Another day, another shooting in the US

[Rob]

Blinge is the kind of guy who will insert himself into a conversation just to be able to say "fuck off, don't talk to me!" I suppose there is some comic relief worthy of appreciation there.

[austere]

While profiting from divide and conquer has always been a thing, it can be misleading to portray the resulting divide as "sides".

I did use quotes. The thing is there are two "sides", and they smarter ones among them are both playing the same game.

If one productive, conscientious, educated, ethical, social, self-sustaining, cohesive body of people are forced to fund their own displacement/replacement,
are socially conditioned by the political class to wear the shackles of political correctness to cause max cognitive dissonance,
suffer racial abuse in educational and employment allocation and treatment and are defamed as Nazi's, white supremacists and racists when the can take no more . . . you do not then have "sides".
You have a wronged party under attack from parasitical mutualism.

Strictly speaking, you might not be wrong, but what changes can you bring about by arguing with the people who have been ensnared by this narrative? They're never going to change their mind, until they're too old to matter. Better yet, what can be gained by attacking the third party they're dragging in to implement their strategy of disenfranchisement? In all these petty arguments your real adversary is never involved and that's the way they want it. But that's precisely what happens online and it's a spectacle for those running the show.

What we do have, is an unholy symbiosis between the state and the weak. In a word "socialism", in its various guises.

It's much worse than socialism, what we have now is feudalism on a planetary scale.

And please do understand that the casual "followed by out-grouping and threats of violence," comment presented in throw away fashion, is also not acceptable and will not be tolerated.
The violence is nigh-on exclusive to one "side", as is evidenced in yesterdays discourse in this very thread.

I think you took my cheeky remark (targeted at people threatening violence) too close to heart. You know exactly who I'm talking about.

Further, that "side" within this forum is quite easy to spot (as it is in society in general) by their poor form and behavior.
They are hamstrung and vicious from the weight of the shoulder chips they carry.

I know exactly who the foul parties are and avoid interaction with them.

No appeasement. Ever.

But isn't avoiding the elephant in the room an appeasement of its own? An establishment that arms, trains, funds and unleashes terrorist organizations around the world is not in the least bit concerned about the safety of its subjects. Instead of making that the primary subject, the "right" chooses to pit its fight on the third parties being dragged into this brawl. Which is a deliberate self-defeating strategy.

[Zen]

But isn't avoiding the elephant in the room an appeasement of its own?

I am well aware of the elephant in the room.
I am also aware that it can not be tackled head-on.
That elephant is quite safe from words and ideas that may be put against it in this, or any forum, I can assure you.
Pick your battles.

Instead of making that the primary subject, the "right" chooses to pit its fight on the third parties being dragged into this brawl. Which is a deliberate self-defeating strategy.

As "right" is in quotes, I'll leave that pass
By "third party", to whom do you refer?
Everyone from the base useful idiot, to the insufferable social-marxist, to greedy white pricks, to those who have been fooled into thinking that whites are "the problem",
to economic immigrants, to those "displaced" by war?
And how are they being "dragged in"? Do they not all have the the same covet purpose.
Yes, I am aware that they are pawns, but a pawn can be as dangerous as any other piece on the board. Never forget that and never forget, they came to the game willingly.

Is it a self defeating strategy to fight the "third party"?
When you cut off the head of the beast, its body does not disappear. Both have to be dealt with.
If you lived and or travelled in Europe, I think you would have a more urgent concern about the "third party".

Finally, historically those who have suffered the weight of the "body" of the elephant and have cast it off, are those who know exactly what to do with the head once they get there.

[BryanM]

The fuck is a "social marxist". Is that like a "pinball darwin".

Are you guys so desperate for new labels and names to call people you just have to make shit up now. The word you're looking for is "multiculturalist".

Bringing Marx and his avocation of public schools, a minimum wage (as opposed to the $0 maximum wage capitalists are working toward. (Yes, maximum, not minimum. Only wagies think a wage is the only way of acquiring currency.)), technology driving the restructuring of society, and the end of child labor into this is a complete non-sequitur.

Ocean comes in, baby comes out, can't explain that.

[Zen]

Obviously, the term I meant was "Cultural Marxist". The attempted repackaging of Marx for an unreceptive Western audience, by hijacking good intentions with bad ideas.
You know, lying?
But I don't need to explain the term to you, do I?

