BF2S Forums Protesters

comet241 wrote:

I was going to respond with a list of references and points, but it's almost no use. You keep bringing up religious based offenders, and now anti-government terrorists.... and you're lumping them with the typical conservative. What's next? Using examples of what the nazis did as "evidence" that conservatives are violent protesters too??? Oh, wait. You already did.

I can see reading comprehension isn't your strong point. I never used examples of the Nazis. That was someone else. I also never said that the above people were "typical conservatives". They are examples of how the conservative viewpoint metastasizes into overt violence and how people like yourself disown them as individuals when they do something truly vile but embrace and support the religious and populist values they espouse to curry favor with them when it's election time.

comet241 wrote:

Now, that last one was almost unfair. Kinda like lumping timothy mcveigh with conservatives? Eh?

Apparently though it's not quite like lumping all protestors in with a few who throw things at cars.

comet241 wrote:

Now im not saying that the conservatives can't get down and dirty with the best of them, but, you seem to think that you have provided ample "evidence" to "show" that conservatives are just as bad. Instead, what you've done is generalize major events that have no relevance to the current conversation, or you bring far, far right-wing extremists into the mix with the rest of them.

No, actually I'm saying they're a lot worse. And I'm engaging in no more generalization than yourself; you use a few derbis-throwers as an ultimate example of protestors, I use violent right-wing social conservative terrorists as an example of how right-wing social conservatism expresses itself instead of protesting. Namely, physical violence or endorsing physical violence against others. Best example would be iamangry up there who gave us this gem:

iamangry wrote:

The hard hat riot... now that was a protest!  Here is one situation where the "silent majority" got noisy for once.  They beat the living hell out of those pussy hippy unpatriotic little shits that were protesting in all the wrong ways.  It just goes to show you that while burning the flag is your right, thats not gonna stop someone with a job from coming over and smacking you across the face with a wrench.

iamangry, I guess nothing says freedom like assaulting unarmed people. But I'm guessing you idolize the Hardhats because you yourself would love to beat up some "pussy hippy unpatriotic little shits" but are prevented from doing so because the survival instinct in what passes for your brain keeps screaming at you that this isn't the 1960's anymore and these days you run a good chance of getting curb-stomped by some teenage vegan in a black hoodie.

comet241 wrote:

I'll keep waiting patiently, or maybe i'll just do some research myself. Either way, i know the answer isn't going to come from you. Thanks.

No, the answer you're looking for definitley isn't going to come from me. You generalize and complain that others are generalizing. You conflate the actions of a few into the belief of many and tell others they can't do the same. You don't want an answer, you want a "librul protestors is all violent and stoopid" mutual masturbation session but so far you've only got one person willing to wank off to your shoddy premise. Me, I know I'm not convincing anybody that isn't all ready convinced here; I'm just in it for the amusement which has finally run out.

GorillaTicTacs wrote:

Dude, you're an idiot.  The Black Panthers are conservative in every sense of the word (being a mirror to the KKK), preferring violence to the movement espoused by the very liberal MLK, Jr.

Ted Kascynski, if you bothered to try to read his drivel about race and religion and how modern technology, thoughts and ideas were destroying society, was a conservative to a T as well.  I'll stay diplomatic and just call you "uninformed."

Damn, you're an idiot! I would point out the fallacies in your argument, but Comet241 already beat me to them. Are you just making stuff up now?

Black Panthers conservative. LOL LOL thats the funniest shit I've ever fucking read!

Last edited by theoneandonly (2007-04-06 18:38:30)

One thing is really interesting about American politics, things are so black and white. Republican or Democrat, liberal or conservative, pro-us or america hater.

The world is full of shades of gray people, to try and pin the black panthers or the unabomber as either lib or con is futile...

and that incredibly biased chart proves what again....????

nothing

Evieira had it right by saying we can't pin one something or another, but if i were a guessing man, i still wouldn't put black panthers anywhere near conservatives.

Please, read something, anything about the black panthers and you will realize how incredibly wrong you are.

here:
http://www.socialismtoday.org/104/panthers.html

or:
http://www.pslweb.org/site/News2?page=N … _ctrl=1261
(a great article on how you can be an anti-government revolutionary and STILL be a socialist... ie the black panthers!)

or:
http://www.marxists.org/history/usa/wor … -panthers/
(another great article detailing how a militant organization can also be strongly socialist... *gasp* just like the black panthers!!!)

never mind. you probably wont read any of them. if you still believe that the black panthers were a conservative organization, there is little hope for you here and you need to re examine some of your basic arguments, supplemented with a little history and background information.

When will you people learn that the crazy's don't represent the whole?

GorillaTicTacs wrote:

I never said Black Panthers weren't socialist

so, i take it you read my links? You are backing off of your previous statement. You did say that the black panthers weren't socialist, more or less, indirectly. You said earlier that the black panthers were, quote, conservative in every sense of the word.....

now, to be conservative, you pretty much can't be socialist. If you are socialist, you pretty much are liberal. so, yea, you said the black panthers weren't socialist.

And charts can be biased, especially when the side you dont believe in is conveniently labled "irrational". how nice for you, eh?

please, do some more homework and dont bring biased "charts" in to prove how ignorant you are anymore, it's getting old.

I've questioned your age myself. You argue something with "facts" that are, well, made up or just plain incorrect. The kind of incorrect that any person with a post-high school education should know is such.

either you are young, immature, and naive about the world.

or you are old, immature, and naive about the world.

