Page 8 of 10 FirstFirst ... 678910 LastLast
Results 106 to 120 of 142
  1. #106

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by justthefacts View Post

    Who cares what that headcase has to say.

    Sent from my SM-G935V using Tapatalk


  2. #107

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by justthefacts View Post

    I've got news for you, Kanye; you're far from alone. People like you have been duped into supporting one side or the other for decades.
    - Respect is the ultimate currency

  3. #108

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LesBolstad View Post
    This intelligent, free thinking, black woman is making waves. A must follow on Twitter. The loony left is losing their collective mind over Kanye West's support.

    "Far right? Allow me to clarify: I believe the black community can do it without hand-outs. I believe the Democrats have strapped us to our past to prevent us from our futures. And I wonít stop fighting until all black Americans see that.
    Iím not far rightóIím free." - Candice Owens

    "You don't have to agree with Trump but the mob can't make me not love him. We are both dragon energy. He is my brother. I love everyone. I don't agree with everything anyone does. That's what makes us individuals. And we have the right to independent thought." - Kanye

    More about Candice: https://www.essence.com/news/candace...t-conservative
    The only thing Hitler did wrong was invading Poland, apparently:



  4. #109

    Default



  5. #110

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by justthefacts View Post
    The only thing Hitler did wrong was invading Poland, apparently:


    a) I've always thought she was kind of a joke and an opportunist, not a principled conserv/libertarian
    b) it was a dumb answer but not the worst one ever, she was trying to make a point that Hitler's nationalism wasn't the problem.

  6. #111

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Section2 View Post
    a) I've always thought she was kind of a joke and an opportunist, not a principled conserv/libertarian
    b) it was a dumb answer but not the worst one ever, she was trying to make a point that Hitler's nationalism wasn't the problem.
    Even if we ignore the fact that her example for why "Hitler's nationalism wasn't the problem" was only that he invaded other countries, the fact is that nationalism has historically been very tied to ethnicity and religion. Most early nationalist movements were centered around consolidating political entities of similar ethnicity/religion and/or throwing off control from another ethnicity/religion. Pretending that Hitler's theory of nationalism is the outlier is ahistorical. You can argue the means he used to effect that nationalism were historically extreme, but his goals were not.

    If Trumpists or others want to argue against interventions abroad (as Owens does here,) that's fine, but that's not nationalism. That's non-interventionism. Instead people want it both ways. They want to use the term nationalism to stoke the visceral reaction of those who are naturally afraid of "the other," while at the same time not having to answer for all of the ugliness that implies.

  7. #112

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Section2 View Post
    a) I've always thought she was kind of a joke and an opportunist, not a principled conserv/libertarian
    b) it was a dumb answer but not the worst one ever, she was trying to make a point that Hitler's nationalism wasn't the problem.
    Iíve never been that impressed with Owens as I think sheís pretty into herself, but justthenarrativeĎs interpretation and bastardization of what she said isnít what she said. She tried to simplify and shorten her comments about nationalism in regard to Hitlerís association with the definition, and doing that and understating Hitlerís history never really works out.

    She wasnít saying Hitlerís nationalism wasnít ok JUST for attempting to take it outside of Germany. She just did a really poor job of explaining it and defining the totality of his evil.

    But JTN doesnít want to miss an opportunity to exaggerate the importance of this, especially when things arenít going great for the Left in recent days.

  8. #113

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by KillerGopherFan View Post
    I’ve never been that impressed with Owens as I think she’s pretty into herself, but justthenarrative‘s interpretation and bastardization of what she said isn’t what she said. She tried to simplify and shorten her comments about nationalism in regard to Hitler’s association with the definition, and doing that and understating Hitler’s history never really works out.

    She wasn’t saying Hitler’s nationalism wasn’t ok JUST for attempting to take it outside of Germany. She just did a really poor job of explaining it and defining the totality of his evil.

    But JTN doesn’t want to miss an opportunity to exaggerate the importance of this, especially when things aren’t going great for the Left in recent days.
    You're hearing what you want to hear. She explicitly says that if he'd not wanted to expand his ambitions outside Germany, it would have been "ok, fine."
    (emphasis added)

    "Whenever we say nationalism the first thing that people think about, at least in America, is Hitler. You know, he was a National Socialist, but if Hitler just wanted to make Germany great and make things run well, OK, fine. The problem is that he wanted, he had dreams outside Germany. He wanted to globalize. He wanted everybody to be German, everybody to be speaking German, everybody to look a different way. That's not, to me, that's not nationalism. So, in thinking about how it could go bad down the line, I don't really, I don't really have an issue with nationalism. I really don't. I think that it's OK. It's important to retain your country's identity and to make sure that what's happening here, which I think is incredibly worrisome, in terms of just the decrease in the birth rate that we're seeing in the UK, is what you kind of want to avoid. So I have no problems with nationalism, it's globalism I try to avoid."
    She's very clearly drawing a distinction between globalism and nationalism and saying that anything that's not globalist is fine. I don't think she meant to explicitly say that the Holocaust was acceptable, but she very clearly says that globalism was the biggest problem Hitler had.

    I'm not bastardizing anything she's saying. People who want to defend her are giving her comments a positive interpretation. The words she ACTUALLY SAID were very clearly a defense of Hitler's domestic policy. It's fine to interpret her words more positively than that, but it's just factually incorrect to argue that's not what she said.

    I'd also point out that her little tidbit about birthrates completely betrays her real intentions. She's not worried about global interventions so much as she is about having Western countries become more diverse.
    Last edited by justthefacts; 02-21-2019 at 02:03 PM.

