I meant the nazis = socialist fallacy.
So now Socialism isn’t left wing?
Your ability to redefine words to fit your position would make The Ministry or Truth proud.
Fake hate crime: Jussie Smollett paid two Nigerian brothers to attack him
- Thread starter tang0
- Start date
I meant the nazis = socialist fallacy.
So now Socialism isn’t left wing?
Your ability to redefine words to fit your position would make The Ministry or Truth proud.
Man of Honour
This again, I see.
I think the root of the problem is the insistence that the left/right split covers all of politics. It doesn't. It's a bit arbitrary and based on old seating arrangements in a parliament. It's not at all impossible for a political ideology to contain elements associated with "left" and elements associated with "right", especially with extremist ideologies because the distinction is even smaller and less meaningful at the extremes. A left/right line should be drawn as a horseshoe shape, not a straight line. Or not at all - I think that the simplest representation with any significant meaning is the left/right/authoritarian/libertarian quadrants, not a single line.
On top of that, fascism was very explicitly not left or right. It was deliberately made that way, a clear rejection of the left/right idea. Nazism was primarily authoritarian and nationalist, but it did have elements of socialism. Which is why many German communists converted to nazism as it gained power - there was enough common ground.
I think the root of the problem is the insistence that the left/right split covers all of politics. It doesn't. It's a bit arbitrary and based on old seating arrangements in a parliament. It's not at all impossible for a political ideology to contain elements associated with "left" and elements associated with "right", especially with extremist ideologies because the distinction is even smaller and less meaningful at the extremes. A left/right line should be drawn as a horseshoe shape, not a straight line. Or not at all - I think that the simplest representation with any significant meaning is the left/right/authoritarian/libertarian quadrants, not a single line.
On top of that, fascism was very explicitly not left or right. It was deliberately made that way, a clear rejection of the left/right idea. Nazism was primarily authoritarian and nationalist, but it did have elements of socialism. Which is why many German communists converted to nazism as it gained power - there was enough common ground.
Soldato
From Smollett to the Nazis in 18 pages 
Good post.
I find the problem is that in order to have an honest debate, there needs to be mutual agreement on the definition of the terms being used to frame the debate. So often (especially recently) it seems that long-established definitions are being flipped or twisted which results in certain parties debating in bad faith.
Last edited:
I understood full well what you meant which is why I pointed out that when the press went looking for a community spokesperson for the wider political viewpoint for the offender that they selected, in this case, someone who has repeatedly expressed enthusiastic support for socialism.
With the same press labelling this view point as (neo) nazism. So I am suggesting the comparison isn't fallacious at all.
The left / right divide often isn't helpful because it means different things depending on who / what you are talking about but in terms of economics Spencer / Nazism in general is closer to the fringes of the Democrats then that of the Republicans in that they are both big state socialists with the primary differences being in who they beleive should be the targets of the states largesse.
In summary the general public are being fed a false narrative. The confusing political landscape doesn't help (like the current POTUS spending large sections of his adult life as a Democrat) but the press are often complicit in wilfully misleading the public..
Be it when placing massive amounts of time into reporting supposed race hate crimes or incidents uncritically to promote a political agenda
Be it when caught out blatantly editorialising the news
Or when they are trying to associate neo nazism to the Republican viewpoint when it's clear that an examination of the actual poltical views of the former group aligns them to the fringes of the Democrats at least as much if not more than Republicans.
Hence it isn't at all surprising to find 'neo nazi's' who were formerly rather active Democrat activists and /or ones that advocate for big state socialism in complete opposition to the economic position of the Republican party.
If I had written it myslef I would have said something like 'an authoritan ideology that centralised control'
I. E. I was refering to a tendency for the ideology to centralise control in a totalitarian state rather then being 'centrist' in any political sense. I can see why this wasn't clear. Perhaps I misunderstood StriderX post when I took the reference to centrist to be in relation to centralised control rather then political affiliation. It just isn't common to hear Nazism associated with political centrism of any form rather it is generally placed more to an extreme position.
