Official War Room Awards 2017

[Limbo Pete]

Everyone knows it's me, we don't need an official tally.

Yeah fair enough

 

[Trotsky]

Thanks man. I try to be impartial, but definitely have a few blind spots where I can be somewhat tone deaf. Islam and the new far left mainly.

What's the "new far left"?

 

[Jack V Savage]

What's the "new far left"?

Shifting category that people on both sides use as a target to strengthen their centrist e-cred.

For example, a right-winger will say, "I'm OK with real liberals, but the new far left? Yecch!" Or a left-winger will say, "I'm a leftist, but this new far left? Yecch!" One needs more info to know who they're referring to (Bernie Bros? Any Democrats? "SJWs"? Anyone who isn't a fan of Trump?).

 

[Bald1]

What's the "new far left"?

The intolerant, hypocritical illiberal "liberals" who are rolerated by the left because, well, the enemy of my enemy is my friend. See the Bret Weinstein, Jordan Peterson and Lindsay Shepherd stories for examples.

And right on cue in comes @Jack V Savage with his head firmly planted in the sand.

 

[Fawlty]

The intolerant, hypocritical illiberal "liberals" who are rolerated by the left because, well, the enemy of my enemy is my friend. See the Bret Weinstein, Jordan Peterson and Lindsay Shepherd stories for examples.

And right on cue in comes @Jack V Savage with his head firmly planted in the sand.

So, privileged college kids?

 

[Bald1]

So, privileged college kids?

No college kids were involved in the Lindsay Shepherd inquisition, and the professors as well as administration at Evergreen were at fault. Kids don't come up with this stuff on their own.

 

[Cubo de Sangre]

The intolerant, hypocritical illiberal "liberals" who are rolerated by the left because, well, the enemy of my enemy is my friend. See the Bret Weinstein, Jordan Peterson and Lindsay Shepherd stories for examples.

And right on cue in comes @Jack V Savage with his head firmly planted in the sand.

Is that Scooby-Doo talk for tolerated?

 

[Jack V Savage]

The intolerant, hypocritical illiberal "liberals" who are rolerated by the left because, well, the enemy of my enemy is my friend. See the Bret Weinstein, Jordan Peterson and Lindsay Shepherd stories for examples.

And right on cue in comes @Jack V Savage with his head firmly planted in the sand.

Hmm. Usually get accused of having my head in the clouds. Are you disagreeing with me or just mad that I said it clearly?

 

[Bald1]

Hmm. Usually get accused of having my head in the clouds. Are you disagreeing with me or just mad that I said it clearly?

I'm not angry at all. The fact is there's a segment of the left that is becoming increasingly intolerant and illiberal. I agree they're not the majority, but disagree with your thinking they're irrelevant and of no concern. Just as there are Trump tolerators (a phrase you've used), there are people who tolerate these folks because they think them to be on their "side". I think of both as enablers.

 

[Fawlty]

No college kids were involved in the Lindsay Shepherd inquisition, and the professors as well as administration at Evergreen were at fault. Kids don't come up with this stuff on their own.

It's still campus shit. Christ, it's always those damn colleges, isn't it? Those are the prominent examples when this "far left" comes up. Granted, in Canada you guys have some weirder things going on than the US, but it has been like that my whole life.

You accuse Jack, plus me and others implicitly of this "enemy of my enemy" shit. But I'm on Weinstein's side ffs. All the way, actually. I'm on Peterson's side to a small extent, which is the importance of expression- the same stance as Obama basically. I don't follow him on his crazier stuff, obviously, but that bit is right. This person whose name is Lindsay also seems to have been treated poorly.

So what of that? Do you even listen when people on your little leftist traitor list express those kinds of things? I doubt there are even three posters in the WR, total, who think it's okay what happened to Weinstein or this person whose name is Lindsay. Peterson is a bit more controversial, but that's for good reason- he seems to have lied, numerous times, about that bill and about claims of others. For instance, when he says that people who wrote/pushed the bill are supporting claims that sex and gender vary independently. That's without going into his embarrassingly shitty arguments about objectivity and belief.

 

[Bald1]

Is that Scooby-Doo talk for tolerated?

I'm off this week and well marinated. I'm leaving it as is.

