4 ms·

It does suggest what so many non-progressives feel, which is that anything that is to the right of the extreme left is being targeted.

krapp 7y ago
But non-progressives never admit that anything on the extreme right deserves to be targeted, they only cry conspiracy when it is. When the left calls for violence, the right will claim it's because leftists are violent. When the right calls for violence, the right will justify it with the Second Amendment and call any attempt to stop them an attack on their free speech. What seems like a desire for fair and equal treatment is still applied under a double standard. It's a petty and immature way to see the world, and maybe non-progressives should look at getting their own house in order.
- brodouevencode 7y ago
  I'm not sure what your news sources are but I haven't seen anyone, right or left, call for physical violence to the other. There has been violence done "in the name of" the right or left, but Donald Trump cannot and should not be blamed for Charlottesville and Bernie Sanders cannot and should not be blamed for the 2017 Congressional baseball shooting. And if either side had they should be arrested, but it doesn't happen. And no, dog whistling is not a thing. That argument is a non-starter and is the sign of someone trying to warp the language to best fit their ideals. So for the things that are non-physically violent: the right certainly has it's problems but to suggest that the left, and especially the most extreme versions of it, isn't doing underhanded or otherwise despicable things (like when YouTube demonetizes channels or Twitter shadow bans accounts) is willingly turning a blind eye. At least with the NRA someone on the left knows where they stand. Google/YouTube/Facebook/Twitter and now maybe Reddit seem to be taking a much more selective approach to how they apply their rules. And even those rules are hazy at best.
  - cannonedhamster 7y ago
    If you haven't seen violence being called then I suspect you may not be paying attention to national media (not necessarily a bad thing). The President himself has called for violence numerous times at campaign rallies and against political rivals. There's been numerous shootings at churches, clubs, synagogues, schools, etc. that inflict real violence on people. You literally have to not pay attention to not see that politics has become radicalized. Whether things like the movement that inspired President Trump and his reverents or they are merely a symptom is debatable. The fact that /r/The_Donald still exists after the numerous brigading episodes, doxxing, and malice they've brought the platform speaks widely to the latitude that they've been given. I'm generally supportive of free speech, even speech I disagree with but The_Donald censors a ton of speech they disagree with and they aren't even really being heavily punished here.
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
mooseburger 7y ago
@krapp I don't believe anything deserves to be targeted for canceling. It's basically the main thing that polarizes me against progressivism, the obsession with speech control.
- krapp 7y ago
  The "obsession with speech control" polarizes you against progressivism, but violent rhetoric doesn't polarize you against conservatism? I would politely suggest that you should reassess your priorities.
  - rhegart 7y ago
    There is far more violent rhetoric from the left than the right for the first time in my life. Regardless, your comment is extremely naive because violent rhetoric will always be present in any political party. If only 1 in 10,000 are nut jobs then we have thousands of crazies in both political parties and in any other group or ideology that represents a large population.
    - fzeroracer 7y ago
      If there is far more violent rhetoric coming from the left, then you would expect to see the rise of said nutjobs committing murder and what not. Yet curiously, we've seen the rise of mass murders and hate come from the far right. How does that work with the idea that the left is somehow more violent than the right? Why is it okay for the right to normalize violence?
      - drak0n1c 7y ago
        The Colorado STEM school shooters were far-left. So was the "nutjob" who shot Republican lawmakers. The Dallas sniper was far-left as well. See where this type of argument leads? It's irresponsible and wrong to claim that people you disagree with are responsible for the actions of violent killers. The responsibility for killings lies with the killers themselves, and the failures of law enforcement.
mankeysee 7y ago
Ah right, American democrats, the "extreme left"
- drak0n1c 7y ago
  Howard Schultz was a moderate Democrat, and that didn't save him from the ire of the media and his former allies.

krapp 7y ago

But non-progressives never admit that anything on the extreme right deserves to be targeted, they only cry conspiracy when it is. When the left calls for violence, the right will claim it's because leftists are violent. When the right calls for violence, the right will justify it with the Second Amendment and call any attempt to stop them an attack on their free speech. What seems like a desire for fair and equal treatment is still applied under a double standard. It's a petty and immature way to see the world, and maybe non-progressives should look at getting their own house in order.

brodouevencode 7y ago
I'm not sure what your news sources are but I haven't seen anyone, right or left, call for physical violence to the other. There has been violence done "in the name of" the right or left, but Donald Trump cannot and should not be blamed for Charlottesville and Bernie Sanders cannot and should not be blamed for the 2017 Congressional baseball shooting. And if either side had they should be arrested, but it doesn't happen. And no, dog whistling is not a thing. That argument is a non-starter and is the sign of someone trying to warp the language to best fit their ideals. So for the things that are non-physically violent: the right certainly has it's problems but to suggest that the left, and especially the most extreme versions of it, isn't doing underhanded or otherwise despicable things (like when YouTube demonetizes channels or Twitter shadow bans accounts) is willingly turning a blind eye. At least with the NRA someone on the left knows where they stand. Google/YouTube/Facebook/Twitter and now maybe Reddit seem to be taking a much more selective approach to how they apply their rules. And even those rules are hazy at best.
- cannonedhamster 7y ago
  If you haven't seen violence being called then I suspect you may not be paying attention to national media (not necessarily a bad thing). The President himself has called for violence numerous times at campaign rallies and against political rivals. There's been numerous shootings at churches, clubs, synagogues, schools, etc. that inflict real violence on people. You literally have to not pay attention to not see that politics has become radicalized. Whether things like the movement that inspired President Trump and his reverents or they are merely a symptom is debatable. The fact that /r/The_Donald still exists after the numerous brigading episodes, doxxing, and malice they've brought the platform speaks widely to the latitude that they've been given. I'm generally supportive of free speech, even speech I disagree with but The_Donald censors a ton of speech they disagree with and they aren't even really being heavily punished here.
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]

mooseburger 7y ago

@krapp I don't believe anything deserves to be targeted for canceling. It's basically the main thing that polarizes me against progressivism, the obsession with speech control.

krapp 7y ago
The "obsession with speech control" polarizes you against progressivism, but violent rhetoric doesn't polarize you against conservatism? I would politely suggest that you should reassess your priorities.
- rhegart 7y ago
  There is far more violent rhetoric from the left than the right for the first time in my life. Regardless, your comment is extremely naive because violent rhetoric will always be present in any political party. If only 1 in 10,000 are nut jobs then we have thousands of crazies in both political parties and in any other group or ideology that represents a large population.
  - fzeroracer 7y ago
    If there is far more violent rhetoric coming from the left, then you would expect to see the rise of said nutjobs committing murder and what not. Yet curiously, we've seen the rise of mass murders and hate come from the far right. How does that work with the idea that the left is somehow more violent than the right? Why is it okay for the right to normalize violence?
    - drak0n1c 7y ago
      The Colorado STEM school shooters were far-left. So was the "nutjob" who shot Republican lawmakers. The Dallas sniper was far-left as well. See where this type of argument leads? It's irresponsible and wrong to claim that people you disagree with are responsible for the actions of violent killers. The responsibility for killings lies with the killers themselves, and the failures of law enforcement.

mankeysee 7y ago

Ah right, American democrats, the "extreme left"

drak0n1c 7y ago
Howard Schultz was a moderate Democrat, and that didn't save him from the ire of the media and his former allies.