MENU

Reason.com

Free Minds & Free Markets

'Unite the Right' Ralliers to Descend on D.C., With Antifa, Black Lives Matter, and Other Counter-Protesters Waiting: Reason Roundup

Plus: TSA provides numbers on "Quiet Skies" spying and Marco Rubio's turn from Tea Party to nationalist

@IGF_News/Twitter@IGF_News/TwitterOne year after the violence that left a woman dead in Charlottesville, Virginia, the "alt-right" group that started the deadly ruckus is headed to Washington, D.C. This weekend "Unite the Right" plans to protest the "civil rights abuses" the group claims to have suffered in Charlottesville last summer.

The group had originally intended to return to Charlottesville, but the city said no. The D.C. rally will take place in Lafayette Square, just across from the White House, on Sunday evening.

All sorts of counterprotests throughout the day are planned as well. "A coalition of anti-fascists have reserved a portion of Lafayette Park to accommodate 1,500 people, as well as two other spaces in D.C., which each accommodates 500 people," reports Vice. "Another activist coalition, including Black Lives Matter, have reserved Freedom Plaza, half a mile from Lafayette Park, for 1,000 people." More information on the counter-events can be found here.

Unite the Right organizer Jason Kessler said in an event application permit that about 400 people were expected at his rally.

Uber and Lyft drivers have been debating in internal forums whether the surge-pricing rates will be worth it to brave the fray, The Washington Post reports. "Regardless of event, drivers are advised to follow all local laws but have the right to refuse service to riders who are disrespectful or who make them feel unsafe," Uber told employees in a statement. Airbnb has said the company "won't hesitate" to boot guests found to be part of the alt-right rally.

"The year since [The Charlottesville rally] has been difficult for the rogues gallery of Nazis and pseudo-Nazis who championed it," notes Adam Serwer at The Atlantic.

From the looks of it, the Nazis lost the battle of Charlottesville. After all, President Trump's handling of the aftermath of the rally, in which he said there were "very fine people" on both sides of the protest, drew bipartisan condemnation. The attempted rebranding of white nationalism as the genteel and technologically savvy Alt-Right failed, the marketing campaign faltering after the murder of the counter-protester Heather Heyer and the attempted murder of several others revealed to the nation the logical conclusion of Alt-Right beliefs and arguments. The bloody outcome of that day foiled the white nationalists' attempt to garner sympathy from the mainstream right, and in doing so, make themselves respectable.

But the Alt-Right and its fellow travelers were never going to be able to assemble a mass movement....And as an ideological vanguard, the Alt-Right fulfilled its own purpose in pulling the Republican Party in its direction.

As evidence, Serwer cites Trump administration ways—thae travel ban, the treatement of Puerto Rico after Hurricane Maria, the efforts "to make it harder for legal immigrants to become American citizens," to name a few—as well as commentary from such Fox stars as Tucker Carlson and Laura Ingraham. On her Wednesday night show, Igraham said that "in some parts of the country, it does seem like the America that we know and love doesn't exist anymore" thanks to "massive demographic changes [that] have been foisted upon the American people."

Ingraham took a lot of heat for the statement, but at least one fellow found it refreshing:

In response, Ingraham put out a statement saying "white nationalists, and especially one racist freak whose name I will not even mention," were "distorting" her words:

The purpose of last nights angle was to point out that the rule of law, meaning secure borders, is something that used to bind our country together....[M]y commentary had nothing to do with race or ethnicity, but rather a shared goal of keeping America safe, and her citizens safe and prosperous.

Ah, yes, the well-known "massive demographic changes" bringing in multicultural anarchist hordes...

FREE MINDS

"Mounting pressure from the political left to censor hateful speech may have unintended consequences," warns Erik Nielson in a New York Times op-ed. "'Hate' is a dangerously elastic label, one that has long been used in America to demonize unpopular expression. If we become overzealous in our efforts to limit so-called hate speech, we run the risk of setting a trap for the very people we're trying to defend." This can already be seen many times over, most recently with the Black Lives Matter movement.

By accusing Black Lives Matter of peddling hate, politicians effectively turned the tables on the movement, allowing lawmakers, in some cases, to strengthen protections for the police. Since 2016, several "Blue Lives Matter" bills have been enacted across the country, many of which seek to add police as a protected class covered by hate crimes laws. Following this logic, Black Lives Matter's opposition to police brutality is a kind of hate itself, from which the police require additional protection. Yet killings by police officers are increasing while line-of-duty deaths of police officers are decreasing.

It is difficult to imagine a more ridiculous outcome. But it speaks to one of the most serious perils of limiting speech: a measure to protect minority perspectives can instead be used to further marginalize them.

Meanwhile, Conor Friedersdorf at The Atlantic contends that democratic socialism could lead us to a similar place as the anti-"hate" laws.

FREE MARKETS

Marco Rubio once presented himself as a fan of limited government and free trade. Now he "fully backs Trump's trade war with China" and "warns of a lack of corporate morality and patriotism" in American tech, notes John McCormack at The Weekly Standard:

Earlier this summer, Rubio delivered a speech in Washington calling for a "new nationalism" in which he decried an "economic elitism that has replaced a commitment to the dignity of work with a blind faith in financial markets and that views America simply as an economy instead of a nation."

Rubio's nationalism is "the kind...admired more by David Brooks than Steve Bannon," notes McCormack. And while it may seem like an ideological departure for Rubio, it's not at odds with his actual record. As McCormack writes: "Most of the actual economic policies Rubio has been prominently fighting for in Congress—an expanded child tax credit to benefit the working class and the paid-family leave bill—are of the same type he has long promoted with Utah senator Mike Lee."

FOLLOW-UP

TSA officials told legislators that "about 5,000 US citizens had been closely monitored since March" as part of its "Quiet Skies" program, "and none of them were deemed suspicious or merited further scrutiny," the Boston Globe reports. A Globe investigation first revealed the existence of the program last week.

Tim Cushing at Techdirt isn't having it:

The TSA had to tail 5,000 people just to determine they weren't suspicious. That's the wrong way around, constitutionally-speaking. The government isn't allowed to snoop on people until it can find a reason to snoop on people. That's not how the Fourth Amendment works.

As noted here yesterday, the TSA's head honcho thinks the program is "very effective."

QUICK HITS

  • The U.S. dropped atom bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki 73 years ago this week. A Twitter thread from historian Alex Wellerstein explains about what people get wrong about narrative.
  • "White officers are no more likely to use lethal force against minorities than nonwhite officers," says Charles Menifield, lead author of a large new Rutgers study on the cops' use of deadly force in America. But black Americans are killed by police more than two times as much as Americans Generally.

Photo Credit: @IGF_News/Twitter

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  • Rich||

    The D.C. rally will take place in Lafayette Square, just across from the White House, on Sunday evening

    in the pouring rain.

  • Jerryskids||

    You concerned because you left a cake out?

  • Rich||

    Sheesh, Jerry -- How old *are* you?

  • Jerryskids||

    Probably just about the same age as anybody that got the reference. *cough, cough*

  • Rich||

    Hey, some of us are just, um well-rounded.

  • Mike Laursen||

    It's not just an oldie. In case you don't keep up with the latest trends, Donna Summer put out a hip, new disco version of the song.

    I know, I know. Disco sucks. Long live rock. But some disco is quite good. Everyone should give it a fair listen.

  • Rich||

  • Mike Laursen||

    That's New Wave, impertinent youngster!

  • BLPoG||

    It took so long to bake it...

  • Rich||

    TSA officials told legislators that "about 5,000 US citizens had been closely monitored since March" as part of its "Quiet Skies" program, "and none of them were deemed suspicious or merited further scrutiny," the Boston Globe reports.

    "The system worked!"

  • Conchfritters||

    The government isn't allowed to snoop on people until it can find a reason to snoop on people.

    Someone should tell the government that.

  • Rich||

    What?! And give the government a reason to snoop on you?!

  • Rich||

    Americans Generally

    Nice band name.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    'Unite the Right' Ralliers to Descend on D.C., With Antifa, Black Lives Matter, and Other Counter-Protesters Waiting

    This is kind of like Germany in the late 1920s and early 1930s, with all the street fighting between the Communists and Socialists (Nazis included) over who gets to rule Germany.

  • Rich||

  • Hattori Hanzo||

    Heavy emphasis on "kind of like". This is nothing compared to the pitched battles between pinkos and brown shirts in Germany.

