The Bud Fight, sorry Presidential Debate

[Vegas Claret]

Armed militia groups plotting violent acts of terrorism sure would be worrying, right KateR? Just as well that hasn't happened or anything.

out of interest would you class them as an organization as they are only acting upon their beliefs ? I certainly do

[Spiral]

out of interest would you class them as an organization as they are only acting upon their beliefs ? I certainly do

Whether or not the Wolverine Watchmen (the group alluded to who are suspected of committing terror offences) constitute an 'organisation' isn't really being contested and I don't think it has any relevance beyond notching up some false moral equivalences. We're at the risk of pointlessly merging together two different conversations happening separately on this thread - I just want to stress that before the conversation becomes a confusing mess - but while we're here I'll answer. Oh, by the way, I alluded to the Michigan plot in response to KateR's pearl clutching about the potential for militia violence, as though it isn't actually already happening in the US. To my admittedly limited knowledge about them, the Wolverine Watchmen group who plotted to kidnap the Michigan Governor appears to be a fairly nascent group with ties to the boogaloo movement, which is itself very, very loosely organised, if at all: it appears to be an ideologically driven movement, not an organisation as such. I believe this is the view of law enforcement (I stand to be corrected) and I read an article interviewing some form of social scientist/political scientist (or some such variation on 'expert', but I can't remember the article, sorry) who took that view.

[PeterWilton]

hmm

Organization: an organized body of people with a particular purpose

So, unless you are telling me that a bunch of people just happen to be in the same city, all wanting to do the same thing without any form of pre contact then by definition they are an organization. You are so stuck behind your agenda that common sense has left your building. You don't need to tell me who Antifa are, what they stand for and what they do - I'm very very well aware. The whole essence of Antifa I agree is an ideology and a belief in it's origination but the galvanization of that movement has been organized - thus an organization.

I don't know how much more simply I need to articulate this for you but having a common idea does not mean you are that idea. **** sake. This is easily understandable for any other idea, so how the hell are you struggling with this one?

[PeterWilton]

Anyway, behold the master race

https://v.redd.it/gj1gb7zi83t51

[Vegas Claret]

I don't know how much more simply I need to articulate this for you but having a common idea does not mean you are that idea. **** sake. This is easily understandable for any other idea, so how the hell are you struggling with this one?

I'm not struggling at all, I agree'd with the essence of your argument in the origination and historical belief system of antifa but not the fact that you have taken it upon yourself to redefine the word organization.

By the way, you will never win an argument or gain respect at any table when you scream and shout like a 10 year old. If you think you are not being understood correctly (which is always a possibility) then instead of throwing your toys out of the pram try thinking of a different way to explain what you are trying to converse.

[Damo]

So, twitter and Facebook are cancelling a story in the NY post about creepy Joe and political influence in the Ukraine.
I'd imagine some of you virtuous people will be absolutely furious about social media trying to influence the election

[Vegas Claret]

So, twitter and Facebook are cancelling a story in the NY post about creepy Joe and political influence in the Ukraine.
I'd imagine some of you virtuous people will be absolutely furious about social media trying to influence the election

you do realise that Zuckerberg is tongue deep in Trump don't you ? There's a reason it's being canned by a lot of people..........a disputed allegation that has never been corroborated. The paper claimed the emails were supplied by Trump lawyer Rudy Giuliani, after being copied from a laptop that had been abandoned in a computer-repair shop.

I mean, agenda aside, c'mon Damo you seriously can't think that the story is remotely legit ? Guilliani is a ******* fraud.

[Damo]

you do realise that Zuckerberg is tongue deep in Trump don't you ? There's a reason it's being canned by a lot of people..........a disputed allegation that has never been corroborated. The paper claimed the emails were supplied by Trump lawyer Rudy Giuliani, after being copied from a laptop that had been abandoned in a computer-repair shop.

I mean, agenda aside, c'mon Damo you seriously can't think that the story is remotely legit ? Guilliani is a ******* fraud.