Anyway
When it comes to this case its clear that large sections of the mainstream press couldn't help themselves.. . Much like the Covington debacle the association of the story to the MAGA narrative was enough for them to completely lose any semblance of rationality or journalistic due diligence they just ran with it . ..
They didn't stop to think whether a supposed racist attack, in an area with loads of Cctv (but conviently none of the attack) , in an overwhelmingly Democrat voting, affluent area of Chicago, by two MAGA supporters who were racists and homophobes but yet knew who Jussie Smollet was and that he was on Empire in the middle of a cold snap whilst the offenders were conviently in possession of a noose and a bottle of bleach was credible.
They just ran with it because it (too perfectly) fitted their narrative. Which is part of the reason so many of these sort of stories turn out to be false/ mis reported.
Last edited:
Ok, so he is a Socialist but he isn't a Nazi, got it.
You can't use him as an example of Nazis being Socialist and then, in the same breath, claim that the press is creating a false narrative about him being a Nazi.
Yes, StriderX meant politically centre, not centralised control.
The last time this came up on these forums, (I thought) everyone had come to a compromise whereby it was agreed that the Nazis has elements of both right- and left-wing ideology and were therefore centrist but extreme authoritarian — not Socialist — as Angilion pointed out.
I agree with you on this. As I said earlier, the polarisation of politics, helped by the media on both sides, is a very worrying trend.
Which is why I'm going to enjoy so much when they finally go bankrupt.
A grand jury have charged him with 16 counts.
He should get a decent chunk of time behind bars.
Having said that, if Manafort only gets 47 months for all of his shady dealings, maybe Smollett will get off lightly.
If he goes away for a long time, I can see certain activists shouting “the system is biased against minorities, a white person would never have been given such a long sentence”.
If he doesn’t receive a long sentence other activists (maybe even some of the same) will decry the broken system that’s lenient if you’re rich and/or famous…
He should get a decent chunk of time behind bars.
Having said that, if Manafort only gets 47 months for all of his shady dealings, maybe Smollett will get off lightly.
If he goes away for a long time, I can see certain activists shouting “the system is biased against minorities, a white person would never have been given such a long sentence”.
If he doesn’t receive a long sentence other activists (maybe even some of the same) will decry the broken system that’s lenient if you’re rich and/or famous…
Last edited:
White people dont generally fake racist letters. And then when they don’t win a gold medal in the victim olympics don’t up the ante and stage a fake racist assault.
The guy is an ******** and he is fanning the flames of the racist fire he claims to want to extinguish. He’s a tool. Lock him up.
Soldato
- Joined
- 13 Jun 2011
- Posts
- 6,053
I agree.
However, there’s currently a debate in the US about race and sentencing. If Smollett does get a long time behind bars, I can easily see how it would play out in that debate, especially as he’s rich and famous:
“Even riches and fame can’t save you from a long sentence if you’re black…” especially when the likes of Manafort gets a pathetic sentence for admittedly different but certainly serious crimes.
Just to be clear, I’m not saying I agree with the above, I’m just predicting the backlash from either outcome.
Indeed, I would hate to be on the wrong end of a Justice system that is as dominated by Politics as the US one!
Indeed. Based on Manafort's sentence, i guess he should get about 2 day in prison
lol...just joking, he will probably get more than Manafort because America is broken.
Well it is a double edged sword tbh... he benefited from his fame, status (and to some extent his race) when reporting the crime, it got widespread coverage, he almost certainly got much more attention and police time focused on the case than if he had been some random anonymous person reporting a hate crime let alone some random anonymous person merely reporting an assault.
Now that it has backfired, now that he's wasted those resources it is quite understandable that they'd want to throw the book at him - the attention that he brought to this that he wanted to take advantage of has now worked against him.
I don't think any justice system really has much consistency when it comes to the sort of sentences the man in the street would like to see imposed for various crimes etc.. vs what actually gets delivered. I generally tend to think that prison isn't a always good solution though does have a useful function of keeping people convicted of violent crime off the streets and indeed in stopping repeat offenders for a while.