 

[HomerThompson]

It's still campus shit. Christ, it's always those damn colleges, isn't it? Those are the prominent examples when this "far left" comes up. Granted, in Canada you guys have some weirder things going on than the US, but it has been like that my whole life.

You accuse Jack, plus me and others implicitly of this "enemy of my enemy" shit. But I'm on Weinstein's side ffs. All the way, actually. I'm on Peterson's side to a small extent, which is the importance of expression- the same stance as Obama basically. I don't follow him on his crazier stuff, obviously, but that bit is right. This person whose name is Lindsay also seems to have been treated poorly.

So what of that? Do you even listen when people on your little leftist traitor list express those kinds of things? I doubt there are even three posters in the WR, total, who think it's okay what happened to Weinstein or this person whose name is Lindsay. Peterson is a bit more controversial, but that's for good reason- he seems to have lied, numerous times, about that bill and about claims of others. For instance, when he says that people who wrote/pushed the bill are supporting claims that sex and gender vary independently. That's without going into his embarrassingly shitty arguments about objectivity and belief.

 

[Bald1]

It's still campus shit. Christ, it's always those damn colleges, isn't it? Those are the prominent examples when this "far left" comes up. Granted, in Canada you guys have some weirder things going on than the US, but it has been like that my whole life.

You accuse Jack, plus me and others implicitly of this "enemy of my enemy" shit. But I'm on Weinstein's side ffs. All the way, actually. I'm on Peterson's side to a small extent, which is the importance of expression- the same stance as Obama basically. I don't follow him on his crazier stuff, obviously, but that bit is right. This person whose name is Lindsay also seems to have been treated poorly.

So what of that? Do you even listen when people on your little leftist traitor list express those kinds of things? I doubt there are even three posters in the WR, total, who think it's okay what happened to Weinstein or this person whose name is Lindsay. Peterson is a bit more controversial, but that's for good reason- he seems to have lied, numerous times, about that bill and about claims of others. For instance, when he says that people who wrote/pushed the bill are supporting claims that sex and gender vary independently. That's without going into his embarrassingly shitty arguments about objectivity and belief.

Quote me where I accuse you "of this shit". Hell, I don't even see Jack espousing this stuff. He's just more vocal in saying "there's nothing to see here". A viewpoint I disagree with.

 

[Jack V Savage]

I'm not angry at all. The fact is there's a segment of the left that is becoming increasingly intolerant and illiberal. I agree they're not the majority, but disagree with your thinking they're irrelevant and of no concern. Just as there are Trump tolerators (a phrase you've used), there are people who tolerate these folks because they think them to be on their "side". I think of both as enablers.

Here's the context of that term for me (Googled it because I like it but it doesn't sound like me):

The question was "how many friends have you lost this election season":

How Many Friends Have You Lost This Election Season?

"Zero. Not even close. Had some very good discussions with Trump supporters (or "Trump tolerators" might be a better term)."

So I used it to refer to people who voted for Trump but didn't like him, and it wasn't derogatory.

Anyway, I think that overly strident campus leftists are bad, but, yeah, I don't see them (or people like them) as a significant force in American politics (no prominent elected officials, not a significant voting bloc, I don't even see them online), and I particularly disagree with the attempt to conflate the entire left with them, which the "new far left" phrasing at the very least allows, and probably encourages.

And side note: When someone says I said something I don't remember saying that doesn't sound like me, I always look it up. So when I then challenge them to put up, I always know how it's going to go. Just a tip for any more trollish posters reading this.

 

[Bald1]

Here's the context of that term for me (Googled it because I like it but it doesn't sound like me):

The question was "how many friends have you lost this election season":

How Many Friends Have You Lost This Election Season?

"Zero. Not even close. Had some very good discussions with Trump supporters (or "Trump tolerators" might be a better term)."

So I used it to refer to people who voted for Trump but didn't like him, and it wasn't derogatory.

Anyway, I think that overly strident campus leftists are bad, but, yeah, I don't see them (or people like them) as a significant force in American politics (no prominent elected officials, not a significant voting bloc, I don't even see them online), and I particularly disagree with the attempt to conflate the entire left with them, which the "new far left" phrasing at the very least allows, and probably encourages.