Mate, I've been reading Trump, Russian collusion stories all over twitter and Facebook for a good 3 years that proved to be unfounded.
Whether it turns out to be true or not, Facebook and Twitter are on a really sticky wicket here when they decide what they will and will not publish.
When they decide to censor something like this, despite it not being proven to be false, then they are basically endorsing every single potentially fake story that they allow to be posted about people that they don't support.

Also, if what you are saying about Zuckerberg and trump is true, then why does he donate more money to the Democrats campaign than he does to Republicans?

[Devils_Advocate]

So, twitter and Facebook are cancelling a story in the NY post about creepy Joe and political influence in the Ukraine.
I'd imagine some of you virtuous people will be absolutely furious about social media trying to influence the election

It's not them trying to influence the election, it's them showing their coparate responsibility in stopping dangerous misinformation being spread on their platforms

I know you love your Toby Young libertarianism but whether it suits your ideals or not in the real world this is the good thing to do.

I know you have twitter and plenty of good summarys on there but look up Judd Legum and his thread to see how disgraceful this story really is (can't link at moment)

You may still want to be an idealist but honestly tell me that allowing gross misinformation like this to be shared as fact across mass social media platforms is less dangerous to democracy and the US election than allowing companies like Facebook,and Twitter to responsible manage their own commercial platforms and decide what content they allow and don't allow

[Damo]

It's not them trying to influence the election, it's them showing their coparate responsibility in stopping dangerous misinformation being spread on their platforms

I know you love your Toby Young libertarianism but whether it suits your ideals or not in the real world this is the good thing to do.

I know you have twitter and plenty of good summarys on there but look up Judd Legum and his thread to see how disgraceful this story really is (can't link at moment)

You may still want to be an idealist but honestly tell me that allowing gross misinformation like this to be shared as fact across mass social media platforms is less dangerous to democracy and the US election than allowing companies like Facebook,and Twitter to responsible manage their own commercial platforms and decide what content they allow and don't allow

My problem is, what gross misinformation both platforms allow to be shared.
I have no doubt the NY post story is a load of nonsense, and you are probably right that people should be alerted to the fact it contains potential misinformation. However, there is still plenty of potential misinformation widely available on both platforms relating to Trump.
Social media needs to decide if its a platform for opinions, and allow people to make up their own mind or a news publication. If its going to be the latter, then it needs to fact check both sides of the political spectrum with equal vigour.
Apologies in advance for quoting Jack White, but it can't be the pimp and the prostitute.

[Devils_Advocate]

My problem is, what gross misinformation both platforms allow to be shared.
I have no doubt the NY post story is a load of nonsense, and you are probably right that people should be alerted to the fact it contains potential misinformation. However, there is still plenty of potential misinformation widely available on both platforms relating to Trump.
Social media needs to decide if its a platform for opinions, and allow people to make up their own mind or a news publication. If its going to be the latter, then it needs to fact check both sides of the political spectrum with equal vigour.
Apologies in advance for quoting Jack White, but it can't be the pimp and the prostitute.

As always we're probably not miles and part but not likely to fully agree. I would love our press and social media platforms to be completely fact checked and have things labelled or removed at certain thresholds but my principle belief as long as it is within the realms of the law then better to have people's views out there to be challenged

I just think social media has become such a dangerous tool for misinformation (just look at QAnon which is thankfully being addressed) that we do need to do something about it and that walks a fine line between the good it can do and the dangers

These issues are gonna roll on but at the moment I'm definitely more pragmatic than principled about this as I see more at stake in the present by not addressing misinformation than just leaving it wide open

Edit: Nowt wrong with quoting Jack White

[martin_p]

hmm

Organization: an organized body of people with a particular purpose

So, unless you are telling me that a bunch of people just happen to be in the same city, all wanting to do the same thing without any form of pre contact then by definition they are an organization. You are so stuck behind your agenda that common sense has left your building. You don't need to tell me who Antifa are, what they stand for and what they do - I'm very very well aware. The whole essence of Antifa I agree is an ideology and a belief in it's origination but the galvanization of that movement has been organized - thus an organization.

