Fake News

[C-Mag]

@Bjorn
I showed evidence that BHO came out as a leader for Social Justice and then it exploded on the world stage. Those are facts.

You show me some evidence of what you believe. Because right now it sound like you just want to view it that way.

[BjornP]

I showed evidence that BHO came out as a leader for Social Justice and then it exploded on the world stage. Those are facts.

You show me some evidence of what you believe. Because right now it sound like you just want to view it that way.

No. You showed what you thought was evidence of that. I argue that what you was showing, was merely correlation. It's like if I gave you a graph showing that the temperature in Paris suddenly spiked on the 1st of June, and tell you that that's because Macron was eating a burger....which caused the ozone layer to melt and thus turn Paris alot hotter.

Now, obviously, everything past that "...which" is nonsense. But would you say that I had "presented evidence" of my claim by showing Macron eating a burger and a graph of the Parisian temperature? I hope not. I hope you have higher standards for what constitutes "evidence".

[C-Mag]

No, you don't get to just discard my documentation as meaningless because it damages your case. Especially while you show no evidence backing your claims. You don't even show evidence that my proof is false. Both CNN and the Mises Institute agree BHO pushed Social Justice to the forefront, and Bjorn doesn't believe it

Weak as hell Bjorn.

[BjornP]

No, you don't get to just discard my documentation as meaningless because it damages your case. Especially while you show no evidence backing your claims. You don't even show evidence that my proof is false. Both CNN and the Mises Institute agree BHO pushed Social Justice to the forefront, and Bjorn doesn't believe it

Weak as hell Bjorn.

Dude, my evidence is your "evidence". Your claim was "All this SJW is BHO". I don't dispute what you now claim - that he "pushed SJ to the forefront". A claim I thought you wanted to clarify. I don't "discard" your evidence, I ask you to explain WHY you consider it evidence, because it doesn't explain:

A: Why the trend only began at the second term.

B: Why and how his speeches on social justice supposedly led to tranny kids, etc.

B1: If/Whether Obama's "social justice" is really the same thing as the belief systems of the SJW's. The paper you cite, says Obama's views are influenced by Rawls, a social liberal. Not excatly batshit crazy "cultural marxism" territory, there.

C: That PC culture had been pervasive enough in mainstream media in the 90's to the point that entertainment figures took it up in comedy and articles.

And don't be so fucking sensitive to criticism. You're not entitled to having your beliefs validated, believed and affirmed by anyone. If you don't want to defend your positions, simply don't.

[TheReal_ND]

1865: civil war ends
100 years later
1964: civil rights act
44 years later
2008: Obama against the gay marriage
8 years later
2016: the gay marriage legalized
2017: gays everywhere
2018: the tranny furries explode onto the scene
2019: DESMOND IS AMAZING <--- ur here
2020: ????

[C-Mag]

Bjorn, I don't know why you are trying to distance BHO from his Social Justice policies, leadership and successes. I think Barrack himself is very proud of how far he was able to push Social Justice.


Is there a problem with Social Justice that Barrack should be ashamed of ?
Or is the there a bigger leader globally in Social Justice the deserves more credit ?


Huffpo says it's a monumental Legacy, no POTUS has done more
https://www.huffpost.com/entry/obama-lg ... s3E0JrJ_BK

[BjornP]

Bjorn, I don't know why you are trying to distance BHO from his Social Justice policies, leadership and successes. I think Barrack himself is very proud of how far he was able to push Social Justice.


Is there a problem with Social Justice that Barrack should be ashamed of ?
Or is the there a bigger leader globally in Social Justice the deserves more credit ?


Huffpo says it's a monumental Legacy, no POTUS has done more
https://www.huffpost.com/entry/obama-lg ... s3E0JrJ_BK

"Social Justice" does not equal the insane things what we call (but they themselves generally don't call) SJW's advocate for.

If "Social Justice" is the same as "Social Justice Warrior-ism", then I'd unflinchingly accept your argumentation, Carlus. But it isn't. BHO's invoking social liberalism and MLK who, can we agree, was for social justice, but not a "SJW" who would equal black people getting the right to vote to transgender people picking their favored bathroom?

If Catholics were a oppressed group in some country, fighting for their right would also be a campaign for social justice, as in for justice for more than one person. Fighting for the right to NOT have trannies tell your kids their propaganda stories is also a social justice issue - justice for your community of parents.

