Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'The War Room' started by phoenixikki, Mar 13, 2018 at 10:27 AM.
Wish she would allow me entry
In a conversation about Southern and Islam you should be pointing the "literally Hitler" finger at Islam.
This is a bit tangential but I think a lot of the hostile/unproductive disagreements on this board stem from how everyone operates from a set of fundamental axioms we regard as inherently true but the conversations here almost exclusively happen at the level of subordinate beliefs that hinge on the validity of one’s axioms. If someone articulates a differening position on a subordinate issue, there is no viable explanation other than that he/she’s a STUPID FUCKING IDIOT LIB/CONSERVATARD NAZI/COMMUNIST!!! Meanwhile, what the other poster is saying is 100% logically consistent according to their own axioms (and people REALLY seem not to like talking about those)
Yeah, Churchill was a very bad person. I mean you can admire his resolve during WW2.
But he has committed so many crimes reaching to genocide people like to forget. He doesn't reach Hitler, Stalin or Mao level.
But he must be one of the worst people of the 20th century with the stuff he has done in Greece, Ireland, Kenya the middle east and especially India etc.
In regards to Southern what I mean for her Muslims are the Jews. And instead of the upper classes, she has made liberals the supporters of Muslims.
Its the same old playbook used by the Fuhrer. He was also just provocateur at the beginning many people made fun of.
Yeah thats what I meant her Jews are the Muslims.
Am I allowed to watch?
Nein. Islam is more supremacist than Souther ever could be. And their Jews are the actual Jews as well. You missed the mark here bud.
What is with you Jerrys and removing the Jews.
No need for that, it makes more sense to leave Jews, and Muslims to be Hitler.
I don't know enough about Christianity in the middle East to answer that. middle Eastern Christians aren't creating enough problems for me to have researched the differences.
The status of middle Eastern Christianity really doesn't have any bearing on the fact that the Muslims that you work with are not practicing the same faith as the ones she is talking about so it doesn't matter one way or the other. Your comment was just pointless deflection with no relevance.
Lol we know you don’t care about the country being turned to shit. It’s obvious
Wut? The conflict wasn't racially motivated.
Yeah, but she is picking a minority that she can blame all the problems on.
And are used by the Left to undermine and destroy your country.
You can't start a good white nationalist movement if you don't have a minority to blame your problems on.
I am not commenting if she is correct or not. Many people thought Hitler was right also. It is just that it is the same strategy.
Well, that's a new one.
I know. The Christians I work with aren't going on crusades or shooting up schools either.
I'm just trying to say that condemning all Muslims is unfair.
I would paraphrase what you’re saying as a “step on the road to Naziism” argument. I won’t call it a fallacy per se because there certainly was a progression but to make that argument you have to identify the point of no return after which something like Naziism is the only possible outcome. You have to do this because there were a lot of steps on this road that go back long before the events of WW2 and not all of them can be assigned the guilt of the Nazis.
There is also the possibility that the road may contain intersections with other roads and a given position may be occupied by someone who is on their way to somewhere else entirely.
Nobody is condemning all Muslims. That would be utterly stupid. What is being condemned here it's the ideology. And it's evil and rotten in some many levels no single rational person would defend it.
The comparison to Christianity is shit for two main reasons:
1. Islamic terrorism is a problem now. Bringing up the crusades that happened hundreds of years ago is another meaningless deflection.
2. The condemnable actions by Christians, even those mandated by the Catholic Church, were decisions made by corrupt men that actually contradict the teachings of the New Testament. You can condemn those men, but you can't hold Christianity responsible because its highest text promotes peace. The same cannot be said for Islam.
It is a bit unfair, especially when you view it as an attack on people. If you actually look at the tenets of Islam though and condemn it as an institution, I see nothing wrong with that.
Milo absolutely acts like an asshole in this video. There is no reason for him to make a public spectacle out of shitting all over someone who obviously isn't a professional political commentator and isn't equipped to discuss the topic. HOWEVER, he does a pretty damn good job of explaining how Western Muslims are hardly even actually practicing Islam and explaining that he isn't condemning every individual who identifies as a Muslim. It's worth a watch if you're actually interested in the topic vice just defending people on the grounds that judgement is unfair.
This sums up my lengthy post much more succinctly.
Yeah, I am not 100% sure what you would call her movement can this be described as the Alt-Right?
If you so will Naziism and Alt-Right are both different versions of white nationalism.
With as of right now Naziism being the much more extreme one.
But before I misrepresent my point I don't think those people are Nazi's.
The Nazis and Naziism came to be in a unique part of history.
You can't really compare that to anything today.
It's just that they have used the same strategy to become an established political power in the 1920's.
It certainly doesn't seem to take too much prodding to get some posters to reveal that their political platform boils down to 'fuck white people.'