The Left Does not Reason

[TheReal_ND]

[JohnDonne]

John,

These examples are disingenuous, unfortunately.

Can anyone name a cross-bearing, white hood wearing, black terrorizing leftist group? How about ideology-bearing, mask-wearing, white terrorizing leftist group? (i.e. the rioting group at Berkeley that is the central example of this thread)

Name me an incident wear a left wing militant shot up a black church. Why would they? You're talking about a mentally unbalanced neo-Nazi kid who just got the death penalty for what he did.

Name me a leftist group that travels on motorcycles raping and beating people. Huh? Are you talking about the Hell's Angels or something? I didn't know they were political. Aren't they coke dealers?

Name me a leftist family that points their guns at federal agents. The Castro family.

Are you implying guilt by association? Most conservatives and/or Republicans do not identify themselves as being aligned with the KKK, or Dylan roof, or the Hell's Angels (fwiw, though, I do know several people who sympathize with the Bundys, but only one could really be called a conservative).For the most part, these groups are universally maligned.

Imagine for a moment if Trump supporters were doing what the Berkeley rioters are doing. There would be outrage and calls for Trump and other conservative leaders to "take responsibility" and do something. None of the leaders on the left, that I am aware of, are doing anything at all about this.

So, are they guilty by association?

Are you trying to tire me out by making me over-explain or do you truly not understand the examples I gave were designed to be disingenuous in mockery of the disingenuous call to give examples of right wing riots? Disingenuous because political violence (which is here being argued by my opposition as being the domain of the left) takes more forms than just riots, doubly disingenuous because the denunciation of the left as terrorists for the actions of a few rioters, which is admittedly wrong, amounts to guilt by association, the very thing which you decry here, but were notably absent when others implied the same thing about leftists.

I'm sorry for ruining your childhood.

If you won't attempt to make a legit argument, then you're basically conceding that "The Left Does Not Reason", regardless of whether or not you are self-aware enough to notice it. Political violence does indeed take more forms than just riots, but you haven't provided examples of any that support your argument.

Your idea of an argument seems to entail that I take the exact inverse position as you in regards to political affiliation. Do you really think those are the only two positions to hold? Do you think I'm trying to paint the right as the "true" purveyors of violence? Or maybe my point was the same as yours, that guilt is in fact not by association.

As for the examples I gave, they are true good faith examples, you and others deny them on a criteria which demands an exact mirror image of the leftist riots, which tells me the only examples of political violence you consider admissible are those rigged to come up leftist.

[Mercury]

Are you trying to tire me out by making me over-explain or do you truly not understand the examples I gave were designed to be disingenuous in mockery of the disingenuous call to give examples of right wing riots? Disingenuous because political violence (which is here being argued by my opposition as being the domain of the left) takes more forms than just riots, doubly disingenuous because the denunciation of the left as terrorists for the actions of a few rioters, which is admittedly wrong, amounts to guilt by association, the very thing which you decry here, but were notably absent when others implied the same thing about leftists.

I'm sorry for ruining your childhood.

If you won't attempt to make a legit argument, then you're basically conceding that "The Left Does Not Reason", regardless of whether or not you are self-aware enough to notice it. Political violence does indeed take more forms than just riots, but you haven't provided examples of any that support your argument.

Your idea of an argument seems to entail that I take the exact inverse position as you in regards to political affiliation. Do you really think those are the only two positions to hold? Do you think I'm trying to paint the right as the "true" purveyors of violence? Or maybe my point was the same as yours, that guilt is in fact not by association.

As for the examples I gave, they are true good faith examples, you and others deny them on a criteria which demands an exact mirror image of the leftist riots, which tells me the only examples of political violence you consider admissible are those rigged to come up leftist.

No, that's not really my idea of an argument. I did think that you were trying to paint the right as the "true" purveyors of violence because your post seemed to imply negative associations that don't exist (e.g. biker-gangs = Republicans) in order to excuse or justify something.

[SuburbanFarmer]

Welcome to the forums, JD.

[JohnDonne]

I notice people using the "imagine if" argument a lot. "Imagine if Trump supporters did that." Right now it's usually being said to convince people that the media would behave differently if something different happened. Which is true, it's just they fail to explain what the media would do differently, or how they know they would do it. It simply leaves the listener to fill in the blank with their biases and treat their imaginary outcome as factual. Sometimes they will say something vague like, "The media would tear Trump supporters apart if they did what Hillary supporters did!" But there is no content to the argument, it exists entirely as a mechanism to reinforce group thinking and biases.