  • perlchpr||

    Not yet.

  • Social Justice is neither||

    Only because one side is still voluntarily allowing themselves to be disarmed in places like Portland while the other shows up armed and spoiling for a fight while the police are restrained from keeping them apart by their lefty mayor.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    The street fighting in Germany started out piecemeal too.

    I said 'kind of like' because there are similarities and many differences.

    The Socialists and Communists fighting in Germany could smell a weak Wiemar Government.

    The Antifa think the Silent Majority will not support Trump trying to rollback Socialist policies. They are wrong.

  • sarcasmic||

    That's not how the Fourth Amendment works.

    Limitations on power depend on checks and balances, which have been replaced by deference. So that's not how the 4A works, because it doesn't work. Nobody in power gives a shit.

  • Rich||

    democratic socialism could lead us to a similar place as the anti-"hate" laws.

    Portland?

  • NoVaNick||

    I think the DemSocs assume that every place is like Portland, or Berkeley-there are lots of hipsters living in their parents' basements even in Alabama who would gladly come out and vote themselves free shit.

  • Longtorso, Johnny||

    "We don't want them giving us money. We want the government to take it from them by force so we feel powerful."

    Andrea Fraser aims to hold US museum boards to account
    The artist has compiled an exhaustive analysis of the political affiliations of trustees

    Clocking in at nearly 950 pages, the document is "a physical manifestation of this sort of scale of the intersection between campaign finance and cultural patronage and governance," Fraser says. The project began in response to Donald Trump's presidential campaign and Fraser's "personal sense of horror at discovering supporters of radical right-wing politicians serving on the boards of arts organisations with which I work", she writes in the introduction. One of the results she found most surprising was the level of support among board members for Republican causes: 32% gave mostly to conservative candidates or groups, and of the $212.4m total donations recorded, 42% ($89.2m) went to the same.

  • Rich||

    "personal sense of horror at discovering supporters of radical right-wing politicians serving on the boards of arts organisations with which I work"

    You mean, "with which I *used* to work", right? RIGHT?!

  • Cathy L||

    I missed the part where she said she wanted the government to take it from them by force.

  • Longtorso, Johnny||

    That comes after driving out the 'wrong' donors means they have trouble raising revenue. Go back to 'liberating' 4 year olds.

  • Cathy L||

    Well, I see I don't have to tell you to go back to making shit up, because you never stop.

  • Longtorso, Johnny||

    I'm not making that up, it is a perfectly reasonable prediction based on previous behavior of the left.

  • chemjeff radical individualist||

    "behavior of the left" = the behavior of the wackiest individual on the left, extrapolated to infinity

  • Red Rocks White Privilege||

    He wasn't making shit up when he pointed out your defense of pedophilia.

  • Cathy L||

    Yes, yes he was.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    Your position is that 4 year olds can give consent to sex with a 30 year old.

    If a 30 year old gets a 4 year old to consent to sex, then there is no crime.

    Age of Consent is designed to provide the immature brains of kids a checkpoint to adult tricks.

    I would love to get my 6 year old to consent to vote for Trump in 2020. I just offered candy and he said he would vote Trump.

  • Happy Chandler||

    Give it a fucking rest already. You keep standing by yourappeal to extremes, and repeating it over and over, and throwing it in totally unrelated threads.

    She's against statutory limits, and believes that cases should be weighed. If you can prove that a four year old can provide consent, you have a point. Otherwise, no, you don't.

    I don't agree with her argument, but you do not provide a good counter to it.

  • TuIpa||

    I always suspected you were one of her socks.

  • Happy Chandler||

    No, it's just really annoying to see the same stupid cut and paste thread throughout the comments.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    Chanandler bong, we see your copy and paste comments a lot.

  • Deconstructed Potato||

    radical right-wing politicians

    So, anyone with an R after their name, or who is assumed to be not totally on board with the "right think".

  • damikesc||

    How can anybody live without whatever "art" she craps out?

  • NoVaNick||

    A woman who lives in my neighborhood has her car emblazoned with all kinds of anti-Trump magnets, including one that says "Screw Trump and Screw Trump Voters", I also noticed an Antifa magnet on her car. Seeing that really made me want to spray paint Trump 2020 #MAGA on her back windshield in bright orange. Have no doubt she will be one of the counter protestors.

  • sarcasmic||

    Seeing that really made me want to spray paint Trump 2020 #MAGA on her back windshield in bright orange.

    That is a major difference between the right and the left. You may want to do that, but you restrain yourself. People on the left have no problem with vandalism.

  • Cathy L||

    Did this lady vandalize NoVaNick's car as part of this story? Or did she just trigger him by putting a magnet on her own car? Now he "has no doubt she will be one of the counter protestors" even though chances are any given antifa-magnet-sporting driver, even in NoVa, will be sitting on their ass this weekend at home just like every weekend.

  • NoVaNick||

    As sarcasmic pointed out, I did not take any action and her TDS display did not trigger any rage, or love for Der Trump. It was more amusement-like wouldn't it be funny to see her reaction if I did that?

    Also, Antifa's big thing is anonymity, so I doubt any serious Antifa member would drive around with a magnet identifying themselves. Antifa are supposedly anarchists, but this lady is in all likelihood a statist who wants big government to lock up people she doesn't like and give her free birth control and abortion on demand.

  • Sigivald||

    I've found that most people calling themselves "anarchists" in the black bloc style are not actually anarchists.

    Not even close, in fact.

  • Weigel's Cock Ring||

    You just know there's about a 99& chance that she works for the Department of Education or the Interior or one of the many other federal agencies that shouldn't even exist.

  • NoVaNick||

    I saw her driving by and she looks rather young-probably live in parents' basement and works part time as a barista, if she works at all...

  • Conchfritters||

    The U.S. dropped atom bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki 73 years ago this week.

    And since then we have nuked ourselves over 900 times. Sorry Nevada and New Mexico.

  • perlchpr||

    As someone who lives in Albuquerque, I demand reparations.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    I can SEE you all the way from Georgia.

    You always LIGHT up the room, dont you?

  • General_Tso||

    Reason hasn't quite figured out how to blame this on Trump, Trump supporters or the 'Alt-Right' yet?

  • Rat on a train||

    They were dropped on foreign minorities.

  • Longtorso, Johnny||

    More fun times in evangelical land
    Lead pastor Heather Larson and the board of elders said they would be out by the end of 2018 in light of mistakes they made in handling allegations of sexual harassment against former lead pastor and church founder Bill Hybels. Larson admitted that "trust has been broken by leadership," especially with the women who brought forth accusations against Hybels, and apologized for the distrust with which leadership treated them.

  • Jerryskids||

    Uh-oh. Trump said some shit about the NFL players refusing to kneel for the national anthem and you're just ignoring the troll? He ain't gonna like that. He's gone like 3 days in a row without getting everybody squawking about his dick-waving and he's getting twitchy. If he doesn't get some attention soon, he's going to have to shit on Betty White to get his fix.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    The U.S. dropped atom bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki 73 years ago this week. A Twitter thread from historian Alex Wellerstein explains about what people get wrong about narrative.

    "First, it's important to note that by the summer of 1945, Japan was in a bad state militarily. It had lost much of the territory it had taken, its navy and air force were in shambles, its ports were mined, and it was being subjected to ruinous conventional bombing by the USA."

    Operation Downfall
    Soviet-Japanese War 1945

    The Japanese military still had millions of Japanese troops in China and Japan. Furthermore, every man/woman/child was expected to defend the Emperor. Operation Downfall explains how the US Military was planning on invading Japan and what the casualty expectations were based on excellent intelligence and the home island invasion of Okinawa.

  • Restoras||

    Dropping nuclear weapons on Japan ended the war and saved more Japanese lives than Allied lives. Besides, we were already systematically raining fire on their wood and paper cities that created firestorms just as destructive as Fat Man and Little Boy. That said, I do hope they are never used again.

  • Sevo||

    Restoras|8.10.18 @ 9:57AM|#
    "Dropping nuclear weapons on Japan ended the war and saved more Japanese lives than Allied lives."

    In a just world, every August 9th would have the Japanese thanking the US for the several millions of Japanese lives saved by the use of the nukes.
    And to anyone still whining that they should not have been used, I ask the same question to which I've never gotten a realistic answer:
    "What was a more humane alternative to ending the war?"