If you take that definition in the same literal way you have then a stag do is an organisation. But you’ve missed off a key bit of the definition that clarifies what it means ‘such as a business or government department’.

[Spijed]

My problem is, what gross misinformation both platforms allow to be shared.
I have no doubt the NY post story is a load of nonsense, and you are probably right that people should be alerted to the fact it contains potential misinformation. However, there is still plenty of potential misinformation widely available on both platforms relating to Trump.
Social media needs to decide if its a platform for opinions, and allow people to make up their own mind or a news publication. If its going to be the latter, then it needs to fact check both sides of the political spectrum with equal vigour.
Apologies in advance for quoting Jack White, but it can't be the pimp and the prostitute.

You are worried about Twitter but surely fixing the election in Trump's favour should be by far the biggest issue:

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/wh ... p-approval

Democrats pressed Barrett to say she’d recuse herself from any election-related case, but she refused to do so, although she said she’d take the idea “very seriously” if such a case came her way. When asked by Democratic Sen. Amy Klobuchar if she thought absentee ballots were “an essential way to vote for millions of Americans right now,” she said she couldn’t comment. And she also declined to answer a question about whether voter intimidation was illegal — even though this question arguably has an easy, factual answer.

[AndrewJB]

The Antifa movement in the United States has been less violent than its European counterpart. Yet, there are examples of American anti-fascists escalating their violence beyond shoving and fistfights. Last July, Willem Van Spronsen attacked an Immigration and Customs Enforcement detention center in Tacoma, Washington, with a rifle and incendiary devices. Before he could cause much damage, the 68-year-old man was shot and killed by the police. After his death, a manifesto was posted in Van Spronsen’s name on It’s Going Down and other anarchist websites. In his manifesto, Van Spronsen identified himself as an Antifa supporter (“I am antifa”), railed against the Trump administration’s policy of detaining illegal immigrants (“fascist hooligans preying on vulnerable people in our streets”), and called for violent resistance against the government (“I strongly encourage comrades and incoming comrades to arm themselves. We are now responsible for defending people from the predatory state”).

These examples illustrate how Antifa’s violence could escalate to terrorism or guerrilla warfare if it is channeled into a more organized, sustained, and bloody campaign. If anti-fascists started bombing buildings with explosives or gunning down Immigration and Customs Enforcement employees and white supremacists in the streets, it would make sense to consider such incidents terrorism. But that’s not what we are seeing — at least so far. Though sucker-punching someone in the face is certainly violent, it’s not terrorism.

Antifa is an anti-fascist action and left-wing political movement in the United States comprising an array of autonomous groups that aim to achieve their objectives through the use of both nonviolent and violent direct action rather than through policy reform. A highly decentralized movement, antifa political activists are anti-racists who engage in protest tactics, seeking to combat fascists and racists such as neo-Nazis, white supremacists and other far-right extremists. This may involve digital activism, harassment, physical violence] and property damage against those whom they identify as belonging to the far-right. Much antifa activism is nonviolent, involving poster and flyer campaigns, delivering speeches, marching in protest, and community organizing on behalf of anti-racist and anti-white nationalist causes.

Individuals involved in the movement tend to hold anti-authoritarian, anti-capitalist, anti-fascist and anti-state views, subscribing to a range of left-wing ideologies such as anarchism, communism, Marxism, social democracy and socialism. Both the name antifa and the logo with two flags representing anarchism and communism are derived from the German Antifa movement. Antifa actions have received both criticism and praise.

It is quite obvious why those on the left would try to distort what Antifa really is and support Biden's claim to it being just an idea, I stated previously about people who support the behavior they exhibit and cause destruction and harm to people plus pulling statues down, more so to use of weapons/firearms. I would also state very clearly that white supremacists and org's like KKK are ridiculously bad and I would never support or provide any form of justification for them, I would support peaceful protesting against them, in that which some parts of Antifa engage. Also I don't believe Antifa is a terrorist org but it's a lot more than an idea and it appears to be getting much more militant and could easily slide into that category, but hopefully not.

Who is/are the leader(s), if it’s an organisation? If it’s not an organisation, is it just an ideology?