Well, I usually go out of my way to differentiate between mainstream liberals and whatever is going on at the fringes. Why? Because as a socially liberal person I have very little in common with them. There's no conflating here, and I've been quite outspoken against the "liberalism is a mental disorder" contingent. I find it odd how defensive some get when every attempt is made to clearly state I'm not talking about the mainstream left.

 

[Jack V Savage]

Well, I usually go out of my way to differentiate between mainstream liberals and whatever is going on at the fringes. Why? Because as a socially liberal person I have very little in common with them. There's no conflating here, and I've been quite outspoken against the "liberalism is a mental disorder" contingent. I find it odd how defensive some get when every attempt is made to clearly state I'm not talking about the mainstream left.

Well, that's good. As we're not talking about a particular instance, there's nothing more for me to say on the issue. I just noted that the term Trotsky was asking about gets used in different ways at different times by different people, which is consistent with all of this, and I don't think that noting indicates any kind of struthian behavior.

 

[Fawlty]

Quote me where I accuse you "of this shit". Hell, I don't even see Jack espousing this stuff. He's just more vocal in saying "there's nothing to see here". A viewpoint I disagree with.

What the hell do you want, then?

"It was the wrong thing to do."

I have very similar views, if not identical ones, to Jack and quite a few others like Homer and Quipling, etc, when it comes to both the principles involved and how to react to them- how dangerous the views coming from the campus left actually are. If you're putting him in the "head in the sand", "enemy of my enemy" bucket, you're putting me and dozens of other decent liberals in there too. Where is this phantom fucking left anyway? The enabling ivory tower-dwellers that aren't doing their part to stop the swarm of scholarship slinging sophomore marxists! Christ and Christ again, does that fucking shit get old.

 

[Bald1]

Well, that's good. As we're not talking about a particular instance, there's nothing more for me to say on the issue. I just noted that the term Trotsky was asking about gets used in different ways at different times by different people, which is consistent with all of this, and I don't think that noting indicates any kind of struthian behavior.

A couple of things -

Do you believe there's a faction on the left, no matter how small or young, that is behaving outside of the norm of liberal behavior?

Is leftist a suitable term to differentiate between mainstream and fringe liberals?

 

[Bald1]

What the hell do you want, then?

"It was the wrong thing to do."

I have very similar views, if not identical ones, to Jack and quite a few others like Homer and Quipling, etc, when it comes to both the principles involved and how to react to them- how dangerous the views coming from the campus left actually are. If you're putting him in the "head in the sand", "enemy of my enemy" bucket, you're putting me and dozens of other decent liberals in there too. Where is this phantom fucking left anyway? The enabling ivory tower-dwellers that aren't doing their part to stop the swarm of scholarship slinging sophomore marxists! Christ and Christ again, does that fucking shit get old.

So I've never accused you of such behavior yet you took exception anyways. Cool.

 

[Jack V Savage]

A couple of things -

Do you believe there's a faction on the left, no matter how small or young, that is behaving outside of the norm of liberal behavior?

Is leftist a suitable term to differentiate between mainstream and fringe luberals?

1. Yes, of course.

2. No, but neither is "new far left." That's why I've warmed to "SJW" a bit, but it still gets used too widely. In general, we talk about these people ridiculously out of proportion to their numbers and influence, and I see that as a deliberate thing (at the higher levels--don't think you're personally doing for any political purpose, but I think you're biased because of the influence of people who are), similar to the way Bush's people made efforts to put SSM on ballots in 2004. People with the less-popular set of policy ideas would rather make the election yea or nay on SJWs than a battle over platforms.

But the issue is that if I say, "I try to be impartial, but boy do I hate those SJWs," does that give you an accurate picture of my views? It's not altogether inaccurate (I would say I view them with mild contempt rather than hatred, but you get the point), but I don't think it does, and I wouldn't say it. The people who do say it are communicating a view that is deeper than just the literal meaning of the words, and part of that is a belief that that stuff really matters to them emotionally, and that they do associate that with the further left. I've seen people who don't consciously describe themselves as Republicans claim that the Democratic Party as a whole is "anti-white." Hard to even wrap my head around that, but I see that quoted sentence as being in harmony with that kind of nuttery.