Yes, it did. As for “on the balance”, I’m 99.9% certain you’re not familiar enough with the evidence to made that assertion. This fetish for worshiping the Enlightenment is one of the worst white liberal traits. You whitewash history significantly when doing so.

Stewart is an idiot why give him attention? This just fuels all the false equivalence nonsense where people accuse antifa, who are mostly just a bunch of pissed off teenagers and twenty somethings with a lot of energy and earnestness, of being terrorists.

Yeah, now that I’ve been thrown back into the greys I can use them as teaching moments since I won’t pull them out of the greys myself. That’s the silver lining I’m clinging to hah. 

None of those people can change the way the US throws gobs of money at pointless military expenses (and not enough at necessary military expenses). It’s fait accompli.

I don’t think they are arguing in good faith. I called out one of their posts in the greys which suggested there’s no “charismatic leadership” in the Middle East and that’s why the Arab Spring/Iran protests/Palestinian protests failed. I said that’s not true, because it’s not, and that non-violent leaders are often…

All of those examples have charismatic leaders. They’re simply jailed or sometimes killed by the regimes in power to prevent any such thing from happened. Non-violent activists end up in jail where they can’t organize to prevent threats to the system. 

Both of which had more radical alternatives present in the general debate at the time, which presented enough of a “threat” to make complacency too costly.

False equivalences about “Antifa” is how journalists show they’re “unbiased”. It’s pure horseshit, even if the idiots were wrong to mess with the press. It’s all posturing.

What historical case of non-violence worked without another figure presenting a more radical position? Historically, the most efficient outcomes seem to come from a non-violent movement with a more radical movement on the flanks. 

I’d almost bet money the “taught to punch” part included some really inefficient advice. 

I don’t think these rallies or counter-protests matter. They’re radicalizing online, they’re bringing in new recruits, they’re pushing out their messaging. Some of them are already on the path towards terrorism. The neo-Nazi Atomwaffen division could credibly be called a terrorist group. They organize and radicalize…

They know what they support. You’re splitting hairs rather dishonestly and I expect intentionally given you’re clearly a conservative troll. “Socialist” in common speech has meant “Democratic socialism” for quite some time. Speech is not static. In the same way when people say they support “capitalism” they don’t mean…

“They don’t want real socialism”. Democratic socialism is not the same as “Venezuela”, and I’m pretty tired of conservative idiots citing Venezuela while ignoring a whole heap of issues other than their economic ideology. It’s just lazy and anti-intellectual.

Democratic socialism. “Classical socialism” isn’t generally what anyone means when they use the term “socialism” these days. 

That’s a bad poll, the reality is no one supports purely one or the other. Everyone supports a mixed system (Democratic Socialism is inherently a mixture of both, and so is the standard form of American capitalism).

Yeah, they’re a hate group. That’s been obvious to anyone who isn’t a far-right Christian. I mean they’re the kind of people somewhat conservative Christians look at and go “We’re not with those assholes”.

I can tell you why, as could anyone in the state. Hogan’s support numbers. He’s a moderate Republican, doesn’t talk Trump, and has plenty of people backing him because why the state is deep blue it’s more complicated when you break it down in state for anything but presidential races.

That’s a complete strawman and you know it. Law enforcement is inherently political, there is nothing wrong with that statement. The priorities behind it are political, the policies are political. There’s a reason a white kid in the suburbs with weed gets treated differently than a black kid in the city, or why white…

ICE was never about fighting terrorism. There is a formerly separate group under the ICE aegis what does more transnational law enforcement, but they are not what ICE does nor do they represent the basic ICE officer. They’re the ones who wrote Nielsen asking to be formally removed from ICE.

It’s a scary poll, but I’m not too convinced by “bad behavior” in the wording. That’s so vague we’re not getting a very useful understanding of what they think. Is bad behavior criticism? Is it publishing false articles? Is it sexual harassment claims? Without something more specific I’m not too sure about the…