3 ms·

So one one hand we have Nazi ideas[1] being platformed by the ruling political party which has barely disguised its support for ethnically cleansing the country

• scottyah 8mo ago
  The main cases I've seen against people on the left (non-exclusive) are: - Lots of them in Epstein files - Mass importations of unchecked non-citizens - Trying harder to look cool to Europe vs helping Americans - Overregulation (things like California Coastal Commission) - Massive fraud (LA -> SF bullet train, tens of billions for "homelessness" that don't go towards homeless at all, building permits, etc) - Antifa burning down 3rd party businesses for reasons unknown - Attempts to squash 1st amendment, particularly on gender Since you linked sites like the Guardian and Atlantic, I figured the bar was low enough that you can just google any of these points and find an opinionated piece of similar quality. The bubble I refer to is the fact that seemingly all you see is the bad on one side and good on the other. As easy as you claim one side are Nazis trying to kill off non-whites, the people on the other side claim the left is trying to force movie/music propaganda to eradicate all white people. Both sides have millions of posts from terminally online people wildly claiming outrageous things. Both "sides" have bad people. If you can't agree to that, you are in a bubble or just lying.
  • llbeansandrice 8mo ago
    > - Attempts to squash 1st amendment, particularly on gender explain yourself
    • scottyah 8mo ago
      Forcing other people to use desired pronouns, requiring new signs on all single-stall bathrooms. You'll have to Google it, you're not going to get a great argument/stance from me personally. I don't dive much deeper than the headlines/parts of my feeds where these are thrust upon me.
  • mrtesthah 8mo ago
    Especially when it comes to ethnic cleansing, peoples' terminally online claims don't factor in from any side; this isn't about partisans or discourse. We are talking about official government policy and statements. This is substantiated, without any constitutional precedent, and extremely dangerous. The equivalent actions on the left that you posed, increasing non-white representation in media, a) is not government policy and b) is fair assuming proportional representation for the existing 1 out of 3 non-white Americans. And the actual Biden policy allowing what you call "non-citizens" to enter the US is simply the international treaty for asylum seekers; these are all people going through the immigration system. Regarding my sources, ESIWeb is a European think-tank that rigorously and objectively evaluates claims. The Atlantic and The Guardian are respected for their journalism world-wide. These aren't op-eds; I have been following this story for a while and choose my sources carefully. There are a few other dubious items on your list--e.g., "Antifa" which doesn't represent mainstream Democrats, isn't an organization, and hasn't been linked to "burning down businesses". Epstein? At least a dozen people in this administration are implicated, with Trump being one of the principal pedophiles. "Massive corruption"? The list would be too long for this message if we got into the Trump administration.
    • scottyah 8mo ago
      It's the knee-jerk reactions to "look at the other side!" that makes me think you're in a bubble. Also your references to certain small groups on the right-side spectrum as the whole while claiming (rightly) that other small groups on the left-side don't represent the mainstream. I was just trying to give you a few examples as a starting point for research since you seem to be completely oblivious to them, I am not here to argue with you or back them up.
      • mrtesthah 8mo ago
        Guy, you're talking about groups that comprise social discourse whereas I'm talking only and specifically about the concrete policies and practices enacted by the Trump regime. The counter-examples you provided are not parallel mappings.