  • NotAnotherSkippy||

    It's funny that he whines about lies of omission and completely neglects to mention casualty estimates from an invasion of Japan. Instead he trots out a little chestnut that "saving lives" was a talking point after the war.

    This camel nose under the tent kind of revisionist history is insidious.

  • Restoras||

    Certainly saving Japanese lives was not the primary concern of the allies - though it remains a fact that saving the one million allied casualties (probably a low estimate, like most of the casualty estimates from the Pacific campaign and the primary concern of the allies) saved several multiples of Japanese lives given the tenacity of the defense on Okinawa, and the willingness of the civilian population to commit suicide instead of surrender.

  • NotAnotherSkippy||

    The duty of the US was to win the war and protect the lives of US citizens. Full stop. This modern, borderless concern over casualties is a fiction that we can afford in these peaceful times, but that doesn't stop it from being a fiction.

  • Restoras||

    Yes, I agree, the duty of the US and the Allies was to win the war and save allied lives. I agree that 'borderless concern over casualties' is a fiction in the sense that it did not enter allied thinking about whether to use nuclear weapons. However, that does not change the fact that millions of non-allied military and civilian lives were also spared - and is a good thing, at least to me.

  • Mickey Rat||

    The US military forces involved in the invasion of Saipan were rather horrified about how the Japanese forces treated their own civilians. Using them as decoys for ambushes, forcing them to commit suicide or outright murdering them to prevent the shame of the civilians being captured.

  • Hank Phillips||

    Well... there is also the matter of communist divvying and looting of Germany since May of 1945. The Soviets had not yet declared war on Japan, and the Allies had by August decided it was better to secure surrender in a flash with weapons designed to take out totalitarian governments than to have communist division and looting in Japan and Manchukuo. See "Fear, War and The Bomb" by P.M.S. Blackett

  • Scarecrow Repair & Chippering||

    The Japanese were still killing 100,000 Chinese every month, even at that late stage.

    Every Japanese peace initiative up to the end included freezing the status quo, with Japan not occupied and still controlling large swaths of China, and all of Manchuria, Korea, Taiwan, Malaya, Indochina, and elsewhere.

    As final proof of how fanatic the Japanese militarists were, one need look no further than the junior officers who stole one of the Emperor's two recorded surrender speeches and tried to foment a palace coup.

    The last two island conquests, Iwo Jima and Okinawa, resulted in as many US casualties (wounded, dead, missing) as Japanese dead (99%), and were the direct inspiration for predictions of millions of US casualties and millions of Japanese dead. Authorities ordered so many Purple Heart medals in anticipation that those stocks have not been exhausted yet.

    It may never be known how much the two atom bombs and the Russian army contributed to the Emperor's decision. But to call the atom bombings unnecessary only shows ignorance of the most basic numerical facts.

  • NotAnotherSkippy||

    Yes.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    The two atom bombs ended the war as expected. Lucky too because we only had 3 bombs by September 1945.

    More were on order though.

  • Restoras||

    Well said, Mr. Scarecrow Repair & Chippering

  • SIV||

    The Nips are fucking hard core.

  • Antilles||

    If Japan had nuclear bombs they wouldn't have hesitated to use them against us, or agonize over the decision 73 years later. The US has turned into a nation of pussies.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    Most of us dont agonize over it. Its Lefties trying to skew the historical record and public opinion.

    Even the Japanese largely respect American for having been the only nation to kick their ass so completely. The Japanese know they fucked up and admit it.

    Japanese are cool to me, being an 'Amerikahito' and all.

  • NotAnotherSkippy||

    Amerikajin.

  • Sigivald||

    I suspect Soviet agitprop from the Cold War has a lot to do with it.

    Unsurprisingly, of course.

  • perlchpr||

  • Longtorso, Johnny||

    Just your daily reminder that a Muslim terrorist who was spiritual mentor to a leader of the Womens' March was running a training camp for school shooters.

  • Cathy L||

    So poignant

  • Longtorso, Johnny||

    Afraid the kids would get shot before you liberated them?

  • Cathy L||

    I'm afraid they'd get shot before you put them in jail for sending each other nudes.

  • Longtorso, Johnny||

    Cathy, you know damn good and well the argument was about protecting kids from adults and not locking up one 12 year old for life for touching another 12 year old. You keep going back and forth about that, trying not to sound like a pervert.

    30 year old man, 4 year old child, automatic felony? Yes or no?

  • Cathy L||

    No, the argument was about whether there should be a uniform, blanket age of consent or whether the state should have to make individual determinations about whether a harm was committed.

  • Longtorso, Johnny||

    30 year old man, 4 year old child, automatic felony? Yes or no?

  • Red Rocks White Privilege||

    And you came down on the side of the pedophiles. At least have the integrity to own it.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    We can just call Cathy L (NAMBLA) for short.

  • Cathy L||

    And I'll just call you slavers, because you don't think children have rights.

  • Deconstructed Potato||

    Would that not be "NAWBLA"?

  • Deconstructed Potato||

    (Warlon Brando, like Wario)

  • Cathy L||

    Nope, I came down on the side of the children.

  • Longtorso, Johnny||

    30 year old man, 4 year old child, automatic felony? Yes or no?

  • Giant Realistic Flying Tiger||

    Nope, I came down on the side of the children.

    - More accurate Cathy.

  • Longtorso, Johnny||

  • Cathy L||

    Weird, I don't feel like commenters on this site are normally in favor of surveilling private groups for engaging in weapons purchases or usage regardless of 2nd-Amendment-violating laws.

  • Red Rocks White Privilege||

    If they got a warrant for the surveillance and the group was actually engaging in illegal weapons trafficking and planning terrorist operations, why would the commenters on this site be against that?

  • Cathy L||

    Because most laws against weapons trafficking violate the 2nd Amendment.

  • Sigivald||

    I'm a pretty hardcore 2A guy, and I'm not at all sure that I think that's so (nor is that a common feeling among 2A activists, that I've seen).

    "The right to keep and bear arms" doesn't seem infringed by even the current FFL system for commercial sales, so long as an FFL is easy enough to get, and it sure seems like they are.

    (If we wanna talk about violating the Second Amendment, let's talk Hughes Amendment and the National Firearms Act!)

  • ||

    Weird, I don't feel like commenters on this site are normally in favor of surveilling private groups for engaging in weapons purchases or usage regardless of 2nd-Amendment-violating laws.

    But, having been granted the power, we are totally in favor of mocking their incompetence in exercising it.

    Also, some of us like to wield the 'equality under the law' sword even if it winds up hurting us way more than it helps us. No reason to stop spying on brown Americans if white Americans, including those running for President, are going to get spied on.

  • Cathy L||

    Also, some of us like to wield the 'equality under the law' sword even if it winds up hurting us way more than it helps us.

    Yeah, I'm well aware of that. Because you're spiteful assholes and not libertarians.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    Cathy L (NAMBLA): Luckily, Libertarians are used to having Lefties like you say ridiculous stuff. Libertarians know who we are and we can defend ourselves against anything that Lefties and Conservatives throw at us.

  • chemjeff radical individualist||

    Johnny is just upset that Reason doesn't go in for the shameless Muslim-baiting that his Republican allies do.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    The MSM is begrudgingly covering the story.

    They hate that this sinks their argument that Muslims are not sneaking into the USA to start trouble.

  • Cathy L||

    You're such a dipshit you don't know Wahhaj was born in Brooklyn.

    The elder Wahhaj.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    His father's father?

    SNEAK!

  • Cathy L||

    If I thought you were a real person, I might think you'd actually feel bad about saying this about the descendant of slaves.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    His father's father was a slave?

    I though Lincoln freed all the slaves in 1865. That's a really old father's father.

  • Sigivald||

    Probably every human on earth is a descendant of slaves, no?

    Slavery has arguably been the general condition of mankind for most of its history, by modern standards.

  • ||

    Probably every human on earth is a descendant of slaves, no?

    Technically, our children are bound to the debt our parents accumulated. Arguably, it's still likely true even if you expand it one generation in both directions.