Also, the idea that Obama was somehow a global "leader" in social justice is ridiculous. The very idea is impossible. He's not a wizard that can cast a global spell that can brainwash (or call the world's Obamaphones) and magic them into following his social justice magic. Social justice is...social. People either agree that something is just or unjust, or they don't. Obama didn't somehow convince the world to suddenly adopt social justice legislations. For example, we have had gay marriage for... dunno, the 80's, or so? Didn't need Obama for that. The idea that Obama invented or was a trailblazer for any issues involving more legal protections for minorities, the poor or homeless, or worker's rights, or anything like that in Europe, is most likely an effect of wishful thinking on his followers' part. Followers who probably didn't know Europe existed before Obama set foot there...

(Tired. Almost midnight now. Work tomorrow, so it'll be a couple of hours before I'll be responding to anything new).

[Ex-California]

Bjorn, I don't know why you are trying to distance BHO from his Social Justice policies, leadership and successes. I think Barrack himself is very proud of how far he was able to push Social Justice.


Is there a problem with Social Justice that Barrack should be ashamed of ?
Or is the there a bigger leader globally in Social Justice the deserves more credit ?


Huffpo says it's a monumental Legacy, no POTUS has done more
https://www.huffpost.com/entry/obama-lg ... s3E0JrJ_BK

"Social Justice" does not equal the insane things what we call (but they themselves generally don't call) SJW's advocate for.

If "Social Justice" is the same as "Social Justice Warrior-ism", then I'd unflinchingly accept your argumentation, Carlus. But it isn't. BHO's invoking social liberalism and MLK who, can we agree, was for social justice, but not a "SJW" who would equal black people getting the right to vote to transgender people picking their favored bathroom?

If Catholics were a oppressed group in some country, fighting for their right would also be a campaign for social justice, as in for justice for more than one person. Fighting for the right to NOT have trannies tell your kids their propaganda stories is also a social justice issue - justice for your community of parents.

Also, the idea that Obama was somehow a global "leader" in social justice is ridiculous. The very idea is impossible. He's not a wizard that can cast a global spell that can brainwash (or call the world's Obamaphones) and magic them into following his social justice magic. Social justice is...social. People either agree that something is just or unjust, or they don't. Obama didn't somehow convince the world to suddenly adopt social justice legislations. For example, we have had gay marriage for... dunno, the 80's, or so? Didn't need Obama for that. The idea that Obama invented or was a trailblazer for any issues involving more legal protections for minorities, the poor or homeless, or worker's rights, or anything like that in Europe, is most likely an effect of wishful thinking on his followers' part. Followers who probably didn't know Europe existed before Obama set foot there...

(Tired. Almost midnight now. Work tomorrow, so it'll be a couple of hours before I'll be responding to anything new).

He's a social justice figurehead if anything. The man got a Nobel Peace Prize simply for being black and making liberal Europeans feel better about those ugly, racist Mericans. He might have not been a social justice leader originally, but he's embraced his figurehead status and can now be considered a leader of the movement.

[C-Mag]

"Social Justice" does not equal the insane things what we call (but they themselves generally don't call) SJW's advocate for.

Yes, it is. Social Justice is all about retribution, redistribution of wealth and selective distribution of basic rights.

Social Justice was a small fringe Lefty theory before BHO, now it's part of our daily lives. Social Justice is about censoring speech, because you label it Hate Speech. Social Justice is monetary reparations to people you view as descendants of victims. Social Justice is about admitting select groups into colleges for their skin color and political beliefs at the cost of others. Social Justice is about taking away from the accomplishment of whites, because of 'white privilege.' Social Justice is a 40 year old dude photographed nude with a 11 year old boy dressed in drag.


Equating Social Justice to the Civil Rights movement is hijacking a legacy and trying to write yourself into the picture. Catholic persecution in the ME and Africa is real, Catholics are dying everyday in those regions, don't sully what's happening to those people by calling it Social Justice. You are just playing semantics.

Social Justice didn't magically explode in the last decade by accident, talk about wizardry. Look at BHO's policies, personnel decisions and actions. There are examples everywhere of how he pushed Social Justice into something we have to dela with daily. He should be proud of that, it's his biggest success.





(Tired. Almost midnight now. Work tomorrow, so it'll be a couple of hours before I'll be responding to anything new). NP brother. Get your rest, this may take a while, we're about 180 out on this issue

[BjornP]

Social Justice is all about retribution, redistribution of wealth and selective distribution of basic rights.

