Too late?

[Impenitent]

There's fear of the Other, which is deep in the human psyche, and then there are the very tangible triggers of economic inequality, resulting often in social dysfunction and educational breakdown, which also make people look for someone to blame (deepening suspicion of the Other) and for someone to be a saviour.
The rise of fascism in Europe occurred after the economic and social upheaval of the great depression when so many felt left behind and overlooked, and that is the soil for many autocratic regimes in modern history.

If you want to beat the neo Nazis, the white supremacists, don't give them the soil to grow. Make sure everyone has the chance for a living wage; make sure quality education is available to all; make sure social support is given to families at risk of generational dysfunction. In other words, dont allow your citizens to sink into poverty and ignorance, because then everyone else becomes Other and anger feeds ignorance, disaffection and sociopathy.



Sent from a tiny phone keyboard via Tapatalk - typos inevitable.

[Frelga]

If you want to beat the neo Nazis, the white supremacists, don't give them the soil to grow. Make sure everyone has the chance for a living wage; make sure quality education is available to all; make sure social support is given to families at risk of generational dysfunction. In other words, dont allow your citizens to sink into poverty and ignorance, because then everyone else becomes Other and anger feeds ignorance, disaffection and sociopathy.

Come to think, Soviets had literally all of that, plus a government enforced policy of mixing up ethnic groups. Actual Nazis weren't much of a thing, given that the memory of what they have was still fresh in my generation and probably the one after, but various nationalist movements sprang up the moment the pressure of USSR-wide authoritarian regime was removed.

What Putin is cultivating now is what feeds on the same dung heap - the idea of a national destiny based on some imagined inherent superiority and loyalty to the strong leader, with the national religion thrown in. Less genocide than the actual Nazis, so that's a plus.

Point being, no, education and social support don't magically fix prejudice.

Besides, what do we do in the meantime?

[Sunsilver]

Just wanted to throw in an interesting side issue here, that is one of the root causes of the whites getting antsy.

I've been working a lot on my family tree. All the generations previous to my own (boomers) had many, many children. Then the pill came along and changed the face of the world.

Now, when I was in university, one of the things I had to do for my ecology courses was model population growth. It was my first experience with computers and punch cards. I do NOT remember it fondly!

Anyway, replacement population, which is necessary to achieve population stability with ZERO growth is just over 2 offspring per family (the exact number depends on the death rate, and is slightly different depending on the country, or in biology, the species). Most of the developed, primarily white nations have fallen below that, and it's been that way for a number of years. What happens in biological terms when that's the birth rate? Well, it's an inescapable fact: you are going to go extinct in a couple of generations.

What countries/populations still have a high birth rate? Third world countries, especially the Muslim countries, and the non-white countries (India and Africa.) Look it up: the figures are out there on the Web for everyone to see.

If you want to feed paranoia in the white population, especially whites who don't fee comfortable around anyone whose skin is a different colour, or speaks a different language, just show them those statistics...

The so-called 'first world' nations are going to look very, very different in 50 to 100 years. If they want to continue to grow and prosper, their labour force is going to have to come from outside the country. And there's not a damn thing they can do to change it, except learn to get along with those who have a different ethnic background.

Personally, I am grateful to our former P.M., Pierre Trudeau, who foresaw this, and began encouraging immigration during his tenure in office. Not that it hasn't been a bit of a cultural shock for me, having grown up in a society that was 99.9% white... I remember boarding the Scarborough LRT late one evening in the 1990s, and finding I was the only white person in the car!

[Primula Baggins]

It'll take more than a couple of generations of 1.9 children per family to wipe out a whole subpopulation, Sunny. What will probably have more effect is interracial marriages/parenting, which is something else racists hate and fear. The time will probably come when having pale skin is a rare thing, but it won't be because white people died off; it will be because almost everyone is thoroughly mixed-race. "Race" won't even be a concept anymore, and I say good riddance.

[Frelga]

To follow that line of thought, the "white genocide" thing is even less logical than the norm for the white supremacists. IF you claim that some "races" are inherently superior to others AND you see that women choose different men over you THEN maybe you are not the pinnacle of evolution you claim to be?

But yeah, right now humanity has to deal with overpopulation, not extinction from low birth rates.

On that tangent - I learned recently that one of the arguments in support of standardized testing (like SAT) was that it would show that white people were naturally smarter than everyone else. It didn't.

[River]

I heard someone on NPR trying really hard to justify the white genocide thing. He refused to listen when it was pointed out that no one is trying to systematically kill white people. I think he just liked the phrasing because it sound so dire and scary, even if he's cheapening a term into drivel.

