Rise of the American Left Wing Authoritarianism (Fascism from the left)

a reply to: scolai

Its defined as right-wing but yes i have read arguments saying that its typically leftist.

I know...

a reply to: onequestion

Clearly both sides have extremes and no party is immune. What we have in our present gov't is a farse show that depicts itself as Right and Left, with some Independent scattered about. They pretend to represent their side of the political spectrum but all they are doing is playing the division game. We all know it, divide and conquer. Most of them are fascist authoritarians disguised as either a R or a D.

It's them you should be concerned about, not college students heated debates or some social justice professor on a podcast.

a reply to: onequestion

What violence? Are you referring the Chicago protests?

And are you also saying Trump supporters aren't violent?!

Trump's hate speech was mild? Oh okay, so mild hate speech is acceptable. Got it.

a reply to: Swills

Hmmm well, besides making this a right vs left wing conversation what its really about is thought policing and sensitivity culture having to much power and influence in universities and how they are advancing a new culture meme of indoctrination over hyper sensitivity

Its bad, its brainwashing and they are trying to control all of our political narratives and the MSM is all in.

a reply to: Swills

Oh no, no.

Not even taking the bait with you Swills, I'm sorry your going to have to bring that somewhere else.

a reply to: onequestion

So you're more concerned with college students and professors than the obvious corruption going on in DC? How about the obvious MSM agenda, you know who are all owned by small number of elites?

Shouldn't that be your focus?

a reply to: onequestion

How is it bait? You straight up said all of those things and then refuse to answer my questions about them under the excuse of it being bait? You know what's bait? That post and your OP.

a reply to: Swills

What violence? Are you referring the Chicago protests?
And are you also saying Trump supporters aren't violent?!

I said neither of these things they were inferred by you.

And i said mildly AT BEST, meaning there is room for compromise depending on your position but i dont think it was hate speech i think it was taken out of context and done so on purpose and its literally one of the only talking points any anti Trump people really have.

But go ahead... continue to try to derail threads as you have been doing.

a reply to: scolai

Only one person on that list was an actual fascist and that's Hitler. There's some confusion over the use of the word I think because their definitions have so much overlap, particularly now. All fascist are authoritarians but not all authoritarians are fascist. The rest of them are more properly referred to a totalitarians.

Contrast the lives of Germans under Hitler and those in the Soviet Union under Stalin to see the differences.

originally posted by: Swills
a reply to: onequestion

How is it bait? You straight up said all of those things and then refuse to answer my questions about them under the excuse of it being bait? You know what's bait? That post and your OP.

No one or the other isnt my focus.

I am paying attention to whats happening at our universities considering our future potential leaders may getting brainwashed by this nonsense.

Stop trying to derail my threads.

a reply to: Swills

I'm less concerned than I was before tbh. Trump proves that when it comes to the MSM, at the end of the day, the agenda with the biggest influence is profit motive.

a reply to: theantediluvian

I'd actually like to see a real metric that proves that paradigm rather just using it as a talking point.

a reply to: onequestion

I know you didn't give examples, that's WHY I asked! I gave you one example but never said you said it! So please, what violence are you talking about AND are you saying Trump supporters are non violent?

Mild or not, it's still hate speech whether there is room for compromise or not. Btw, what compromises are we talking about here? Does it depend on how point of view or fact?

How can I derail a thread when I ask you to answer 3 simple questions to your 3 statements. Fact is, you don't want to answer and are trying everything to shut me up, including accusing me of derailing the thread. If you continue to evade the questions it's literally you derailing the thread taking me with you. Just answer the questions about the statements you made. Why is that so hard?

a reply to: Swills

Your trying to derail the thread by making this about Trump and not about the topics present in the OP.

I'm going to assume I'll no longer be responding to your post.

originally posted by: BatheInTheFountain
This thread comes mere MINUTES after an event hosted by Milo Yiannopoulos was shut down by BLM "Activists".

Even threatened Milo physically.

www.breitbart.com...

That's hate crime!

Milo is a gay guy.

a reply to: onequestion

Ok.

US News

So it goes in the prime-time cable wars. A madcap primary season has proven a huge ratings boon to cable TV, much as a Super Bowl yields the ultimate victory of massive audiences and pricey ad revenue. In September, CNN was reportedly charging advertisers $200,000, or 40 times its usual rate, to air a 30-second spot during the GOP debate, and CNBC and Fox News followed suit. According to new Nielsen data shared with U.S. News, the average cost of a 30-second ad during the first 10 presidential debates, between August and January, was approximately $61,000 – a 1,120 percent increase from the average cost of a prime-time spot on CNN.

Sam Feist, CNN's bureau chief in Washington, D.C., says it was clear even in 2014 that this year's election at the end of the Obama administration was poised to be unique, so the network made a "massive investment" to expand political coverage. "We added 50 people to our political coverage team for the 2016 cycle. The lion's share of them were added to the digital coverage team," says Feist, who has covered seven elections for the network. "I don't think we really appreciated back then how significant a story it was going to be." This week, CNN announced plans for a $20 million expansion, with over 200 new staffers.

NYT

The New York Times’s Upshot team, using data from mediaQuant, reported last week that Mr. Trump had received nearly $1.9 billion worth of news coverage; his next closest Republican competitor, Ted Cruz, received a little more than $300 million. Hillary Clinton has received less than $750 million.

Google around a bit but you'll that everyone is in agreement, including Trump and his campaign:

CNN Money

"Maybe Fox was gonna have a 20 or 25 million person debate, but without Mr. Trump's participation, I think they might have a one to two million person debate," Trump campaign manager Corey Lewandowski said earlier in the week.

DonaldJTrump.com - HOW DONALD TRUMP MADE TV PROFITS GREAT AGAIN: INSIDE 2016’S INSATIABLE CASH GRAB

a reply to: onequestion

Future leaders are being brainwashed, see one club called the Skull and Bones. To each his own I guess, but I'd rather not waste my energy as to what's going on at a university because there is literally nothing I can about it. I can however at least vote and focus on my local, state, and federal politicians. There is a political revolution going on right now and people are getting involved and trying to make real changes. The possible removal of the current head of the DNC by a grassroots rival could be enormous and just may become a reality!

What are you gonna do for the children at school? What movements out there can vote out a professor or dean?

That all said, again, I'm not derailing your thread, you just don't want to discuss my thoughts about your OP and that's not how a thread works. Just because you don't like what I say doesn't mean you have the right to shut me up.

Funny thing is, it's conservatives as of late saying Sander supporters are the ones who don't want Trump supporters to have free speech but here you are, a Trump supporter trying to silence a Sanders supporter.

a reply to: theantediluvian

This is exactly why I didn't bring up Trump in the OP.

I won't be responding directly to your post or any other post about Trump.

a reply to: Swills

Here we go....

It's important that these topics are discussed from both sides in the national conversation and that both sides are represented equally in our universities to encourage debate and competition in order for us to evolve from this paradigm.

Man, sometimes I really do wonder.

a reply to: onequestion

Actually I'm not making this about Trump. Again, ALL I am doing is asking you questions about your statements. You refuse to answer and continue to attack and accuse me successfully derailing this thread because you know I will reply to your accusations.

Your game is to continue to dance in your accusatory circle of denial while blaming it on me. Here's a thought, if you don't want to be challenged don't say it. How about you own it and just answer the questions.

What violence are you talking about when it comes to Sander supporters?

Are you of the belief Trump supporters are non violent?

You already answered the third question, kinda, about Trumps "mild" hate speech so I'll let that slide.