  • Longtorso, Johnny||

    'Journalism is DEAD.' Derek Hunter explains point by BRUTAL point why NM school shooting compound isn't top story
    Derek Hunter
    @derekahunter

    A) They're Islamic radicals
    B) Trump tweets
    C) Journalism is dead

  • Longtorso, Johnny||

  • Scarecrow Repair & Chippering||

    Haven't, and won't, read your link. My understanding of Unconditional Surrender was to ensure no repeat of WW I, where the German army was not militarily defeated and the country did not surrender and was not occupied by foreign armies to make the defeat palpable, thus giving rise to the backstabbing myth which fueled Hitler's rise to power. No more of that armistice crap, or truce, or any such weak sauce.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    Part of it. Part was that the Japanese would not surrender. Even if Japan wanted to surrender, they didnt want to give up their conquered territory in Korea, China, Pacific....

    The USA did not want to get pulled into another World War in the 1960s over the same shit. FDR did that right at least. Truman also made that good decision.

    We had the military might to utterly crush Germany and Japan at the same time.

  • Mickey Rat||

    Hirohito's speech to credit the bombs as the primary consideration to accepting the US terms. There also has to consideration for where the most hawkish elements of the Japanese military were in the Army, which the war against the Allies had not been defeated. The Allies had beaten up the less strident Navy which had an antagonistic relationship with their Army. The Japanese Army did not consider itself defeated, that the setbacks were the Navy's fault and problem.

  • Palin's Buttplug||

    Anti-Fascists vs Fascists.

    Will John or LoveCons join in?

  • loveconstitution1789||

    Socialists (Nazis) vs Communists.

  • Weigel's Cock Ring||

    I hope the brawl makes it way up the road to Euclid Street while you're getting home and your hideous acne-ridden face gets smashed in.

  • Giant Realistic Flying Tiger||

    Just kiss already you two.

  • Sigivald||

    Are the Fascists the ones wearing black and promising to beat up anyone who says stuff they don't like?

    I mean, historically that's been the Fascists, right?

  • Sevo||

    Lefties and media hacks hardest hit:

    "Analyzing the Trump effect: Is America having a nervous breakdown?"
    [...]
    "The American Psychological Association is holding its annual convention in San Francisco, and there are no fewer than 15 symposiums, panel discussions and paper presentations devoted to the psychological ills that practitioners believe are spreading under the president."
    https://www.sfchronicle.com/politics
    /article/Analyzing-the-Trump-effect-
    Is-America-having-a-13145645.php

    Of course the problem not the people over-reacting to some perceived issue, it's TRUMP!!!!!!!!!!!!
    See? Media hack hardest hit.

  • NoVaNick||

    American Psychological Association is holding its annual convention in San Francisco

    Of course-gotta have your convention where you will find the most nutcases

  • Rockabilly||

    FUCK ANTIFA !!!!!!!!!!!!

    Fuck you asshole communists, eat shit and die a slow fucking death you Stalin loving assholes !!!!

    FUCK ANTIFA !!!!!!!!!!!!

    FUCK ANTIFA !!!!!!!!!!!!

    FUCK ANTIFA !!!!!!!!!!!!

    FUCK ANTIFA !!!!!!!!!!!!

    Fuck you asshole communists, eat shit and die a slow fucking death you Stalin loving assholes !!!!

    Fuck the NY Times, Facebook and all you fucking progressive communist asshole asshats.

  • Palin's Buttplug||

    Fuck Fascists, Nazis, and all the far right assholes too.

  • Ken Shultz||

    Shithead.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    Nazis are Socialists, so far-Left is the proper political direction.

  • Restoras||

    I see you still have't learned that fascism and Nazism are far-left strains of thought. Don't you read? I'm disappointed. The tone of your rhetoric doesn't seem as vitriolic as it used to be and yet there are still some facts you prefer to ignore.

  • Palin's Buttplug||

    Bullshit. You can't redefine "far right" on this lousy board.

    Far-right politics are politics further on the right of the left-right spectrum than the standard political right, particularly in terms of more extreme nationalist,[1][2] and nativist ideologies, as well as authoritarian tendencies.[3]

    The term is often associated with Nazism,[4] neo-Nazism, fascism, neo-fascism and other ideologies or organizations that feature extreme nationalist, chauvinist, xenophobic, racist or reactionary views.[5] These can lead to oppression and violence against groups of people based on their supposed inferiority, or their perceived threat to the native ethnic group,[6][7] nation, state[8] or ultraconservative traditional social institutions.

  • Restoras||

    Context, dude, context. In Weimar Germany, a 'conservative' or 'right-wing' individual would want the restoration of the Kaiser, not an extreme left socialist government. The only thing that fascism/Nazism is to the right of is communism, and the principle differences between the two are nationalism versus internationalism. It's also convenient that those calling fascism/Nazism 'extreme-right' are so far left that they validate the description.

  • Palin's Buttplug||

    The "Third Reich" was a restoration of an older order. Namely, the German Empire of the late 19th and early 20th Centurys (Second reich). That is the very essence of conservatism.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    Hitler wanted a "revolution" of Socialism. Revolution is the opposite of conservatism. Revolution is rapid change. Conservatism is slow change.

    Any references to Old Family Orders was to get aristocrats on the Nazis side. The old families ran Germany. Hitler was not one of them.

    You really need to brush up on German history Buttplugger. You are so far out of your depth.

  • Palin's Buttplug||

    You're just trying to whitewash history. But it is too late. History and academia defines Aryan Supremacy as classic right wing politics.

    50 people read this lousy forum. Tens of millions are in school now learning that Nazism and Aryan Supremacy is right wing.

    You NEVER mention the defining characteristic of Nazism - Aryan Supremacy.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    Palin's Buttplug|8.10.18 @ 10:43AM|#
    You're just trying to whitewash history. But it is too late. History and academia defines Aryan Supremacy as classic right wing politics.
    50 people read this lousy forum. Tens of millions are in school now learning that Nazism and Aryan Supremacy is right wing.
    You NEVER mention the defining characteristic of Nazism - Aryan Supremacy.

    Schools dont do a good job teaching and kids are not paying attention to history. Clearly.

    Imagine all of us dissenters who were taught the same lies in school and found out the truth that Nazis are Socialists.

    OMG!

  • Restoras||

    Dude, come on. In name only and based on socialistic economic thought. Was their a Kaiser and a landed gentry running it (you know, the 'old order') or a bunch of thugs and rabble that were capitalizing on the next stage of progressive political thinking? And you do realize that one of the left's patron saints was a racist and eugenicist, and that this thinking was simply adopted by the National Socialist German Workers Party to strengthen their 'National'(ist) credentials?

  • Restoras||

    No it wasn't, since there was no kaiser and landed gentry (junkers) to run the country. The National Socialist German Workers Party co-opted that idea of 'restoration' to bolster there 'Nationalist' credentials and capitalize on a) widespread resentment of Versailles, and b) differentiate themselves from the 'internationalist' communists.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    Exactly Restoras.

    The right-wing Germans wanting to keep the Weimar Republic were a tiny minority. Mainly ex-German military officers.

    The street fighting was mainly between Communists and various types of Socialists. The Nazis (Socialists) got the upper hand when tens of thousands of Socialists joined the ranks of the S.A. under Ernst Rohm.

  • perlchpr||

    And most importantly for defining "left wing" vs: "right wing", I feel confident that if you'd asked Hitler his position on the restoration of the French Monarchy, he'd have been opposed to it.

  • NotAnotherSkippy||

    12. In view of the tremendous sacrifices in property and blood demanded of the nation by every war, personal gain from the war must be termed a crime against the nation. We therefore demand the total confiscation of all war profits.

    13. We demand the nationalization of all enterprises (already) converted into corporations (trusts).

    14. We demand profit-sharing in large enterprises.

    15. We demand the large-scale development of old-age pension schemes.

    16. We demand the creation and maintenance of a sound middle class; the immediate communalization of the large department stores, which are to be leased at low rates to small tradesmen. We demand the most careful consideration for the owners of small businesses in orders placed by national, state, or community authorities.

    17. We demand land reform in accordance with our national needs and a law for expropriation without compensation of land for public purposes. Abolition of ground rent and prevention of all speculation in land.

    No matter how many times you quote wikipedia, reality will not change. Nazis are on the left.

  • Palin's Buttplug||

    Nazis exterminated Jews - no old age pension there.

    Nazis banned labor unions. They were not socialists. They are (and still are) Aryan Supremacists. To deny that is the height of stupidity.

    No, more desperation.