From a biological perspective, out-crossing is a really good thing. It keeps recessive traits to a minimum. Why do you want to that? Because so many of them are disabling or lethal.

[yovargas]

Can I point out that, as per the article I previously posted, there are people out there actually doing research on why people join, and why they leave, hate groups, so we don't actually have to guess and theorize? I'm sure there's no perfect answer given that humans are complicated and hard to predict but still, it seems that there are some answers out there.

It tends to be people who feel very isolated and who's lives feel purposeless and out of their control. Hate groups exploit that to make these people feel like they can have a purpose and be a part of something. (Much like religious cults, it occurs to me.) Muslim terrorists have been excellent at spreading the sense that the world is chaotic and out of control, which I suspect is largely why these groups are growing.

I found it particularly interesting that the researchers had found that many of these people didn't even have any particularly strong opinions about race or whatever until they joined the groups. They don't join the groups because they are filled with hate, they become hate-filled so they can belong to the group.

Given this, the idea that you can win these people over by giving them empathy, showing them that they aren't isolated, and helping them find a more constructive purpose in their lives makes a lot of sense. That there are groups out there trying to do just that and having success against the hate groups makes me feel pretty good about saying this approach is more successful than violence.

[Dave_LF]

Seems relevant:
https://www.theatlantic.com/internation ... sm/565076/

(ignore misleading headline)

[Frelga]

Did the study look into *why* they were isolated?

[Cenedril_Gildinaur]

Can I point out that, as per the article I previously posted, there are people out there actually doing research on why people join, and why they leave, hate groups, so we don't actually have to guess and theorize? I'm sure there's no perfect answer given that humans are complicated and hard to predict but still, it seems that there are some answers out there.

That article is always relevant, but not exactly welcome when we are dealing with people who are so reprehensible that we actually have people advocating initiating violence against them and getting away with it as if they weren't advocating criminal acts.

The last thing most people want to do is see the humanity in those they oppose, especially in as divisive an environment as we have today.

I found it particularly interesting that the researchers had found that many of these people didn't even have any particularly strong opinions about race or whatever until they joined the groups. They don't join the groups because they are filled with hate, they become hate-filled so they can belong to the group.

It makes sense. The appeal of such a group is "Join us and we will tell you why you failed. It isn't your fault, it is the fault of the hated other."

Given this, the idea that you can win these people over by giving them empathy, showing them that they aren't isolated, and helping them find a more constructive purpose in their lives makes a lot of sense. That there are groups out there trying to do just that and having success against the hate groups makes me feel pretty good about saying this approach is more successful than violence.

That's too sensible. We're not supposed to use sensible solutions in politics.

[IdylleSeethes]

Hi, Impenitent, Prim, and Frelga.

There isn’t much in the latter part of the thread I disagree with you about. On most things I disagree with you about, I understand your feelings. However, having the question posed is disconcerting. The Klan was the Democrat militia after the Civil War, righting perceived wrongs. Democrats were still voting former Klansmen into office in your lifetimes. Almost a year ago a Sanders supporter tried to assassinate the Republican Congressional baseball team and almost succeeded. Antifa is an international terrorist group widely supported by liberals. First Amendment rights are banned on many college campuses. I don’t know why the left thinks this pattern needs to be continued.

I’m a trained killer. I have fired 10s of thousands of rounds. I have pulled the lanyard on a gun that kills anything in a hundred-foot diameter circle. I have held a multi-barrel gun that fires thousands of rounds in a minute. I have never killed anyone. I have never injured anyone. I have never punched anyone. It’s doubtful any of these will ever happen. It is difficult for me to understand why violence is considered a solution to whatever you think you know is going on in this country. People inclined to hate are quick to buy into anything that feeds their hate. This is true on both side of the political spectrum. Before you take action, you need to confirm the "truth" you have been told is the truth.

I worked in DC for several years. I was the minority. I had to be careful about how I phrased things. I have been called racist. Some of you may remember that I raised a black daughter. I have been called homophobic. I shared an apartment with a gay man. Another gay man was the best man in my first wedding. I attended gay weddings before they were legally recognized. I lived in a heavily gay neighborhood. I employed gay people. But, I disagreed with part of the agenda.

