It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Dear Resistance, You're Not The Resistance, You're The Establishment

page: 3
39
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 10 2019 @ 04:39 PM
link   
a reply to: Dfairlite


You're not the resistance, you're the establishment.


Take things out of context and say that all you want, it doesn't make it true.

Sounds to me like you're trying to convince yourself.



Could that be just a tiny bit of self reflection creeping in?




posted on Jun, 10 2019 @ 04:40 PM
link   
a reply to: underwerks

I took the section you bolded and applied it to the OP. How is that out of context?



posted on Jun, 10 2019 @ 04:42 PM
link   

originally posted by: Dfairlite
a reply to: underwerks

I took the section you bolded and applied it to the OP. How is that out of context?


By disregarding the rest of it. You know, taking it out of context.



posted on Jun, 10 2019 @ 04:43 PM
link   
"No establishment, no establishment, you're the establishment!!!"




posted on Jun, 10 2019 @ 04:43 PM
link   
a reply to: underwerks

Oh, you mean by disregarding your comment on what it meant. See, that's not context that's just your opinion on the fact you presented.



posted on Jun, 10 2019 @ 04:47 PM
link   
a reply to: Dfairlite

Nope. That's the definition. You guys have been and always will be the establishment.

Get used to it.





posted on Jun, 10 2019 @ 04:48 PM
link   
a reply to: underwerks

Here's one for you, using the definition you provided, when did the 3rd reich transform from the resistance into the establishment?

Bonus: Then was it conservatives who were fighting Hitler?



posted on Jun, 10 2019 @ 04:50 PM
link   
a reply to: underwerks

Yes; here is the definition:



a group in a society exercising power and influence over matters of policy or taste, and seen as resisting change. the ecclesiastical system organized by law


All of the organizations I listed in OP match that description. In fact they go to great lengths to resist change.



posted on Jun, 10 2019 @ 05:29 PM
link   
a reply to: Dfairlite

And literally every person involved in politics, depending on which side you ask.



posted on Jun, 10 2019 @ 05:37 PM
link   

originally posted by: JustJohnny
a reply to: Dfairlite

BWAHAHAHA..

Basically all of corporate America/big business are conservative Republicans..


Conservatives have dominated American politics for the majority of the time..



The definition of conservatism is to uphold the traditions of the past or bring back a bygone era.. aka literally the establishment by literal definition.. lol



I think it is extremely telling that you think liberals are the establishment, when the democrat party is comprised of the least powerful people in America..

Blacks, gays, Hispanics, academia...

The only 2 wealthy and influential fields dominated by liberals are silicone valley and Hollywood..



That’s right.. the people who usually came from nothing and only used their own skills and talents to become world famous.. are mostly liberals..





I understand your confusion. But remember: the political parties are not the same thing as the people that vote for them. They can vote for Democrats, but they are not the Democratic party. The party members may claim to value this or that, but in reality they're elites using people for some entirely disparate agenda. That party politics.



posted on Jun, 10 2019 @ 06:03 PM
link   
a reply to: JustJohnny



By definition conservatism is attempting to CONSERVE the establishment..


It's funny how all of you lefties seem to have discovered root words recently. It's too bad you use your new found first grade knowledge to boil conservatism down to this weird thing it's not, where it's goal is to conserve the status quo. That is not what conservatism is, if you took a political science class or two you'd know that the only change conservatism rejects is radical change for the sake of radical change. The reasons for this are pretty simple and common sense to most people (mainly, human nature is not highly malleable).



posted on Jun, 10 2019 @ 06:17 PM
link   
a reply to: Dfairlite

The hyperbole aside, left or right, the Koch’s are bad news.



posted on Jun, 10 2019 @ 08:57 PM
link   
I wish there was a resistance. We need more change than either democrats or republicans can bring. The politicians are almost all pieces of crap that do not have our best interest in mind. People keep hoping for different results and it isn't happening. Not with our current system. You all keep talking about some sort of civil war. Let's do this, or shut your holes and go back to sleep.



posted on Jun, 11 2019 @ 12:58 AM
link   
a reply to: Dfairlite

There are actually people who think of those you listed as "the resistance?!" It seriously can't be more than a few thousand worldwide, can it? I would think more people believe the moon is made of cheese and grass it actually the fur of a giant, planetwide creature than would think that.

And people -even Pelosian Democrats thinking the Kock brothers aren't terrible bad guys because they're backing Democrats?

Lots of posts lately proving that the tiny minority of extreme leftists are succeeding in making people believe they are a large majority.



posted on Jun, 11 2019 @ 09:20 AM
link   
Well said. a reply to: Dfairlite



posted on Jun, 11 2019 @ 12:00 PM
link   

originally posted by: Xcalibur254
To be fair, wouldn't the Libertarian argument be that border states should be able to set their own immigration laws?

They can argue all they want... the Constitution delegated this power (to create uniform rules for naturalization and to protect the nation from invasion) to the Federal government.


So by getting the Feds out of the equation, doesn't that sound like a more traditionally Conservative position?

Yeah... ummm... no.



posted on Jun, 11 2019 @ 01:14 PM
link   

originally posted by: underwerks
a reply to: Dfairlite

Nope. That's the definition. You guys have been and always will be the establishment.

Get used to it.




So every time a democrat wins office it's a win for "the resistance"? For the last 200+ years? You actually think Obama wasn't the establishment? Wise up chief, just because you lost your place at the head of the table doesn't mean you're not still part of the same dysfunctional family.



posted on Jun, 11 2019 @ 01:44 PM
link   

originally posted by: Dfairlite
a reply to: underwerks

Yes; here is the definition:



a group in a society exercising power and influence over matters of policy or taste, and seen as resisting change. the ecclesiastical system organized by law


All of the organizations I listed in OP match that description. In fact they go to great lengths to resist change.


It's all part of their delusion that each of them is a beautiful and unique snowflake. It's only the guys on the other side that are all uniform and bland. We're soooo anti-establishment, and, like, cool you know?



posted on Jun, 11 2019 @ 01:58 PM
link   
a reply to: Dfairlite

The dictionary boils conservatism down to that...


Because that is the definition of conservatism..


It has been that way since the pro-monarchy aristocracy sat on the right and the pro democracy peasants sat on the left of French parliament..


That is why right/left and liberal/conservative can be applied to any culture in any time..


Because those who want to PRESERVE or return to the old status quo are conservatives ..


Those who want to try something new are the liberals..


It is sad Fox News has convinced people of alternate definitions


edit on 11-6-2019 by JustJohnny because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 11 2019 @ 02:00 PM
link   
a reply to: face23785

The vast conspiracy by Webster’s dictionary?!?!


Lmao



new topics

top topics



 
39
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join