[JohnDonne]

I'm sorry for ruining your childhood.

If you won't attempt to make a legit argument, then you're basically conceding that "The Left Does Not Reason", regardless of whether or not you are self-aware enough to notice it. Political violence does indeed take more forms than just riots, but you haven't provided examples of any that support your argument.

Your idea of an argument seems to entail that I take the exact inverse position as you in regards to political affiliation. Do you really think those are the only two positions to hold? Do you think I'm trying to paint the right as the "true" purveyors of violence? Or maybe my point was the same as yours, that guilt is in fact not by association.

As for the examples I gave, they are true good faith examples, you and others deny them on a criteria which demands an exact mirror image of the leftist riots, which tells me the only examples of political violence you consider admissible are those rigged to come up leftist.

No, that's not really my idea of an argument. I did think that you were trying to paint the right as the "true" purveyors of violence because your post seemed to imply negative associations that don't exist (e.g. biker-gangs = Republicans) in order to excuse or justify something.

Oh, well I'm glad that's cleared up. Cheers.

[JohnDonne]

Welcome to the forums, JD.

Thank you.

[DrYouth]

Who, instead of reasoning, decides to shut down the speech and arguments of people they don't agree with? That's _____

Who paints everybody who opposes them as "nazis" and justifies physical violence against those people on the grounds that one should always attack nazis? That's _____.

Fun exercise...

Substitute Marxists for Nazi's and who do you get?

[SuburbanFarmer]

Who, instead of reasoning, decides to shut down the speech and arguments of people they don't agree with? That's _____

Who paints everybody who opposes them as "nazis" and justifies physical violence against those people on the grounds that one should always attack nazis? That's _____.

Fun exercise...

Substitute Marxists for Nazi's and who do you get?

I was going to do that too, but JD was laying a beatdown across the thread - didn't want to interrupt.

[C-Mag]

Carlus, you're making a few errors. I said the cultural divides of right and left are geographically based, not racism.

Forget the terms Democrat and Republican as being continuous identities through history because they are not, and that's because the parties are subject to shifts in cultural identity depending on the regions they hold power in.

Notice how it was the Southerners who defended the standing social orders and hierarchies of the day in the 1850s. Notice how the Southerners today largely have the same conservative, reactionary political culture, which is applied to modern progressive ideas, even though, get this, they have a different political party affiliation than in the 1850s.

That is why it doesn't matter whether the Democrats or Republicans control the South, because the political culture of the South is conservative, reactionary, right wing, and has been that way since the Civil War, where the great American identities were tempered like steel through flames.

It's simply an ahistorical modern conservative fantasy to claim that the KKK was left wing in any of its manifestations. I understand the appeal to the imagination, being defeated ignobly by the North, and then having to bear the shame of responsibility for forming the first terrorist organization in American history, and the racism, it is only natural that conservatives would try to wash their hands of their history and blame progressives for it, through the simplistic fig leaf of the party affiliations.

You've got quite a juggling act going there. It's an admirable try. But where I give you facts, you avoid them. I know where you are going with this BS Dixiecrat switch, it's a myth.

J. William Fullbright is a saint amongst todays Dems and the Left, he was a tremendous racist and a very intelligent educated man, and like his protégé Bill Clinton and Oxford Scholar. Woodrow Wilson too was highly educated, Johns Hopkins, Cornell, Weslyan, New York Law, and Princeton; but he was a huge racist. These are mere examples of the highly educated racists of the left. What you never hear is the lefts leadership apologizing for these people, the pain, suffering and human tradegy they caused. No, the Left embraces and loves these people.

What you are doing here, is using Liberal and Conservative titles to make excuses for the Democrats Racist history, a history that the Democrats seem quite proud to embrace. As proof of this you make the argument that it is Hollywoods bad stereotypical country boy bubba that is the flag bearer of racism. That is just BS, oh and here's some numbers to prove it.
http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/20 ... -fairness/

The gap in perceptions between urban and rural residents is widest when it comes to the treatment of blacks in the criminal justice system. Half of all urbanites say blacks are treated less fairly than whites in dealing with the police, compared with just 30% of rural residents. And a similar gap emerges regarding the courts—about four-in-ten urbanites (41%) see racial bias, compared with about a quarter of those who live in rural areas (24%).

Direct Question. JohnnDonne, do you believe the Democrat Party should apologize for their role in Slavery, Jim Crow, stalling Civil Rights and Segregation ?