Earlier in this thread I think someone mentioned Steve Bannon. I don’t like him. I don't read Breitbart's news. I don’t think Bannon should have had any roll in government. Some of you speak of him being a white-supremacist and member of the alt-right. In March 2016 Milo, someone else demonized by those who hate, and another Breitbart writer, wrote an article about the alt-right. A gay Jew and a Pakistani Muslim wrote an article describing the alt-right and took joy in making fun of it. The nicest thing they had to say was it was a group of juveniles trying to anger their parents. Mother Jones, and I think Salon, tricked most of the media and their gullible readers/listeners into thinking this article was the alt-right manifesto. Read the actual article:

https://www.breitbart.com/tech/2016/03/ ... alt-right/

So, a couple of conservative guys whose characteristics include being gay, Jewish, foreign, and Islamic, belittle the alt-right and that makes them the leaders of the movement, Breitbart its propaganda arm, and Bannon its promoter. People are so easily misled.

There are evil people. They need to be dealt with in some way. Spencer seems like a good candidate. I would never walk up to him and punch him, but I might hope that he punched me.
About a year ago, there was an alt-right gathering in Charlottesville that resulted in the death of an innocent woman. There was an interesting cast of characters.

Jason Kessler was the organizer. He was previously an Occupy member and supporter of Obama. Even the SPLC agrees with this. Their latest bio of him gets fuzzy before the November 2016 election, but I believe that he supported Hillary. It does agree that in November 2016, he and the Democrat Mayor had a very public major conflict.

In early 2017, Kessler started promoting himself as an alt-right leader. He ultimately organized the fatal rally.

The Democrat Mayor of course controlled things like permits to rally in public areas and the police needed for security. Before the rally, he told the police to not arrest anyone without his permission, according to the ACLU.

The Democrat Governor who is good friends with the Clintons and worked with them on many things, including being her campaign manager in 2008, being a board member of the Clinton Foundation in the period the NYT reported what seemed to a $45 million RUssian payoff to Secretary of State Clinton in the Uranium One deal. In later reporting this grew to $145 million. He was currently under investigation for other things. He also happens to be on the fringe of the Russia collusion investigation. I almost forgot to mention he was Bill Clinton’s manager for foreign campaign donations, the kind of campaign activity that really is illegal. You might remember the millions funneled from Chinese generals through Buddhist nuns and other avenues. It’s the case in which the media showed the Chinese leaving at the airport the night before they were to be indicted. I wonder who told them it was time to leave? Where did all of that money go?

Kessler held his rally. The alt-right showed up. Antifa and friends showed up. The city police lined up to separate them. It was rowdy, but the local police prevented any physical connection. That is, until the Governor told the Mayor to remove the local police because the Governor was sending in the State Police. The State Police lined up between the stage and the alt-right. The local police vacated the space between the opponents, and the State Police forced the alt-right into the alt-left. Who would have thought that would precipitate violence?

Doesn’t this seem like something scripted in Hollywood rather than an actual event? Didn’t somebody already make this movie?

The magnitude of the alt-right is hyperinflated by the media. Spenser, who seems like a leader, can draw a crowd of dozens like he did on his big day after the inauguration. 99.999% of conservatives want them gone more than you do.

I have no use for promoters of violence on the left or the right. I hope they all find a path to a prison cell. I’m not much interested in mob violence. I am also not sure the government is always separated from the mob enough.

I suggest you be more skeptical about what you hear.

[Frelga]

Idylle, I appreciate your thoughtful post. Given that I started some fairly controversial discussion in this forum, I feel I should make it clear that I am not planning on posting here in the future.

But also - because I don't actually have any impulse control - I'm aware that your background is more varied than many other posters but I wonder if you are able to appreciate the irony of telling someone who grew up in the late Soviet era to be sceptical.

[IdylleSeethes]

Frelga,

I ask for skepticism because a large number of us on both sides of the political spectrum build an illusionary world built on falsehoods. I can fault the media on each side for feeding into this. On the right, the group that follows InfoWars (Alex Jones) is willing to believe anything he says. Jerome Corsi, who became the force behind the birther movement, still has his adherents years after Trump pushed Obama into releasing his birth certificate and ending it. For this small group of people on the right, all they want to hear is confirmation of their prejudices. What amazes me more is that the NYT or WP can run a detailed story about Hillary's Uranium One scandal and no one on the left seems to care. The WP ran a story about the transfer of 500 metric tons of yellow cake uranium from Iraq to Canada after the Iraqi war and no one on the left noticed that might have been proof that there was a nuclear program. The NYT ran stories a couple of years ago about US soldiers being harmed from destroying Saddam's chemical weapons in Iraq. WMDs were a real issue in Iraq but some people have difficulty connecting these 2 things with them. Then there is the issue of where did Syria's chemical weapons come from? It escapes me why intelligent people so easily run away from facts that don't conform with the illusion they have created.