  • Restoras||

    Correct, the Nazis banned labor unions - because labor unions work for the interest of a narrow segment of the greater society and therefore are not Nationalist. The point of National Socialism was a socialist economic structure for the benefit of the nation.

    Yes, the Nazis were racist, but racism was embraced by the progressive left before the Nazis adopted it as a policy. Just ask Margaret Sanger.

  • perlchpr||

    They were not socialists. They are (and still are) Aryan Supremacists.

    He said, as though the two categories are somehow exclusive.

  • NotAnotherSkippy||

    And Stalin killed Ukranians and Mao killed Chinese. Mass death is definitely a feature of the Left. You aren't helping your cause.

    He also created a works program just like FDR, another noted far-right leader.

    Their platform literally calls for socialism. I know you think that words mean whatever you want them to mean whenever you need them to change, but reality doesn't care about your feelz.

  • Palin's Buttplug||

    Mass death is definitely a feature of the Left.

    So? Leftists are just as much a threat to freedom as fascists are.

  • NotAnotherSkippy||

    Leftists are just as much a threat to freedom as fascists are.

    Yes, Leftists are just as much a threat to freedom as Leftists. Congrats on the tautology. It seems to be the limit of your argumentation.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    The only fascists around these days are Lefty fascists. They go by names Antifa, Unite the Right, Alt-Left....

  • loveconstitution1789||

    Nazis banned all non-Nazis unions.

    Guess what you dont need if Nazis run the economy? A Nazi labor union.

    This is just one more thing that shows that your narrative is being destroyed by the freedom of the internet.

  • Scarecrow Repair & Chippering||

    Communists are not nationalists? Oh yes, they sing the Internationale, but the USSR invaded and controlled many individual countries: the Baltics 1939, Poland 1944/45, Hungary 1956, Czechoslovakia 1968, Poland 1980.

    Nazis are not socialists? Oh yes, they sang Deutschland Uber Alles, but they invaded and controlled many individual countries: Austria and Czechoslovakia 1938, Poland 1939, Belgium, Holland, Luxembourg, France 1940. Hungary and the whole Balkans 1940/1941, the Baltics 1941.

    Near as I can see, the only real difference is that Communist governments directly own the factories and distributors and farms, while Nazi governments leave title in the hands of private citizens who are told by the government exactly how they will behave. A distinction without a difference.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    The Communists took over everything and you belong to the State.

    The Nazis deemed Socialism that strictly controlled the means of production too harsh and they would get more productivity out of serfs rather than slaves. Its the same method that Sweden Norway and Denmark uses. Serfs are more productive than slaves.

    The Nazis took over full control of all means of production by 1943 anyway. All people belonged to the State.

    The Nazis ran occupied nations as Communist States.

    Its laughable that Lefties expect people to believe that Nazis were anything but Lefties.

  • Restoras||

    Indeed - In fact, the only real difference between communism and fascism that I've ever been able to discern is the preferred color of uniform.

  • Red Rocks White Privilege||

    Shriek still parroting the post-WW2 commie definition of a fascist.

  • Palin's Buttplug||

    Me and all of academia.

    Except maybe that wingnut con school - Hillsdale College.

  • Social Justice is neither||

    So PB and the other commies are all singing the same revisionist commie tune. how odd.

  • perlchpr||

    Me and all of academia.

    You mean hard left wing academia is trying to distance itself from the Nazis now that it's far, far too late for them to distance themselves from the Soviets? Shocking.

  • Palin's Buttplug||

    The NSDAP was a far-right political party which came into its own during the social and financial upheavals that occurred with the onset of the Great Depression in 1929.[158] While in prison after the failed Beer Hall Putsch of 1923, Hitler wrote Mein Kampf, which laid out his plan for transforming German society into one based on race.[159] The ideology of Nazism brought together elements of antisemitism, racial hygiene, and eugenics, and combined them with pan-Germanism and territorial expansionism with the goal of obtaining more Lebensraum for the Germanic people.[160] The regime attempted to obtain this new territory by attacking Poland and the Soviet Union, intending to deport or kill the Jews and Slavs living there, who were viewed as being inferior to the Aryan master race and part of a Jewish Bolshevik conspiracy.[161][162] The Nazi regime believed that only Germany could defeat the forces of Bolshevism and save humanity from world domination by International Jewry.[163] Others deemed life unworthy of life by the Nazis included the mentally and physically disabled, Romani people, homosexuals, Jehovah's Witnesses, and social misfits.[164][165]

    right wing all the way - even the hatred of gays just like the GOP

  • Restoras||

    The communists in Russia hated gays too. And Jews.

  • Palin's Buttplug||

    save humanity from world domination by International Jewry

    Just like the wingnuts of today

    GLOBALIST! SOROS! JEW BANKERS!

    John Bircher conservatives

  • NotAnotherSkippy||

    More like Margaret Sanger Eugenicists. Say, how's your latest BDS effort going? Those dirty jews need to be put in their place, right?

  • NotAnotherSkippy||

    While "progressives" in England and elsewhere were still deluding themselves that communism and fascism represented opposite poles, more and more people began to ask themselves whether these new tyrannies were not the outcome of the same tendencies. Even communists must have been somewhat shaken by such testimonies as that of Max Eastman, Lenin's old friend, who found himself compelled to admit that "instead of being better, Stalinism is worse than fascism, more ruthless, barbarous, unjust, immoral, antidemocratic, unredeemed by any hope or scruple," and that it is "better described as superfascist"; and when we find the same author recognizing that "Stalinism is socialism, in the sense of being an inevitable although unforeseen political accompaniment of the nationalization and collectivization which he had relied upon as part of his plan for erecting a classless society," his conclusion clearly achieves wider significance.
  • NotAnotherSkippy||

    ..."The complete collapse of the belief in the attainability of freedom and equality through Marxism," writes Peter Drucker, "has forced Russia to travel the same road toward a totalitarian, purely negative, non-economic society of unfreedom and inequality which Germany has been following. Not that communism and fascism are essentially the same. Fascism is the stage reached after communism has proved an illusion, and it has proved as much an illusion in Stalinist Russia as in pre-Hitler Germany."


    -Hayek, F. A. (2010-10-22). The Road to Serfdom (pp. 78-80).

    Wait, aren't you supposedly an avid reader of Hayek?

  • Palin's Buttplug||

    Stalinism is worse than fascism, more ruthless, barbarous, unjust, immoral, antidemocratic, unredeemed by any hope or scruple,"

    So what?

  • NotAnotherSkippy||

    While "progressives" in England and elsewhere were still deluding themselves that communism and fascism represented opposite poles,

    Odd that you didn't comment on this part. I realize it was at the beginning, so maybe it's just a short term memory problem...

  • damikesc||

    One side is obsessed by race.

    The Right aint that group.

  • Sigivald||

    Sure.

    Fuck both of 'em, not that they're really any different.

  • Ken Shultz||

    But what about all the good antifa has done in their Toys for Tots program?

  • bevis the lumberjack||

    Aitifa mostly gave the kids new bikes, but they kept the bike locks for their own purposes.

  • Rich||

    "That *does* it! Nothing but decaf for you from now on!"

  • Aloysious||

    Decaf sucks and blows. It is a communist plot to put everybody to sleep.

  • Hank Phillips||

    Observe the appeals to (and demonization of) "right" and "left". This is the mark of a single-variable mentality barely able to conceive of length and totally unable to fathom the concept of area on a Nolan chart. THAT--plus fear of a Libertarian insurgency getting government paychecks and gavels--is what determines the attitude of "both" sides.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    The Spectrum political chart puts Libertarianism in the middle with the most freedom under a government. The right extreme is monarchy and oligarchy. The left extreme is communism. You get more free as you get to center of the spectrum.

    The Nolan chart does not work because Libertarian is 'Centrist'. Libertarian is tiny authority in a small government where maximum Liberty and free market are possible.

    On the Nolan Chart Liberal is supposed to mean more freedom but that is not what Lefties are about.

    Anarchists are not listed because their politics is a dot- no government and maximum Liberty.

  • Flinch||

    Incrdible that there are people still stupid enough to play this alleged Unite The Right farce originally organized by Obama loving hacks. Unite the Left is more like it. In that vein, let's celebrate August as Make Fun of Antifa month - because a man only wears a mask when they have no balls.

  • John I||

    You think Unite the Right, organized by Richard Spencer and a bunch of other white nationalists, was created by "Obama loving hacks?"