Thank you for bringing to my attention my error though and for the opportunity to expand on what I meant to say and what it means, namely;

Cultural Marxism.
The pretend and hidden champion for;
social justice, regressive-left, political correctness, third wave feminism, BLM, LGBTQIA, affirmative action, "empowerment", cultural relativism, , etc., etc

Cultural Marxism.
The pretend and hidden champion against:
Islamophobia, homophobia, xenophobia, various other phobias, white privilege, hate speech, hate crime, free speech and being "bold" in general.

Cultural Marxism.
Basically the farmed outrage of those who perceive themselves to be "oppressed", i.e Marxism, cynically channelled through the critical Theory of the Frankfurt School.

The "play" is the same; Manufacture outrage amongst those experiencing discontent. Follow through by promising equality of outcome (rather than equality of opportunity).

Your recent post on page 193 of the Bush thread explains this more succinctly;
"DSA style messaging wins elections. DNC style messaging loses elections. Amazing how "Trump sucks" is less effective than "fuck them, get yours".
Of course, if you strip away the socialist wrapping, what is actually being said is "fuck them, get theirs".

I think we all know where this leads but just in case, here are some examples, on the same page, also from yourself, of recent political "winners".

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-DL50WhLGyk btw., the article you link, has this wonderfull line; "The crowd chanted “Danica! Danica!” She raised her fist and shouted “Sí, se puede!”"
Priceless.
This is followed by a link is to defence attorney Larry Krasner, who has made a career suing law enforcement, defending BLM and "occupy" movements. Also a "winner", apparently.


Here is a bonus Virginia "winner," spouting Cultural Marxism 101; https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1OEvmcvCqog


Wait, wait, WAIT!
Isnt that guy - this guy? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MNXGgSVPgTI

Seems koscher

I hope this goes some way to make up for the unforgivable proof reading fail of my previous post and satisfies BryanM that "us guys" most certainly do not need,
nor ever have needed, more made-up, weaponized labels

If I have committed anymore oversights, please do let me know and I will correct them. At length.

[emphatic]

I like you, Zen. I like you a lot.

[Despatche]

Bringing Marx and his avocation of public schools, a minimum wage (as opposed to the $0 maximum wage capitalists are working toward. (Yes, maximum, not minimum. Only wagies think a wage is the only way of acquiring currency.)), technology driving the restructuring of society, and the end of child labor into this is a complete non-sequitur.

The ideal of automation eventually used to "free" society, etc. Not sure it'll work out too well, too many horror stories. We can't really guess at what aliens would do very well, but we can guess pretty accurately at what humans will do.

[austere]

If you lived and or travelled in Europe, I think you would have a more urgent concern about the "third party".

At the base level you'd be correct, that would indeed seem like an immediate danger. However, on closer inspection you will agree it's merely a symptom of the fact that you've lost control over your borders. This happened long before the destruction of Libya commenced, pouring out the contents of Africa into Europe deliberately. It happened when you lost control of your military, you lost control of your economy and you lost control of your legislature to a clique of powerful people who control financing around the world.

No matter how many problems you attempt to solve, they will create new ones to justify their existence and to drag you and your victims into deeper and deeper debt. Every economic "refugee" is created by their destructive policies world wide and comes to the country with zero money -- but also debt! The perfect vehicle to keep the artificial system afloat while they eye control over the last few remaining resources on the planet. They will put you in check with every counter move you attempt that doesn't put their system in danger. Every time you rise up against them, they will unleash the weak to bring you back down, by blaming you for all the misery they imposed on them.

Let me demonstrate what I mean with a concrete example, there is always a third party with these mental tricks of theirs. You've grown to despise the weak, because they always present objectives that hide behind their supposed welfare:

Bringing Marx and his avocation of public schools, a minimum wage (as opposed to the $0 maximum wage capitalists are working toward. (Yes, maximum, not minimum. Only wagies think a wage is the only way of acquiring currency.))

If you enter into an argument here, you might be immediately attracted to attack the idea of a minimum wage for the weak who may not deserve it. This is what I usually hear, but it's self-defeated, they will win through appeal to emotions. Do not accept the false alternative, it isn't either a minimum wage or a $0 maximum wage, there is a third alternative: Attack the very financial system that created their situation! Finance inflated the prices of all assets continuously, to the point where the average person must work all their lives just to buy the house in which they wish to live. If they didn't need to pay this servitude to the controllers of financial capital (ironically advocated by Marx himself, despite being associated with "capitalism") their existing wage would be well above what would be considered a "minimum wage".