I am hoping for the former rather than the latter. simply for your sake. Young and immature can be fixed. old and immature cannot.

the thread has been sucessfully derailed to the point at which the main topic is no longer even discussed. however, i feel the point has been made. even through tangent discussions. thanks for playing.

Hunter/Jumper wrote:

Being compared to a Nazi. What a feeble whorehouse trick.

Conservatives may not be nazis, but it is well accepted that the Nazis were conservative radicals.

comet241 wrote:

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,263860,00.html

A right way to do it and a wrong way to do it. Which is this?

Honestly, have you ever seen conservative protesters/demonstraters do anything like this? I can think of a handful of cases in the last year or so where liberal protesters/demonstraters have...

shameful

The right way would involve a pair of pliers and a blowtorch.

lowing wrote:

jonsimon wrote:

Hunter/Jumper wrote:

Being compared to a Nazi. What a feeble whorehouse trick.

Conservatives may not be nazis, but it is well accepted that the Nazis were conservative radicals.

Nazism

noun
a form of socialism featuring racism and expansionism and obedience to a strong leader.


 
Na·zism       (nät'sĭz'əm, nāt'-)  Pronunciation Key 
n.   The ideology and practice of the Nazis, especially the policy of racist nationalism, national expansion, and state control of the economy.


One definition has " a form of socialism" in it.......another has.......a policy of "state control of the economy" in it.


Explain to me how this is conservatism.

Liberals are socialists, and push for BIG GOVT. Sounds like you should love the Nazi ideology. Assuming you are part of the Arian race.

Either way. I dare you to find me where NAzis are conservatives other than in your own warped sense of reality.

Well done. notice he omitted this part

Who do you think went and laid the Nazis low ?
Is it liberals who do our fighting ?
Then why don't they ever want us to count the Military votes in a close election ?

You can bet that was no accident

Last edited by Hunter/Jumper (2007-04-08 07:55:17)

The OP said as his original premise that conservatives "didn't act this way" and challenged us to prove him otherwise.  Fair enough.  He left a lot open wide in that statement, as most terrorist causes historically have been "conservative" linked.

Generally accepted on the right of any given scale is centrist -> libertarian -> conservative -> fascist -> nazism.

BUT - We aren't looking at ECONOMIC factors, we are looking for the psychological factors of the membership.  Herd mentality, authoritarian submissiveness, authoritarian aggression, and conventionalism (compartmentalization).  Basically, how likely they are to hurt someone if the "rightful authority" says its ok.  How effective the "fear factor" remains with them when the society baseline returns to normal after a catastrophic event.  Another way to identify them is to see which groups they identify with and whether or not they believe their group is superior to another for no other reason then their membership.  Race groups, anti-anything groups, religious groups, etc.  To a conservative mindset there are only ever 2 types of people in the world, their group...and enemies.

Propoganda aimed at them takes heavy advantage of this, simply pay attention to Fox news for more than 30 minutes and you can easily peg the "fear inducing" statements as well as the "enemy reference" statements.  Their authoritarian submissiveness makes them very easy to manipulate on a number of levels, and the leadership of conservative groups often do not share anything in common with their followers, being able to use and manipulate their followers at will.  Once trust is established, simple statements (memes, talking points, slogans, etc) are enough to keep the followers in line and rabidly loyal.  The conservative mindset does not want to think, first and foremost, their lot in life is to DO for the good of their tribe.

Authoritarian aggression, another cornerstone of the conservative mindset, is the basic willingness to do harm at the behest of an authority figure, either implied (i.e. a bunch of frat boys beating up a homosexual) or via direct order (ie being ordered to "soften up" some prisoners for interrogation).

Conventionalism is sort of a lazy catch-all for the other parts of the equation.  This includes personality traits many conservatives share such as high work ethic, good ability to follow instructions, inability to see moral ambiguity, and love of traditional values.  If you ever hear the arguement "because we've always done it this way", this is an example of conventionalism.  The compartmentalization factor enters when two conflicting beliefs can exist in the same head and not need to be reconciled.  A common example of this is believing in "Jesus, Prince of Peace" and being pro-hawk at the same time, or how they can say they support the Republicans and "small government" at the same time.  Typically, this is how religious values are consolidated with their every day values...there simply isn't a conflict because the two sides are neatly in their own boxes and never reconcile.

Again, to be perfectly clear...SOCIALISM is an economic belief, as is CAPITALISM.  This is typically the "up/down" on any given scale.  You wanted to debate mentalities and what makes people throw things.  I promise you, throwing rocks at Rove's car had nothing to do with communism, it was a rebellion against authoritarianism and the propoganda minister that makes it happen.

Last edited by GorillaTicTacs (2007-04-08 12:16:02)

sad, does that stuff happen often in the UK ? here only the liberals act like retards.

So you let them ban hunting huh? lol well I geuss its true what they say " the past is a different country " maybe you should reintern Winston Churchill over here. He'd probebly desire it after the Iran situation.
We will trade you for Carter lol

comet241 wrote:

fighting over hunting? sad. I wonder why you label them conservative, though?

cause you don't tend to get leftist Liberals swanning about the country on Horse back terrorising small animals - that's the domain of the rich right winged conservative in the UK - they are protesting to "conserve" a certain way of life (namely one that favours themselves) hence the term conservative..