    I'm going to have to disagree with the assertion that The Daily Stormer and the The National Policy Institute are pro-Obama

  • loveconstitution1789||

    Nazis are Socialists. They want to control government and then control the means of production. They just add in racism as part of their plan to rule.

    White Supremacist Nazis types dont want free market because that allows for trade with all races and creeds.

  • John I||

    That's an interesting take that has literally nothing whatsoever to do with the fact that the initial post I am responding to did not call Nazis "socialists," but instead claimed Unite the Right was run by Obama supporters

    So there's no point in debating whether the Nazis were or were not socialists since this has nothing to do with the conversation.

    Should be noted quite a few far rightists I've talked to got their start as libertarians and are now part of the extreme right because they think we need to rid America of the brown scourge before libertopia can prevail, too, which undercuts the assertion by some libertarians that libertarianism is innately separate from fascist ideologies. There's more bleed over than some people here would like to admit

  • loveconstitution1789||

    'Unite the Right' are Socialists.

    Libertarians are the best of both Worlds. Maximum freedom under a rule of law. Maximum free market under a rule of law to protect property rights and the capitalist system that promotes free trade. In America that Supreme Law is the US Constitution.

  • MWG||

    "'Unite the Right' are Socialists."

    That would be news to them as many of them have rallied around Trump and according to you he's the ultimate anti-socialist, right?

  • loveconstitution1789||

    They can say whatever they want to distract from what they represent.

    Nazis want to control the government to control the means of production with a racial twist.

    White Supremacists want to control the government to control the means of production with a racial twist.

    Socialists want to control the means of production.

    'Alt-Right' is way to act like you're a conservative but not be. Conservatives dont start riots and start fights. 'Unite the Right' is the same as Socialists calling themselves 'Liberals'. Its a scam to deflect from what they stand for. Liberals care nothing for civil rights. Unite the Right people care nothing for conservative restraint.

  • Ken Shultz||

    Turkey is in deep shit.

    Their currency has lost half its value this year, and the interest on its government debt has gone from about 12.5% to well over 20%.

    "Investors worry about President Erdogan's influence over monetary and economic policy after he granted himself the right to appoint the central bank's governors and named his son-in-law as finance minister. Investors fear the growing sway of Mr. Erdogan, who has expressed a preference for lower rates, will discourage the central bank from taming inflation that hit an annual rate of 15.85% in July.

    Turkey is especially vulnerable to falling currency, given the nation's large pile of foreign-currency debt."

    http://www.wsj.com/articles/in.....1533740109

    Market forces make dictators look so silly. Why won't market forces just do what they're told? Is there somebody we can throw in jail or something?

    Don't expect Erdogan to come begging the IMF for help either--not that help from the IMF is likely to be forthcoming. Trump gets his say as to whom the IMF bails out, and he's not likely to support a bailout of Erdogan. Rather Trump is currently threatening to slap Turkey with tariffs on aluminum and steel as soon as next week.

  • Restoras||

    More importantly, what are the knock-on effects of Turkey going into a full blown debt/fiscal crisis?

  • NotAnotherSkippy||

    Ugliness. I would be quietly removing any nuclear weapons presently in incirlik.

  • Shirley Knott||

    I am constantly amazed that nobody ever suggests simply acknowledging the Armenian genocide.
    Erdogan's Head would explode.

  • John I||

    Shockingly, Islamist authoritarians are not the best when it comes to economics.

    "Investors fear the growing sway of Mr. Erdogan, who has expressed a preference for lower rates"

    So inflation in Turkey is already pushing 16% and Erdogan's solution is lowering interest rates. Stand back everybody, we've got an economic genius over here!

  • John I||

    Interestingly, I just looked up Turkey's historical inflation rates and economic growth. In the 70's, 80's, and '90s Turkey consistently had 40% inflation with rates topping out at 140% in the early 80s. During that period, they had basically no per capita GDP growth. Per capita gdp took off in the early 2000s, starting right around the time they got inflation under control.

    And Erdogan's solution is to go back to the 1980s way of doing things with chronically high and rapidly fluctuating inflation rates

  • Ken Shultz||

    There's a conundrum with dictators. A nice chunk of the population would already like to see your head on a pike. You're buying off the army, the police, and civil servants with jobs. He's purged and imprisoned everyone who might have moved against him in the armed forces, and he's given his supporters all of their jobs--and we're talking about tens of thousands of people he rounded up and purged from the government.

    The solution to his inflation problems is to slash government spending, but if he slashes government spending, he'll lose the support of the people he's buying off to keep his head off of a pike.

    In other words, he can't do what's necessary to solve the problem.

    Maduro is in a similar situation. A judge gave bond holders of Venezuela's defaulted debt effective control of Citgo yesterday--which is Venezuela's refiner and an important source of foreign currency for the government.

    http://www.reuters.com/article.....SKBN1KV02L

    Maduro's life depends on keeping the right people paid off. The solution to Venezuela's problems is to stop paying those people off. Therefore, Maduro can't solve Venezuela's problems without losing his life.

    Once they go full dictator retard, many of the rest of their choices are made for them. Dictators all over the world and throughout history have all acted the same in these situations because they have so few choices.

  • ||

    Combine this with the shenanigans over the İncirlik Air Base, and Turkey's "valued ally' status is looking awfully tenuous.

  • Juice||

    Investors worry about President Erdogan's influence over monetary and economic policy after he granted himself the right to appoint the central bank's governors

    Thank god that doesn't happen in the land of the free!

  • Longtorso, Johnny||

  • Cathy L||

    Do you have a comment on this from a libertarian perspective?

  • Longtorso, Johnny||

    30 year old man, 4 year old child, automatic felony? Yes or no?

  • Cathy L||

    12-year-old boy, 12-year-old girl, automatic felony? Yes or no?

  • Scarecrow Repair & Chippering||

    You could have taken all the wind out of his sails by prefixing that question answer with "Yes.". That you didn't deflates your sails instead. Own goal, as they say elsewhere.

  • Cathy L||

    I don't think any felonies should be "automatic." Because I'm not a statist asshole.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    YOU are a statist and YOU are an asshole.

  • lap83||

    12-year-old boy, 12-year-old girl, automatic felony?

    that's stupid, no one is asserting that juveniles should be tried as adults

  • lap83||

    They are othering real comedians by pretending to care about comedy but only focusing on unfunny identity issues. So problematic.

  • Mock-star||

    When I clicked on the link I got *Account Suspended*

  • Jerryskids||

    "Mounting pressure from the political left to censor hateful speech may have unintended consequences," warns Erik Nielson in a New York Times op-ed. "'Hate' is a dangerously elastic label, one that has long been used in America to demonize unpopular expression. If we become overzealous in our efforts to limit so-called hate speech, we run the risk of setting a trap for the very people we're trying to defend."

    I don't think so. There's going to be intended consequences. The left knows conservatives in general are like old people that just want some peace and quiet and don't have much interest in stirring up shit. They'll make a few half-assed attempts at squelching stuff they don't like, just enough that it will provide a pretext for the left once they regain power to go whole hog on the squelching under the argument that "they started it first". It's like daring a guy to swat you with a rolled-up newspaper when you're holding a shotgun behind your back. You're planning on committing murder and claiming it was self-defense.

  • Cathy L||

    Well, the real-life example that's already happen and is expounded in the column is hate speech laws that were passed in response to Black Lives Matter to protect the feelings of police.

  • Longtorso, Johnny||

    30 year old man, 4 year old child, automatic felony? Yes or no?

  • Cathy L||

    12-year-old boy, 12-year-old girl, automatic felony? Yes or no?

  • Longtorso, Johnny||

    Like I said, we aren't talking about locking up 12 year olds, but protecting them from adults, so no, don't throw a 12 year old in jail for life over that. Too young to be treated as an adult means too young to be treated as an adult.

    Now answer mine, 30 year old man, 4 year old child, automatic felony? Yes or no?

  • Cathy L||

    Like I said, we aren't talking about locking up 12 year olds, but protecting them from adults, so no, don't throw a 12 year old in jail for life over that.

    Well, you're just lying about that, because what we were talking about were blanket, uniform ages of consent and the idea that "children" "can't" consent to sexual contact.

  • Longtorso, Johnny||

    30 year old man, 4 year old child, automatic felony? Yes or no?

