A pattern emerges

I am probably late in the game noticing this but have we noticed that the things that we inherently think of as good are the things the Round Tablers infiltrate the hardest.

BLM- should have been a beautiful thing. This was a violent #show and funded like this.

Antifa- the title is supposed to be us versus them. Them being the ones poviding all of our products and food and dictating everything we talk a about ( climate change, racism, sexism, trans acdeptance etc ). Those that know this exists, know these people want to control all the emotional and intellectual energy of this whole planet. And they inserted crazy people with green hair who became the face of this movement.

The Democrats- this is one of my favorites. This is supposedly the group that believes we should all vote to decide. This is irrefutably the group pushing tyrannical agendas that do not have freedoms and rights.

Climate Change- this cant not be mentioned. Everything alive feeds directly off our atmosphere. The carbondioxide becomes the food we eat and creates the oxygen we breathe. I dont think there has been a counter study to human caused climate change during my lifetime yet somehow we all just believe this.

Anyways, if youve read this far thanks for your time.

a reply to: Exit89

Infiltrated. Aka co-opted.

Why? Well to create ideological division.

These are all microcosms of what has and is still currently being played out around the globe.

a reply to: Exit89

The US has gone from pursuit of happiness to big tech and big government colluding to turn the world into social justice boot camp.

Oh I’m a social justice warrior
With scores of Soro lawyers

With DA’s that won’t prosecute
Because they are democrats prostitutes

While big tech gets to pick who is published
To keep the common present masked and hushed

And lies are fact check as truth with gleeful hypocrisy
And truth is now a threat to democracy

With respect, I think you are misinterpreting a few things, although I agree there is co-option:

BLM: It was founded by Marxists, literally. It always had a hard left agenda. That does not mean that we should not address police brutality, but BLM's platform was more than that.

Antifa: Antifa was founded in the early 20th century in Germany as a direct offshoot of the communist movement. Original "antifa" are largely anarcho-communists (anarchists) or some Marxists. It was always a radical left group.

Democrats: I'm not sure that their inherent meaning is "democracy," although the name implies that. I think they were more ostensibly to stand for the working class, liberalism, etc, at least in the latter half of the 20th century. It looks like they threw that all out the window.

originally posted by: Exit89
I am probably late in the game noticing this but have we noticed that the things that we inherently think of as good are the things the Round Tablers infiltrate the hardest.

BLM- should have been a beautiful thing. This was a violent #show and funded like this.

Antifa- the title is supposed to be us versus them. Them being the ones poviding all of our products and food and dictating everything we talk a about ( climate change, racism, sexism, trans acdeptance etc ). Those that know this exists, know these people want to control all the emotional and intellectual energy of this whole planet. And they inserted crazy people with green hair who became the face of this movement.

The Democrats- this is one of my favorites. This is supposedly the group that believes we should all vote to decide. This is irrefutably the group pushing tyrannical agendas that do not have freedoms and rights.

Climate Change- this cant not be mentioned. Everything alive feeds directly off our atmosphere. The carbondioxide becomes the food we eat and creates the oxygen we breathe. I dont think there has been a counter study to human caused climate change during my lifetime yet somehow we all just believe this.

Anyways, if youve read this far thanks for your time.

originally posted by: JinMI
a reply to: Exit89

Infiltrated. Aka co-opted.

Why? Well to create ideological division.

These are all microcosms of what has and is still currently being played out around the globe.

The first two of those organizations were never moderate organizations.

a reply to: Madviking

Depends on context. BLM, as the movement, before the organization, was meant to draw attention of police brutality against blacks. You can argue the legitamacy of the claim but by and large that is what was the mass supporters were portraying.

Antifa, long before being Americanised was established across Europe for actually being antifascist. The morons we currently see are not the same as its inherent org.

But your comment was "never moderate" and i think that is correct. However my argument would be that a moderate response to an opposing extreme is akin to capitulation.

Something like what establishment Republicans have been doing for the past 15 years or so.

originally posted by: JinMI
a reply to: Madviking

Depends on context. BLM, as the movement, before the organization, was meant to draw attention of police brutality against blacks. You can argue the legitamacy of the claim but by and large that is what was the mass supporters were portraying.

Antifa, long before being Americanised was established across Europe for actually being antifascist. The morons we currently see are not the same as its inherent org.

But your comment was "never moderate" and i think that is correct. However my argument would be that a moderate response to an opposing extreme is akin to capitulation.

Something like what establishment Republicans have been doing for the past 15 years or so.

BLM was co-founded by a Marxist. They published platforms several times that weren't just about police brutality (which I'm against), but instead leftist ideas.

While I'm against police abuse, the numbers don't match the hysteria. It was shocking to me when I actually looked. There simpy is not an epidemic of mass killings by police of black people. There is a prison industrial complex, and yes disproportionally there are black people in it.

Antifa was explicitly a communist organization when founded in Germany, and yes was against the Nazis. But both OG Antifa, and modern Antifa, were and are largely composed of hard leftists. Even today most serious Antifa members are anarcho-communists.

en.wikipedia.org...(United_States)

Individuals involved in the movement tend to hold anti-authoritarian, anti-capitalist, and anti-state views, subscribing to a range of left-wing ideologies. A majority of individuals involved are anarchists, communists, and socialists who describe themselves as revolutionaries, and have little allegiance to liberal democracy,[8] although some social democrats also adhere to the antifa movement.[6][9][10] The name antifa and the logo with two flags representing anarchism and communism are derived from the German antifa movement.[11]

I agree that there can be a place for serious action, or non-moderate approaches, if faced with serious situations and dangerous powers. But it must match. And, it doesn't grant license to take any and all actions, especially destructive or unjust actions.

To your point about OG Antifa, yes, they were facing a Nazi Party. That doesn't suggest moderate resistance. At the same time, there is strong evidence they were an offshoot of the Communist Party of the USSR, or Communist International. The USSR was an evil empire itself. The plot thickens. The Nazis explicitly stated they modeled their concentration camps after the USSR Gulag system.

a reply to: Madviking

Do you think right and left in the US is the same in the UK?

Point being, you can agree with messages or even finer points without supporting the org.

See populism for example.

originally posted by: JinMI
a reply to: Madviking

Do you think right and left in the US is the same in the UK?

Point being, you can agree with messages or even finer points without supporting the org.

See populism for example.

See the rest of my post above, I added more. It's a lot more complex.

No, Europe is generally harder left than the US. Bernie Sanders is a centrist in Europe. In Europe however, hard left still represents what knowledgeable people in the US would call hard left: Marxism, socialism, communism, etc.

Misinformed people across the board will think that social democracy a la Scandinavia is "socialism," which is one reason 1/3 of millennials state in polls they like "socialism."

Yes, we can and should distill reasonable points and complaints by various organizations. If the rest of their platform is extreme or even dangerous, then I can both understand their critiques and also not accept their solutions.

Agreeing on historical and social critiques is not the same as agreeing on solutions. A lot of solutions either don't work or even are net negative (ahem, Marxism).

Take Nazism for another example. The German people had a lot of legitimate gripes: Treaty of Versailles was unjust and rapacious, their economy was destroyed, etc. Hitler spoke to that, which made him popular. But, his solutions were incredibly destructive.

a reply to: Madviking

Yes, and completely to my point. Agreeing with a principal is one thing.

Nazis and BLM have lost public support.

That is interesting thank you. Im sure i heard this before to be honest.
a reply to: Madviking

originally posted by: Exit89
That is interesting thank you. Im sure i heard this before to be honest.
a reply to: Madviking

Cheers