I'm familiar with the psychological phenomenon of people not seeing what they don't want to see, but that explains ignoring it, not runnng away from it. That means you see it and won't confront it.

All I am interested in doing is presenting facts to others. You should remember and may have noticed that whenever possible, I quote sources I consider to be on the other side of the issue. In my prior post I mentioned the SPLC, ACLU, NYT and maybe some others. I think the only conservative site that I mentioned was Breitbart, because at the core of all of the media misrepresentation of Bannon is the Breitbart article that they twisted into its opposite. Read it, really read it and you can see how distorted what the media says about Bannon is, based on lies they have told you. I know whenever I quote a conservative source it will be immediately dismissed. I'm dumbfounded when someone reacts in the same way about what the liberal media has to say.

These are example of what a conservative sees from the left, taken from the Kavenaugh hearings last week:

- A young women sitting behind Kavanaugh was claimed to be passing alt-right message during one hearing. There were millions of hits on the sites that claimed this on the internet. I don't recall any apologies after it was disclosed that she was Kavanaugh's assistant, born in Mexico, of Jewish ancestry whose grandparents were Holocaust survivors.

- Kamala Harris claimed Kavanaugh owned a comment she considered offensive statement in one of his research papers. The words she was attributing to him were those of someone else he was citing as an example of a certain line of thought. Some of the media apologized for passing on this nonsense, Politifact said it was false. So far as I know, Harris hasn't admitted her misrepresentation.

- Then there was Spartacus fighting his imaginary lions in the Roman arena. Apology?

- These were piled on to the imaginary claims like Kavanaugh once mentioning that there was a respected vein of thought, on the ability for the Federal government to take criminal action against a president, is settled in the Constitution with the impeachment clause, meant Kavanaugh was solely nominated to protect Trump. He has never stated on which side he falls. There were also unfounded claims about Roe and a few other things.

I think it is safe to say that most of the left accepted every bit of this as true. I think Scalia, as opposite as you can get from the Justices on the left, received at least 90 votes in the Senate. I fully believe the hateful rhetoric surrounding this nomination will result in Kavanaugh barely having enough votes. The perpatrators will think that is great, since they have convinced the left Kavanaugh is the devil incarnate and the only way to stop the creation of more demons is to vote against Republicans. Wouldn't be better, if the Democrats at the hearing could have just concentrated on real issues?

The huge gap between the left and the right can never be bridged if either side refuses to acknowledge the truth, but instead chooses to adhere to their illusions.

[yovargas]

This article seems relevant:

Americans Are Shifting The Rest Of Their Identity To Match Their Politics

Increasingly, the political party you belong to represents a big part of your identity and is not just a reflection of your political views. It may even be your most important identity.Asked what he thinks the implications of his research are, Egan said that he shies away from saying whether the results are “good or bad.”

I feel rather comfortable saying "bad". In fact, I think it is the most dangerous and frightening thing happening in our country right now.

[Voronwë the Faithful]

I certainly don't disagree with you, yov.

[Cenedril_Gildinaur]

That's a couple of brilliant posts IdylleSeethes.

[River]

There's a lot of bad blood in the Senate regarding SCOTUS nominations. Garland was refused any attention from the GOP, leaving the seat open more months after Scalia passed away. Then McConnell did away with the filibuster for SCOTUS nominations. All of this left the Dems enraged and eager to obstruct with any and all weapons left at their disposal. Kavanaugh's hearings were a guaranteed circus and I see no point in hand-wringing and deploring unless the root causes of the bad blood are also going to be addressed.

As for Booker's moment, he was told that if he released documents to the public he'd face sanction. When it became clear he was going to do it anyway and make a thing out of it, the hold on the documents was removed. This caused embarrassment to him and also spared the rest of the committee from having their bluff called.

[yovargas]

On the other hand, "you started it" is not necessarily the most mature response. (Though really they did start it.)

[River]

True. And someone needs to end it. Perhaps the ones in charge could step up and show some leadership on the matter?

[Impenitent]

This is a most interesting opinion piece, which reflects my own ambivalence on the topic of this thread.

It also touches on some thinking I've considered for some time but have felt reluctant to articulate, because I'm way over here, not living on the soil on which all these dramatic changes are occurring: that the shape of American society and the processes and rules on which it depends are being destroyed while the progressive/liberal sector hangs its hopes on Mueller and a possible impeachment.

https://lithub.com/fascism-is-not-an-id ... -to-fight/

Sent from a tiny phone keyboard via Tapatalk - typos inevitable.