  • Scarecrow Repair & Chippering||

    Yes. 12-year-old boy, 12-year-old girl, automatic felony? Yes or no?

    That's what Cathy L should answer, but she's too damned proud to actually stoop to your level.

  • Longtorso, Johnny||

    My level? Saying pedophilia is bad is a level you stoop to?

  • Longtorso, Johnny||

    Well, you're just lying about that, because what we were talking about were blanket, uniform ages of consent and the idea that "children" "can't" consent to sexual contact.

    They can't. If you believe they can, you are defending pedos.

  • perlchpr||

    I had consensual (for lack of a better term) sexual contact when I was 6, with another 6 year old. Neither of us forced the other to "play doctor", so... which thing is not true? It wasn't sexual contact, we weren't children, or we didn't consent?

  • Jerryskids||

    Yes, I read the column. My point is that this isn't a case of being hoisted by their own petard, it's a pawn sacrifice to establish the precedent of banning hate speech. They've got much bigger plans than outlawing talking shit about some small group of people. Or, as somebody said, it's like daring a guy to swat you with a rolled-up newspaper when you're holding a shotgun behind your back.

  • Jerryskids||

    You frequently see people asking why the left would be wanting the government to have more power when Literal Hitler is running the government - it's because they know the people in charge right now are not Literal Hitler and that the people they want in charge *are* Literal Hitler. It's not really projection on these people's part, it's just a scare tactic they're using to gain power. And once they regain power, they're not going to make the same mistake they made last time and just take for granted that they have a lock on the electorate. They know damn well the GOP's not going to do all the things they're accused of wanting to do, they're not repealing Obamacare, they're not cutting government spending, they're not outlawing abortion, they're not bringing about the Handmaid's Tale society - they're not the racist and sexist patriarchy they're accused of being so it's safe to expand their power. Once the left gets back in power though, all that unused power's going to be sitting there ready to be used. And it will. Open borders, voting rights for illegal immigrants and felons, banning voter ID laws, outlawing as hate speech any talking bad about Democratic constituencies, packing the courts with 2nd Amendment nullifiers, getting rid of the Electoral College, free shit for everybody who tends to vote Democrat - turning the US into California is just the starting point. You'll wish you lived in California when they get done turning the US into Oceania.

  • NotAnotherSkippy||

    Yes.

  • Longtorso, Johnny||

    Medical students are being drafted in to plug gaps as the NHS struggles to cope with the Winter crisis
    They have been told to expect to fit cannulas – the tubes inserted so patients can receive medication – and take blood, work usually done by nurses or qualified doctors

  • Cathy L||

    You'd think the "winter crisis" would have been a tipoff that this article was six months old.

  • Longtorso, Johnny||

    30 year old man, 4 year old child, automatic felony? Yes or no?

  • Cathy L||

    12-year-old boy, 12-year-old girl, automatic felony? Yes or no?

  • Longtorso, Johnny||

    Like I said, we aren't talking about locking up 12 year olds, but protecting them from adults, so no, don't throw a 12 year old in jail for life over that. Too young to be treated as an adult means too young to be treated as an adult.

    Now answer mine, 30 year old man, 4 year old child, automatic felony? Yes or no?

  • Cathy L||

    Did I say "for life"?

    Are you aware that we currently prosecute children for this?

    I mean, you do read this site.

  • Longtorso, Johnny||

    30 year old man, 4 year old child, automatic felony? Yes or no?

  • Scarecrow Repair & Chippering||

    Yes. 12-year-old boy, 12-year-old girl, automatic felony? Yes or no?

    That's what Cathy L should answer, but she's too damned proud to actually stoop to your level.

  • Longtorso, Johnny||

    You don't stoop down to saying pedophilia is bad.

  • Cathy L||

    Violating the rights of children is bad. Adults who violate the rights of children by having sex with them when they don't consent are doing something harmful.

    Adults who violate the rights of children by preventing them from making choices about their own lives are also doing something harmful.

  • Longtorso, Johnny||

    Violating the rights of children is bad. Adults who violate the rights of children by having sex with them when they don't consent are doing something harmful.

    Its official, you aren't just talking about two 12 year olds, you honestly believe a 4 year old can consent to sex with an adult?

  • Cathy L||

    It's official, you're either illiterate or a liar.

  • Longtorso, Johnny||

    This, from you, assumes they can consent.

    Adults who violate the rights of children by having sex with them when they don't consent are doing something harmful.

  • Giant Realistic Flying Tiger||

    And really fucking annoying, always shitting up the threads.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    GRFT: I think its great. YOU shit up the threads a lot.

  • Pudgeboy||

    Cathy L made it very clear yesterday. Yes, she believes that some 4 year olds, those with a supposedly high IQ, (how 'accurate' would that 'test' be anyway?) can consent to sex with adults. She refuses to apologize for the implications of that. She isn't as smart as she thinks.

  • Scarecrow Repair & Chippering||

    Yes. 12-year-old boy, 12-year-old girl, automatic felony? Yes or no?

    That's what Cathy L should answer, but she's too damned proud to actually stoop to your level.

  • Red Rocks White Privilege||

    If that's what her argument was limited to, sure. But that's not what was being debated.

  • Longtorso, Johnny||

    Cathy can't answer. Her answer is clearly 'no' (saying 'yes' to that being an automatic felony is the easiest thing in the world for just about everyone else here), but telling the truth would cost her.

    Hence the sudden silence.

  • Cathy L||

    Yes, my answer is no because as I said I am against age of consent laws. I don't see any reason prosecutors would need this to be an "automatic felony." There's simply no reason for it and it carries potential rights violations with it. So why would a libertarian be in favor of it?

  • Longtorso, Johnny||

    There's simply no reason for it

    To protect 4 year olds. There is your reason. 4 year olds aren't adults; they don't have the same legal rights.

  • Scarecrow Repair & Chippering||

    The two are making different arguments and both are making the same mistake of trying to force the other into their argument. Cathy L could win that battle easily by one simple answer, and leave Johnny Longtorso looking like the only chump remaining.

  • Longtorso, Johnny||

    She can't say that 30 year olds having sex with 4 year olds is always bad and punishable. I'm not the wrong one here.

  • Giant Realistic Flying Tiger||

    You're the one saying "automatic felony". So tell me something motherfucker.

    30 year old having sex with 26 year old: automatic felony?
    30 year old/22 year old: automatic felony?
    30 year old/18 year old: automatic felony?
    30 year old/16 year old: automatic felony?
    30 year old/14 year old: automatic felony?
    30 year old/12 year old: automatic felony?
    30 year old/10 year old: automatic felony?
    20 year old/26 year old: automatic felony?
    20 year old/22 year old: automatic felony?
    20 year old/18 year old: automatic felony?
    20 year old/16 year old: automatic felony?
    20 year old/14 year old: automatic felony?
    20 year old/12 year old: automatic felony?
    20 year old/10 year old: automatic felony?
    12 year old/14 year old: automatic felony?
    12 year old/12 year old: automatic felony?
    12 year old/10 year old: automatic felony?

  • loveconstitution1789||

    Someone's bot program manfunctioned.

  • Longtorso, Johnny||

    For the 20 and 30 year old, 18 and above, no, 16 and below, yes. Where both are well below the age of consent, we don't treat children like adults. Easy.

    Seriously guys, you think "what about a 30 year old with a 10 year old?" is a drop the mic moment?

  • perlchpr||

    What do you even mean by "automatic felony" anyway, since that's not, y'know, a legal term of art.

  • Longtorso, Johnny||

    What I mean is that Cathy L wants to treat 30 year olds w/ 4 year olds on a case by case basis and have a judge decide whether the 4 year can consent (she is no statist because she wants judges deciding that). I say 'automatic' because I believe 4 year olds cannot consent.

    Not all that difficult.

  • chemjeff radical individualist||

    Don't stop Johnny now, he's got his outrage boner fully stroked and loaded.

  • Giant Realistic Flying Tiger||

    I'm thinking that I want you to define your fucking position, and then maybe there can be a logical debate–because you just admitted that you agree with Cathy on the issue of 12/12.

  • chemjeff radical individualist||

    Johnny is just baiting and trolling. That is what he does.

