The White House Hunger Games: ThErE aRe No EpStEiN fILeS

[Swholli]

You dont make yourself very clear at all you just argue for the sake of arguing - your logic itself is entirely inconsistent you seem to just justify whatever you feel like under the guise of you being open minded

this ^

whatever rule they want because it's the government and they make the rules. I don't like it anymore than you do but that's just how it is

That's a poor argument and you know it. There is no "they," it's you and me. We make the rules, or at least, we used to. If we're not going to stand up for anything, that's how con-men like Annoying Orange get into power and erode our democracy like this.

[Ad Bot]

[Swholli]

all anyone had to do was not be nasty about their ideas. as of now we've gotten to a point where everyones going to be nasty about their ideas and throw around nasty words to each other. but in 2015-16. when people were bringing up gamergate or the immigration crCIA in europe or even something as crazy as pizzagate. if we could have had a normal conversation about it instead of being called national socialists or white supremacists or tribals or conspiracy theorists or whatever ist or ism, this wouldn't be happening right now.

You're framing this like people just randomly got called national socialists in 2015 because they had "different ideas," but lets be real the "ideas" you're listing weren't exactly... neutral. Gamergate was a harassment campaign. Linking the 2015-16 Cologne assaults Wikipedia page is a dogwhistle. It's an old right-wing talking point that tried to paint all refugees as rapists, even though the vast majority of migrants/refugees were not involved and the far right weaponized the incident to push xenophobia. And Pizzagate? Literal unhinged conspiracy propaganda that led someone to bring a gun into a pizza shop. People didn't get labeled tribal/white supremacist for fun; they got called that because they were repeating tribal, white supremacist narratives.

Acting like the problem is "name-calling" rather than the content of those narratives just shows how much the far right has normalized itself online.

they still do it to this day. why bring up a white guy specifically? why national socialist stuff? this charged language has been a thing since 2015 and is exactly the kind of thing that has forgeted all of this up. i was willing to have a conversation until i was deemed an enemy simply because im white and i dont care.

You're not being "deemed an enemy" because you're white. You're being called out because of the content of the stuff you're defending. Again, Gamergate, national socialist-adjacent memes, anti-immigrant panic, all was steeped in racism and conspiracy. "Why white guys?" Because statistically, that's who was pushing those talking points. "Why national socialist stuff?" Because that's literally the movement that rode that wave. You weren't cast as an enemy because of your skin color; you got pushback because you parroted bigoted rhetoric and then acted shocked when people noticed.

i feel like you're imagining the absolute worse case scenario which would be me just going around and saying nasty words to people because i can, which couldn't be farther from the truth. all i was advocating for is that people have the right to say this stuff if they want. im not an idiot. i know how to treat people with respect and not make their lives a living hell. i wouldn't have the relationships i have or the jobs ive had if i was some spiteful evil person.

i just think basing your interactions with people of color based off these factors is weird. respect their culture and their history (obviously) but these people aren't untouchable. its okay to forget with each other every now and then if you like and respect each other

This isn't about imagining worst-case scenarios. It's about history, power, and context. You can't just sprinkle your freedom-to-offend on a culture you've never lived in and call it fun. Being "nice" in some parts of your life doesn't erase the harm embedded in racialized slurs, period. Respect isn't about treating people like untouchable saints, it's about acknowledging the weight of centuries of oppression, which you clearly don't have the experience to grasp.

[Swholli]

The founders put the first amendment into place exactly because of issues like this. The crown controlled printing, if you said something in a pamphlet criticizing the king you had your printing license revoked and were charged with libel.

Just in case you thought I was being hyperbolic:

The president also stated that he believes he should be able to pull networks' licenses if they air overwhelmingly negative coverage of him - rhetoric that even Republican Senator Ted Cruz called "dangerous as hell" and compared to "mafioso" tactics.

[Dr.Block]

I think you have a seriously rosey view of 2015/2016 if you think we would have had a "civilized discussion" about the current topics back then.

[mod-man]

well i have a response but im getting a database error lol

[Swholli]

well i have a response but im getting a database error lol

Oh that happened to me too, it's just forum jank, remove any special characters and make sure everything is web safe. It's usually quotation marks and em dashes the forum can't stand

[Goth77]

You dont make yourself very clear at all you just argue for the sake of arguing - your logic itself is entirely inconsistent you seem to just justify whatever you feel like under the guise of you being open minded

Sorry your having a hard time interpreting my posts correctly. I don't understand why you think I'm being inconsistent, but I will attempt deliver my message in a more simple approach:

I believe in free speech. I think what happened to Charlie was wrong. People who think that him being murdered is a good thing or funny are allowed to have that opinion, even if it makes them look bad.

More commonly now days employers monitor your social media and will fire or suspend you if you talk about politics or post something they don't like, that's just a sad reality we live in. I do not trust, nor like big corporations or the modern federal government.

That's a poor argument and you know it. There is no "they," it's you and me. We make the rules, or at least, we used to. If we're not going to stand up for anything, that's how con-men like Annoying Orange get into power and erode our democracy like this.

We are a democratic republic - and we do make the rules, to a certain degree. If you vote someone into a position of power and they abuse it, you have to vote them out. That's how it's supposed to be, and for most state & local level government this remains true. However, the modern federal government system pretty much does whatever the hell they want because it's grown out of control. Big federal government is exactly what the founding fathers were worried about and why they wrote the constitution to protect our rights. This brings to mind one of Charlie Kirk's speeches, where he talked about the second amendment and why it was put there - which is so that citizens should be able to protect themselves against the government and any other threat to their wellbeing or personal freedom.

maybe the issue is that yall are so used to far left or far right arguments, when someone shows up in the middle ground just using common sense it throws you for a loop? That's where all this political hate stems from in the first place, and it's exactly how main stream media use the two party system to divide people. people need to wake up and see thru this b.s

well i have a response but im getting a database error lol

Oh that happened to me too, it's just forum jank, remove any special characters and make sure everything is web safe. It's usually quotation marks and em dashes the forum can't stand

There are probably more than this, but these are the most common in my experience

[Sheepocalypse]

People being murdered the things they have said





People being fired for the things they have said