If only people were wise enough to utilise this Judo move, they would regret bringing it up ever time and more awareness to towards the elephant in the room would be achieved. And maybe one day we would get a Ron Paul without the libertarian baggage.

Oh and,

technology driving the restructuring of society

Sorry to say but society was working just fine before the social engineering drained away so many people's happiness. In the drive to create utopia they've only created hell, much like an incompetent child when presented with a brush (technology) and an exquisite work of art (society)... or a perfect OST ruined by an arrangement.

[jepjepjep]

Finance inflated the prices of all assets continuously, to the point where the average person must work all their lives just to buy the house in which they wish to live.

Boom!

Exactly. Everyone is focusing their anger and energy on Right vs. Left, when the real problem is the a-holes who are at the top, and who happen to control just about everything via the purse strings.

Timely news article: "The Richest 1% Now Own More Than 50% of the World’s Wealth" http://fortune.com/2017/11/14/credit-su ... nequality/

[Specineff]

Aaaaand another shooting with five dead and seven wounded in Tehama county, California.

http://abc7.com/2647030/

Too bad it can't be labeled terrorism since it wasn't a foreigner pulling the trigger.

[Rob]

It never ends with you. If you're so terribly insecure about being a foreign non-citizen, to the point where you take delight in every shooting 30 minutes after it happens, go back to your own people - you know, the people you fled from. But of course we both know you won't.

"We really don't have any idea what his motive was at this time," Johnston said.

[Bananamatic]

Too bad it can't be labeled terrorism since it wasn't a foreigner pulling the trigger.

definitions of terrorism:
"The unlawful use of violence and intimidation, especially against civilians, in the pursuit of political aims."
"the systematic use of terror especially as a means of coercion "
What is political about domestic violence and then snapping and going around killing random people? What is someone who is fucked up in the head and violent trying to intimidate you into? Eugenics?

[Giest118]

Definitions are a white supremacist construct invented by the patriarchy to keep the black man down.

[Specineff]

It never ends with you. If you're so terribly insecure about being a foreign non-citizen, to the point where you take delight in every shooting 30 minutes after it happens, go back to your own people - you know, the people you fled from. But of course we both know you won't.

"We really don't have any idea what his motive was at this time," Johnston said.

Hey, bon-bon. Don't you realize that I'm calling out your hipocrisy when you do EXACTLY the same when it was a foreigner and you whine, bitch and moan about how they get here through diversity lotteries or whatever other way those people got here? For someone who labels others as "Low IQ", you're not that bright. Do you seriously believe that I rejoice in seeing innocent people get shot and killed, regardless of who pulls the trigger, in the same way you NEED (and probably derive pleasure and validation) to denote that it was a foreigner in your prior posts? Sounds more like you're the one dealing with insecurity; maybe it's time YOU got over whatever makes you be so bitter, bitchy and moaning. Perhaps it was because you got passed over in favor of a foreigner for a job promotion or hiring in the past? There is professional help for that.

Ah, and you show your true colors. Thank you, Rob. Well said; I won't, because your country needs strong, willing and hardened people, instead of delusional xenophobic butt-hurt finger-pointing whiners. So YOU stay pigeonholed in your little happy hamlet crying "Dey took er jerbs!" while myself and others bring the USA the strength it's seriously lacking thanks to that attitude.

Bananamatic: Satire. Hyperbole. Parody.

[ZacharyB]

Too bad it can't be labeled terrorism since it wasn't a foreigner pulling the trigger.

definitions of terrorism:
"The unlawful use of violence and intimidation, especially against civilians, in the pursuit of political aims."
"the systematic use of terror especially as a means of coercion "
What is political about domestic violence and then snapping and going around killing random people? What is someone who is fucked up in the head and violent trying to intimidate you into? Eugenics?

It's interesting, because, if it were terrorism, it's a kind of subconscious terrorism. The message this guy's shooting becomes: "we have guns and aren't afraid to kill if you piss us off/don't give in to our demands," which is more like the traditional definition of terrorism. But, they don't know if that's the message they're sending or not. Do they?