AFAIK Manafort is still awaiting sentencing on some charges, IIRC current sentence he's serving relates to bank and tax fraud for which he's got 47 months. People mostly seem miffed at this because Trump...
Last edited:
True. Hopefully they do throw the book at him and it discourages anyone else from attempting anything similar.
However, I don’t think that will dissuade those ardent campaigners who will use it as an example of unfair sentencing.
No doubt there’s a Trump effect but I think most people are miffed because Muller recommended 20 years and he got less than four… it’s seen as a perfect example of money and power resulting in shorter sentences, especially when there are recent cases of people without money and power getting longer sentences for much less-serious crimes.
I don't think anyone can claim it is a perfect example of anything without context, specifically what the usual sentences are in similar cases, how often judges do go against guidelines, do the judiciary generally feel that those guidelines are excessive for the offences he was convicted of in that case and/or admitted to, how do they compare in terms of severity to similar cases etc... I'd presume a lot of people convicted under the laws used to convict him have money and power.
There are plenty of people on the left who'd otherwise argue that prison isn't the answer for a lot of crimes etc.. in other cases who are disappointed that this guy associated with Trump didn't get longer in prison for his white collar crime. Likewise there will be people on the right who'd otherwise be absolutely fine with some of the excesses of mandatory sentencing laws or three strikes and you're out laws in the US yet would be happy with the result. Same will apply in a few days when he gets further sentencing, if he gets close to 10 years then some people will be celebrating etc..
I don't know whether the Judge in that case was doing something exceptional in his sentencing compared to other similar cases, that is what I'd compare it too if I were to voice an opinion either way. I'd certainly not want to voice an opinion mostly based on being triggered by anything associated with the orange idiot currently occupying the White House.
Yes, you make some good points.
When I said “It’s seen as a perfect example…” I was referring to the articles, commentary and comments I read when the sentence was announced.
You’re quite right, that perception may be unfounded and/or biased due to his association with Trump. However, it’s certainly out there and it will no doubt be used to frame the Smollett sentence whether it’s harsh or lenient.
Soldato
Just as it is to do with Fake hate crimes. It seems that now Covington kids have announced they plan to sue CNN for $250,000,000. That will leave a dent. I fail to see how anything other than a large settlement can be awarded.
Bill Maher and Trevor Noah will be next in the firing line as they both made comments after the incident was exposed as fake news. The lawsuit has made it clear more than 50 entities and [far left/left leaning] celebrities and activist "journalists" are to be sued for damages.
The NYT vs Sullivan case has been explained away by some pundits citing that libel now tied to knowingly reporting false information is not covered in the ruling. Naturally, I wish Sandman and the Covington kids all the luck in hitting that decrepit cesspit of a news outlet with the full $250,000,000.
Bill Maher and Trevor Noah will be next in the firing line as they both made comments after the incident was exposed as fake news. The lawsuit has made it clear more than 50 entities and [far left/left leaning] celebrities and activist "journalists" are to be sued for damages.
The NYT vs Sullivan case has been explained away by some pundits citing that libel now tied to knowingly reporting false information is not covered in the ruling. Naturally, I wish Sandman and the Covington kids all the luck in hitting that decrepit cesspit of a news outlet with the full $250,000,000.
So using kids in the opposite direction is cool to you then? I believe they should sue, but.
It’s the exact value of Washington post, it’s clearly engineered.
Associate
- Joined
- 3 Feb 2019
- Posts
- 747
It's not using them if the right wing media just report on what they are doing. If the right wing try to say the kids did nothing, holding them up as pariahs, then that's exploiting them. Note how the right leaning media haven't over egged the pudding as they know the Covington boys were acting like little douches at other parts of the day.
The right wing are entitled to use stories that support their narrative as is the left. It's the clearly faked stories that have been linked to the left that have caused the problems.
The right wing are entitled to use stories that support their narrative as is the left. It's the clearly faked stories that have been linked to the left that have caused the problems.