That's your personal definition, sure. "Retribution"? Huh? I know what you'd be referring to, since you think SJW are SJ is the same thing, but again..it's not. Redistribution of wealth? So giving taxpayer money to pay veteran's benefits is "social justice" on par with 11 yo drag queens? And a selective distribution of rights has historically been referred to as privileges, like the privileges of the aristocracy. You are confusing what your enemies call "social justice" with what the term itself is supposed to mean.

Social Justice was a small fringe Lefty theory before BHO, now it's part of our daily lives. Social Justice is about censoring speech, because you label it Hate Speech. Social Justice is monetary reparations to people you view as descendants of victims. Social Justice is about admitting select groups into colleges for their skin color and political beliefs at the cost of others. Social Justice is about taking away from the accomplishment of whites, because of 'white privilege.' Social Justice is a 40 year old dude photographed nude with a 11 year old boy dressed in drag.

That's simply nonsense. You're painting with a huge brush to the point of utter absurdity, like people who say that "Conservative" means people who value tradition are in the same boat as Sieg-Heiling Neo-Nazis. You think wanting to reduce poverty and being for equality before the law is, in ANY way, in the same boat as 40 year old nude men getting photographed with 11yo drag kids? I mean, holy shit, Carlus.

Equating Social Justice to the Civil Rights movement is hijacking a legacy and trying to write yourself into the picture. Catholic persecution in the ME and Africa is real, Catholics are dying everyday in those regions, don't sully what's happening to those people by calling it Social Justice. You are just playing semantics.

Social Justice didn't magically explode in the last decade by accident, talk about wizardry. Look at BHO's policies, personnel decisions and actions. There are examples everywhere of how he pushed Social Justice into something we have to dela with daily. He should be proud of that, it's his biggest success.

Lol at "hijacking". The Civil rights movement fought for literal social justice. I want social justice, too, my "social" being my own society. But fuck if I - or thousands of my Danish compatriots - are supportive of all the bullshit SJW stories of victimhood culture that have been posted in the SJW thread on these forums for half a decade now. I mean, you do remember who - before SJW's was even a topic on the DCF - was attacking a certain Jamaican secretary who had a hate-boner for the Dutch "Black Pete" thing, and who attacked the notion that it was "racist", right? Yup. Me. I was anti-SJW before you guys were using that word.

Your view of what "Social Justice" means has no connection to reality, whatsoever. The ultra-radical SJW stories from the SJW thread, have never been "social justice". They have always been "justice" for some ultra-minority, some identity politics bullshit. Fighting for greater social mobility, for example, ain't the same as fighting for little 10 yo Timmy's right to get his dick cut off and call himself Tammy.

Trying to tie that interpretation of "social justice", to the centuries old fight for lessening the gap between rich and poor, improving social mobility in a society, equality before the law no matter your beliefs, is either spurious or simply ignorant. Urbanite progressives grooming their "trans" kid for pedo rape don't give a shit about the poor, they just want to admire their own navels and whine about "oppression" when people don't tell them it's oh, so beautiful and special. They are decadent aristos.

If BHO got social justice (not SJW'ism, but social justice) higher on the agenda, good for him. Just like lots of you Americans scream at Brits and Euros to do something about our invading Muslim hordes, or the lack of free speech, I'm glad at the thought that at least it can become an agenda or issue for public discussion, in US politics. Just wish it wasn't so insane, and that the kooks didn't try and hijack it. For example, the changing jobs market will probably leave alot becoming more or less...useless to many companies who don't need the same amount of workers, anymore. So, should the government pick up the slack and pay for education for those workers OR should it merely better faciliate private entities doing that? No matter the solution, that's an example of aspiring to a more just society.

It's like with Trump. Sure, the media will scream and rage at him, and make everything bad be about him for the first couple of years after he's left office. But he's pushed the Overton window on what you can discuss about immigration. With luck, your leftists will realize that any sort of welfare state (or welfare society) will be impossible if you allow completely open border immigration. That's what changed here, and hopefully countries like Germany and Sweden will learn from that. But with Trump's "wall", it could open the way for US leftists just privately becoming skeptical, then publicly, then in twenty years, a US immigration-skeptic leftist political party could arise. Thanks to Trump.