The question can be answered when you consider why these wackos are pissed in the first place. They just don't seem to be aware that when you "speak up" like this, the message extends beyond their own anger.

[Rob]

I'm calling out your hipocrisy when you do EXACTLY the same

No, not in any way "exactly the same". See, I'm not and would never be in Mexico commenting on what Mexicans in Mexico are doing or petitioning the Mexican government as a non-citizen of Mexico. What goes on in Mexico is none of my business. I'm in a country that was founded and built by my own people. I've never made a case that some nut going on a shootout isn't terrible or a symptom of a sick and dysfunctional society. But that's an American problem. We don't need Uzbekistan or Somalia or Latin America problems on top of United States of America problems.

while myself and others bring the USA the strength it's seriously lacking

You've abandoned your countrymen for a bigger paycheck. What you're willing to do is leach off of America's prosperity while complaining about the people responsible for that prosperity.

[Bananamatic]

It's interesting, because, if it were terrorism, it's a kind of subconscious terrorism. The message this guy's shooting becomes: "we have guns and aren't afraid to kill if you piss us off/don't give in to our demands," which is more like the traditional definition of terrorism. But, they don't know if that's the message they're sending or not. Do they?

The question can be answered when you consider why these wackos are pissed in the first place. They just don't seem to be aware that when you "speak up" like this, the message extends beyond their own anger.

Does that mean that they would be afraid to kill without guns? I bet it's not very hard to turn a place into a bloodbath with bladed weapons or a vehicle.

How many of these accidents are even reported when they don't involve guns and how many of them happen outside of the USA? Or do only shootings get the coverage and attention because guns are a controversial topic? Or are americans just more likely to snap and kill people? Or are they just more likely to use a gun because they're more available?

[Zen]

It never ends with you. If you're so terribly insecure about being a foreign non-citizen, to the point where you take delight in every shooting 30 minutes after it happens, go back to your own people - you know, the people you fled from. But of course we both know you won't.

"We really don't have any idea what his motive was at this time," Johnston said.

Hey, bon-bon. Don't you realize that I'm calling out your hipocrisy when you do EXACTLY the same when it was a foreigner and you whine, bitch and moan about how they get here through diversity lotteries or whatever other way those people got here? For someone who labels others as "Low IQ", you're not that bright. Do you seriously believe that I rejoice in seeing innocent people get shot and killed, regardless of who pulls the trigger, in the same way you NEED (and probably derive pleasure and validation) to denote that it was a foreigner in your prior posts? Sounds more like you're the one dealing with insecurity; maybe it's time YOU got over whatever makes you be so bitter, bitchy and moaning. Perhaps it was because you got passed over in favor of a foreigner for a job promotion or hiring in the past? There is professional help for that.

Ah, and you show your true colors. Thank you, Rob. Well said; I won't, because your country needs strong, willing and hardened people, instead of delusional xenophobic butt-hurt finger-pointing whiners. So YOU stay pigeonholed in your little happy hamlet crying "Dey took er jerbs!" while myself and others bring the USA the strength it's seriously lacking thanks to that attitude.

Bananamatic: Satire. Hyperbole. Parody.

Am I to understand that a non-citizen is telling a citizen to "get over" the concerns that citizen has for his country and people and that further, this same non-citizen is actually declaring the he is to "bring the USA the strength it's seriously lacking"?

Specineff, do you see other peoples countries as borderless neutral zones, to use as you please?

[ZacharyB]

Does that mean that they would be afraid to kill without guns? I bet it's not very hard to turn a place into a bloodbath with bladed weapons or a vehicle.

How many of these accidents are even reported when they don't involve guns and how many of them happen outside of the USA? Or do only shootings get the coverage and attention because guns are a controversial topic? Or are americans just more likely to snap and kill people? Or are they just more likely to use a gun because they're more available?

I definitely think it's more difficult to kill with bladed weapons, and maybe even a vehicle. With a knife, you actually have to go up to each person. A vehicle has to do the same thing, although it's faster and much more massive. Could be bedlam in a crowd. (You don't even need to target people when you go crazy... I remember watching a Youtube clip about a guy in a small town here who built an assault bulldozer because he felt that his auto repair business was receiving unfair treatment at town hall. He ended up wrecking millions of dollars of property before the bulldozer got stuck and overheated.) In any case, a gun is just easier to use, and they're all over the place here...

