists are quite keen to point out that there are various species which display behaviour indicating more than 2 genders in their societies, so biology definitely does not say there are 2.
Do you feel that people that don't fit the binary are delusional somehow?
I agree though, it's something that really doesn't matter, I don't see why anyone can care so much about things like which toilet someone can use.

CLAPTON

wotsthat wrote: »

A right winger doesn't like liberals - when was it ever different? They're just on your list of 'them' and always have been.

The voice of the right is being heard and is winning votes - be proud that people are being persuaded instead of meekly trying to abdicate some responsibility to those who disagree.

Farage, Le Pen, Trump, Wilders are on people like you Conrad. Please don't pretend it's because their feeling have been hurt by a nasty liberal.

by far the biggest killers and imprisoners of liberals have been the socialist countries like USSR, China, Cambodia, Cuba etc

better to define what your principles are and then measure the actual policies against them.
in seems that 'non platforming' is a characteristic of the left rather than the right

Conrad

Herzlos wrote: »

The reality of the order is that it's a mess,

So whilst the order doesn't explicitly call out Muslims,

*Conveniently not including ones in which Trump has business ventures, or the ones which are the main origin of US terrorists, but that's irrelevant.

**Exclusively brown people, from what I can tell.

.

Where were the mass social justice warrior protests at Obamas drone use and bombings, mainly against Muslims? Brown people.


This is why 'liberal' SJWs cannot be taken seriously, their inconsistency is only out done by their desire to be seen vocalising about trendy anti Trump marches for a bit of attention seeking


As I say they gladly welcome evil Islamic speakers to Universities but shun Richard Dawkins and many other genuine liberals

TrickyTree83

Herzlos wrote: »

That's how it feels from the liberal side (assuming we're talking about the same thing) - the terrorist threat is insignificant any any response to it that hinders liberty is a self defeating waste of time. More people are killed by gun-wielding toddlers than terrorists in the US, so all of this "concern over things like mass immigration and privileging of self-framing victims for years." has been blown out of all proportion.

OK, lets roll.

The terrorist threat is insignificant is it?

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

I find it unacceptable to be willing to risk the lives of people who were born here to facilitate the relocation of individuals to this country who would be better relocating to a country in a similar climate, similar culture, similar (if not same) language. In the West these poor people will be dependent on the state for their finances, food and shelter, they will struggle to find work and make their way in the world. Relocating these people in countries which more closely align with where they are coming from makes more sense for the refugees and more sense for the Western countries who are struggling to deal with it. By all means use the aid budget to finance this.

Edit: Just to back up this point here's a piece from a think-tank that supports this, they obviously are bias, but the argument holds up to scrutiny.

http://cis.org/High-Cost-of-Resettling-Middle-Eastern-Refugees

It's US focused, but it's reported the cost of per refugee in the UK is higher than that of the US due to us providing government housing rather than private individuals stepping in to accommodate them.

Herzlos wrote: »

The reality of the order is that it's a mess, and is targeted at majority Muslim states*, by a president who made a big deal about banning Muslims. There's even been talk of allowing exemptions/fast track access for Christians from these Muslim states.
So whilst the order doesn't explicitly call out Muslims, it's still very clearly a ban on Muslims. There's also been various reports of people** having to hand over things like social media passwords to find out their political views, before being allowed back into the country.

No, the reality of the order is exactly what the order says. Those are the instructions that the border agents will enforce. So if you come from the UK and you're a Muslim, you're not banned. If you come from Syria and you're a Buddhist, you're banned.

Stop inventing a story to suit your agenda, it's this behaviour that rallies people against your views and those of others who believe/create such stories.

America elected Trump, he has decided to implement a travel ban on 7 countries, it's none of our business and we absolutely should not be butting in and telling them how to run their country. In the same way Obama shouldn't have been butting in telling us how to run ours. Protest Trump if you must on the streets of the UK, protest on behalf of your brothers and sisters in America who think and feel the way you do, but do not attack Theresa May as an "appeaser" or castigate her for not presuming to tell POTUS what he should or should not do! That is pure and simple ideological point scoring, which to me speaks volumes about the type of people the protesters are and to the real reason they're protesting in the first place, let alone them referring to it as a Muslim ban when it's clearly, very very clearly, not.

Herzlos wrote: »

Except biologists are quite keen to point out that there are various species which display behaviour indicating more than 2 genders in their societies, so biology definitely does not say there are 2.
Do you feel that people that don't fit the binary are delusional somehow?
I agree though, it's something that really doesn't matter, I don't see why anyone can care so much about things like which toilet someone can use.

Oh, so hypothetically because some lizards or insects (I forget which) display characteristics such as asexual reproduction means that homo-sapiens, despite all the science to the contrary, can identify as an asexual gender even though they can't reproduce without an opposite gender? Meaning they can't do what they're claiming to be.

More stories.

Why are you even bothering to defend the indefensible? This is what makes Conrad and Milo look correct, that these stories are embarrassing. They make you look a fool, sure in nature there are examples of !!!!!exual relationships, there's examples of asexual reproduction, but not in our species!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

In our species there are two genders, there are sometimes genetic mutations which give people both sets of genitalia, and they posses both sets of chromosomal data, they are indeed both but this is a reproductive mutation. It's an ailment in the same way that cleft pallet is an ailment and in my belief the same way that men believing they should be women and vice versa is a mental ailment, which is another travesty in that we'd rather make these people go under the knife than try to understand why their brains are torturing them daily as they grow up.