    He's not arguing from a position of principle, and proudly so. He is only here to stir up high dudgeon about "defending pedophilia". Just like when he keeps posting his link about what that Muslim Imam did. He wants people to take the bait about how horrible Muslims are. He is just here to stir shit, not to add anything relevant to the discussion.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    Seems like Johnny has a position that he feels strongly about. He is against Pedos using no Age of Consent rules to prey on kids.

    YOU however, love the drama.

  • Longtorso, Johnny||

    And she disagrees with me on 30/4. I believe that makes her an inhuman monster.

  • chemjeff radical individualist||

    Now that you've gotten your virtue signaling out of the way and called Cathy L an "inhuman monster", would you like to discuss the larger issue of age of consent laws? No? Your only point in this whole discussion was to prance around calling people names? Thought so.

  • Red Rocks White Privilege||

    Still not as old as your passive-aggressive commenting style.

  • Longtorso, Johnny||

  • Flinch||

    You're surpised? A marxist invents any aritice necessary to fracture a culture so it can be penetrated for takedown, which is to say... they're a cult.

  • Red Rocks White Privilege||

    Hispanics are "white" when it's convenient for the left to define them as such.

    See Zimmerman, George, or data gathering on crime statistics.

  • Happy Chandler||

    Hispanics can be white, black or other ethnicity. Whites can be Hispanic or non-Hispanic.

    Race and ethnicity are independent.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/W....._Americans

  • Brett Bellmore||

    "The group had originally intended to return to Charlottesville, but the city said no. "

    The city said no the first time, too: They only got to hold their event the first time around because a court had ordered the city to permit it.

    So the city invited the Antifa in to start a riot, in order that the city would have a pretext for canceling the event.

    That's how it works, in case you hadn't noticed: For the most part, the Antifa only go where the local government wants them, and will order the police to leave them alone. Their "business model" depends quite heavily on the local police not actually making any effort to stop them.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    That and Antifa dont come to the South. We're all armed down here.

    Most working Americans that are non-Lefties dont get involved in big protests anyway. These people are too busy working and taking care of their families.

    The Antifa are Communists/Socialists and the Nazis folks are Socialists. They all just are struggling for control over who gets to run the country. Unfortunately for them, they are all a tiny minority and have no real effect on how the USA is run. Trump is proof that the Silent Majority are standing up for themselves.

  • Happy Chandler||

    Virginia isn't the South?

  • Juice||

    Not in my book.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    If you dont know that Virginia is not the South anymore, I cannot help you.

  • Happy Chandler||

    Atlanta isn't the South?

  • loveconstitution1789||

    Atlanta is very Lefty and not Lefty at the same time.

    You dont live here, so you dont have a clue about that.

    Notice that the cops didnt take Antifa bullshit. The Democrats created those mask laws and then the police made them remove the masks. Its nice to see rule of law applied evenly.

    I actually think the mask laws are unconstitutional. Believe it or not, I cannot find a single Lefty who would support repealing the said mask law.

  • John I||

    ""White officers are no more likely to use lethal force against minorities than nonwhite officers," says Charles Menifield, lead author of a large new Rutgers study on the cops' use of deadly force in America. But black Americans are killed by police more than two times as much as Americans Generally."

    Did they separate out any groups other than whites and non-whites? For example, are Hispanic officers more likely to shoot black people than black officers?

    I don't understand what value a study has if all it does is separate whites and non-whites, as if there is no possible existence of racism or prejudice between various non-white minority groups. White vs. any and all POC has absolutely no value when trying to describe what's going on in a truly multicultural society.

  • Ken Shultz||

    "White officers are no more likely to use lethal force against minorities than nonwhite officers," says Charles Menifield, lead author of a large new Rutgers study on the cops' use of deadly force in America. But black Americans are killed by police more than two times as much as Americans Generally."

    If black Americans are killed by police more than twice as often as the average, are they four times or half as likely to interact with the police?

  • Ken Shultz||

    In other words, they're not telling us whether this is above or below their proportion of the population that gets arrested.

  • Juice||

    The problem with the study is they concentrated on race and everything in the study was looked at through that lens. I think by doing that they miss the true underlying problem, which is the complete unaccountability of police.

  • Eddy||

    "White officers are no more likely to use lethal force against minorities than nonwhite officers,"

    They don't seem to have investigated whether these uses of force were justified, just that they're not racist.

    Shooting someone because he has attitude, or a sandwich wrapped in tinfoil, or he has a gun because he just shot someone invading his home...that doesn't count as racist so I guess it's not a problem.

  • John I||

    No, that's not what they did. The article linked is very critical of police violence.

  • ||

    John,

    Did you read the actual paper on Wiley Online? If so, it should have answered your question above as to the value of the study.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    Its John I. We already have a John and he is better.

  • ||

    Do you correct everyone who calls you "LC"? Or do you understand that truncating a username is acceptable shorthand?

  • loveconstitution1789||

    Sock puppeteers use similar names to trick people.

    I just keeps it real.

  • Weigel's Cock Ring||

    Writer for the South China Morning Posts says thatChina should cut its losses in the trade war by conceding defeat to Donald Trump.

    This is the best freaking idea I've heard in almost two years! Thank you sir for recognizing that you guys have been fucking us over long enough.

  • Happy Chandler||

    While I think China should largely eliminate restrictions unilaterally, that's not really what the article is recommending.

    He wants China to use the EU plan. Skip Mnuchin, because he is not empowered to make a deal. Any deal Mnuchin makes can be sunk with a Trump tweet.

    He wants Xi to go talk to Trump, have a photo op, and call it a deal like the EU did. They don't actually give anything up, but they flatter Trump.

  • Happy Chandler||

    While I think China should largely eliminate restrictions unilaterally, that's not really what the article is recommending.

    He wants China to use the EU plan. Skip Mnuchin, because he is not empowered to make a deal. Any deal Mnuchin makes can be sunk with a Trump tweet.

    He wants Xi to go talk to Trump, have a photo op, and call it a deal like the EU did. They don't actually give anything up, but they flatter Trump.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    The EU cracked and that is all that matters.

  • ||

    the "alt-right" group that started the deadly ruckus

    This is some fucking bullshit. I don't know who started it but I know that the idea that one person or side did is unadulterated bullshit. Like saying the Patriots started the Superbowl, except the Patriots list a public roster, didn't show up to protest hours and days before the game and weren't exactly being taunted or threatened beforehand. Moreover, even if the Patriots did 'start the ruckus' it's not like they were scoring touchdowns on themselves and the Eagles just happened to show up.

    This is fucked up.

  • Happy Chandler||

    There's a guy on the right facing murder charges.

    There's multiple guys on the right convicted of malicious wounding in an attack that sent a guy to the hospital with sever injuries. He faced a malicious assault charge, but the trial affirmed that he acted in self defense.

    I don't think anyone from the left was ever charged with violence.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    Lefties wear masks, so theyre harder to catch?

  • This Machine Chips Fascists||

    Rubio's tea party cred has never been more than skin-deep. He is, and always has been, a statist tool. His war-boner is priapic. He's been a chronic paraste on the public tit. Soon to be US Senator Rick Scott will reduce him to tears with his crazy eyed stare and cocaine fueled jabbering.

  • Palin's Buttplug||

    Pure Laura Ingraham. She wants to MAKE AMERICA WHITE AGAIN! with Trumpty Dumpty.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    MAGA!

  • This Machine Chips Fascists||

    You know who is a narcissist cunt?

  • This Machine Chips Fascists||

    /else/

  • Happy Chandler||

    I'm so vain, I think this comment's about me.

  • chemjeff radical individualist||

    She doesn't want to "make America white".

    But it is clear that she has some stereotypical and caricatured views of immigrants. Notably, that there's something insidious and un-American about what immigrants are doing. And she herself did not make the distinction between legal and illegal immigrants. She blamed both groups.

  • Rockabilly||

    Fuck nazis fuck commies fuck them all

    Every last fucking one of them

  • Cory Crockett||

    Well, here's a family reunion that DEFINITELY will not include Tyler Perry. Might I suggest that Dr.Phil, @ the very least, sit in via intercom (for the sake of mediation/re-establishing civility between them)?

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    White officers are no more likely to use lethal force against minorities than nonwhite officers...

    It's blue and nonblue.

  • Juice||

    [M]y commentary had nothing to do with race or ethnicity

    Just "demographics".

  • Duelles||

    Don't pick on Laura Ingraham for 'splaining a truth.

GET REASON MAGAZINE

Get Reason's print or digital edition before it’s posted online