As for the second paragraph, I think it's a little bit of all of those things. Americans just aren't very, uh... secure. See bulldozer guy above. No doubt that we don't hear about every shooting/stabbing/car accident here... Although mass murders ("mass" being defined as more than two or three, I think the official definition is) will definitely get more coverage.

[Bananamatic]

Bananamatic: Satire. Hyperbole. Parody.

not sure what you mean but I hear this way too often
"why are only brown people called terrorists when they kill people" (because they shout allahu akbar and kill for a purpose when they do)
"why are only black people called thugs when they kill people" (because they engage in thug behavior when it happens, like stealing, acting hard and casual violence)
"why are only white people called mentally ill when they kill people" (because they had no criminal history or motive, the kid just snapped and shot up a school one day or had mental issues that were mostly ignored?)
why even argue about semantics though, does calling someone mentally ill instead of a terrorist or a thug make shooting up people somehow better as if it would make those people come back to life?

I do think that america could use more gun control though and open carry just seems retarded

[Mischief Maker]

why even argue about semantics though, does calling someone mentally ill instead of a terrorist or a thug make shooting up people somehow better as if it would make those people come back to life?

No, but it does have direct relevance to the type of policy response that should be enacted to prevent this from happening again.

Or you can just shrug, offer "thoughts and prayers," then cash your check from the NRA.

[Mortificator]

People like bulletmagnet (who I can tell actually cares and thinks) I can respect.

Oooh, I can almost see you pucker your lips and suck.

There's no special relationship between you and the people who founded or built the U.S. It's an appealing fantasy to someone who's own history plays to the tune of, "like PewDiePie, but unsuccessful."

[neorichieb1971]

This happened very recently. No word on the headlines, just a blurb buried in the deep reaches of the BBC website.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-41991397

[Rob]

There's no special relationship between you and the people who founded or built the U.S.

Yeah. We call these special relations ancestors.

[EmperorIng]

Though in all likelihood, both your and my ancestors abandoned their countrymen for a better paycheck. Though there is an apocryphal story that some of my paternal grandmother's ancestors fled Bavaria to come to America because they killed someone in a barfight. I like to think it's true because it makes for a good conversation piece.

This happened very recently. No word on the headlines, just a blurb buried in the deep reaches of the BBC website.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-41991397

This has been depressingly underreported. How much more mental health funding are they going to cut before psychos everywhere pick up semi-autos and shoot up places? Oh, wait.

[Zen]

There's no special relationship between you and the people who founded or built the U.S.

Yeah. We call these special relations ancestors.

[Specineff]

Am I to understand that a non-citizen is telling a citizen to "get over" the concerns that citizen has for his country and people and that further, this same non-citizen is actually declaring the he is to "bring the USA the strength it's seriously lacking"?

Specineff, do you see other peoples countries as borderless neutral zones, to use as you please?

No, I'm telling him to get over the butthurt that causes him to be racist and to justify it as "patriotism", and to stop being a finger pointer who doesn't actually do anything to address those supposed concerns, beyond spewing his phobic rhetoric to validate the butthurt.

Dude, I played by (and fulfilled) the unfair rules and conditions the government set for me to be here, so please drop the condescending "second-class human being type of talk". If this causes your ears to itch, well, sorry.

Respecful Snip

I was just doing the same as Rob when he highlights the race of the killer, as if it made a difference to the victims or their families, to call out his hipocrisy especially after he calls it disgusting when I do it. (Just when it's a US citizen as opposed to a foreigner). It was aimed at him.

[Rob]

I was just doing the same as Rob

You make the IQ studies real for me, bub.

Dude, I played by (and fulfilled) the unfair rules and conditions the government set for me to be here,

Rules and conditions - oh so unfair. There is nothing unfair about the rules and conditions 'our' government has set if you are here. Unfair would be a major improvement.

[austere]

Dude, I played by (and fulfilled) the unfair rules and conditions the government set for me to be here, so please drop the condescending "second-class human being type of talk".

I don't know dude, if I go over to a friend's they have some house rules like taking off shoes, I respect those and do so. As a guest, it should be distasteful to you to even think about complaining about it. America's house, America's rules.

[MintyTheCat]

America's house, America's rules.

....America's mass shootings too, sadly.