  9. #114

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by justthefacts View Post
    Even if we ignore the fact that her example for why "Hitler's nationalism wasn't the problem" was only that he invaded other countries, the fact is that nationalism has historically been very tied to ethnicity and religion. Most early nationalist movements were centered around consolidating political entities of similar ethnicity/religion and/or throwing off control from another ethnicity/religion. Pretending that Hitler's theory of nationalism is the outlier is ahistorical. You can argue the means he used to effect that nationalism were historically extreme, but his goals were not.

    If Trumpists or others want to argue against interventions abroad (as Owens does here,) that's fine, but that's not nationalism. That's non-interventionism. Instead people want it both ways. They want to use the term nationalism to stoke the visceral reaction of those who are naturally afraid of "the other," while at the same time not having to answer for all of the ugliness that implies.
    It may be historically tied to it, but that's not what the word means. I don't think she stated that his version is an outlier. Nationalism doesn't mean take over the world. And nationalism doesn't mean exterminate ethnic or religious minorities. We have other words for those things.

  10. #115

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by justthefacts View Post
    You're hearing what you want to hear. She explicitly says that if he'd not wanted to expand his ambitions outside Germany, it would have been "ok, fine."
    (emphasis added)



    She's very clearly drawing a distinction between globalism and nationalism and saying that anything that's not globalist is fine. I don't think she meant to explicitly say that the Holocaust was acceptable, but she very clearly says that globalism was the biggest problem Hitler had.

    I'm not bastardizing anything she's saying. People who want to defend her are giving her comments a positive interpretation. The words she ACTUALLY SAID were very clearly a defense of Hitler's domestic policy. It's fine to interpret her words more positively than that, but it's just factually incorrect to argue that's not what she said.

    I'd also point out that her little tidbit about birthrates completely betrays her real intentions. She's not worried about global interventions so much as she is about having Western countries become more diverse.
    Again, you are playing loose with what she said. It's obviously an incomplete and bad response, but she's saying had Hitler just wanted to make Germany great and implement socialism, fine. That's not a defense of the holocaust obviously.

    Look, I think it's not at all fine to want to implement socialism in Germany and destroy the rights of all Germans.

  11. #116

    Default

    And, IMO, she was confining her remarks about Hitler to nationalism, not ALL of his evil.

    After all, the topic WAS nationalism, not Hitler.

  12. #117

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Section2 View Post
    It may be historically tied to it, but that's not what the word means. I don't think she stated that his version is an outlier. Nationalism doesn't mean take over the world. And nationalism doesn't mean exterminate ethnic or religious minorities. We have other words for those things.
    We have other words for what goes on in Venezuela, but you don't mind tagging the entire thing with "socialism."

  13. #118

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Section2 View Post
    Again, you are playing loose with what she said. It's obviously an incomplete and bad response, but she's saying had Hitler just wanted to make Germany great and implement socialism, fine. That's not a defense of the holocaust obviously.

    Look, I think it's not at all fine to want to implement socialism in Germany and destroy the rights of all Germans.
    Who's playing loose? She didn't say "socialism." She explicitly drew the distinction with extending beyond Germany. She could have easily contrasted something positive Hitler did (?) with the Holocaust, but she didn't. She contrasted him "want[ing] to make Germany great and make things run well" with "dreams outside Germany." The sentences are back-to-back. She said "The problem is that he wanted, he had dreams outside Germany." She did not say, "The problem is that he wanted to implement socialism," or "the problem is that he wanted to murder Jews." She didn't even say, "a problem is that he wanted, he had dreams outside Germany."

    Again, it's fine to try to have a positive interpretation of what she said. It's not fine to pretend that the guy who first linked a video and then quoted her exact words is the one "playing loose."

  14. #119

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Section2 View Post
    It may be historically tied to it, but that's not what the word means. I don't think she stated that his version is an outlier. Nationalism doesn't mean take over the world. And nationalism doesn't mean exterminate ethnic or religious minorities. We have other words for those things.
    This is exactly what I'm saying. PEople just want to throw out everything nationalism means so they can skirt some fine line.

    https://www.merriam-webster.com/word...vs-nationalism

    There are still obvious areas of overlap: we define patriotism as “love for or devotion to one’s country” and nationalism in part as “loyalty and devotion to a nation.” But the definition of nationalism also includes “exalting one nation above all others and placing primary emphasis on promotion of its culture and interests as opposed to those of other nations or supranational groups.” This exclusionary aspect is not shared by patriotism.
    In one respect, the insanities of 1947 are reverberating now with growing Hindu nationalism in a professedly secular India.
    –Kashmir Monitor, 14 Aug. 2017

    Today, more than two decades into a democratic South Africa, Afrikaner nationalism has been severely diminished and along with it the standing of Afrikaans in the public sector.
    —The New Age (Johannesburg, South Africa), 2 May 2017
    Founded in 2014—two years after Burma experienced religiously motivated riots largely targeting the Muslim minority—and now with sub-chapters across the country, Ma Ba Tha has become virtually synonymous with Buddhist nationalism.
    —Asia News Monitor (Bangkok), 7 Jul. 2017
    Over the last few years, however, a strong contender in the form of Tamil nationalism has emerged because Tamil Nadu got into river water disputes with all the neighbouring states and the neighbours did not seem to care much for Dravidian niceties although Telugus, Kannadigas and Malayalis are putatively Dravidian.
    —The Times of India (New Delhi), 4 Mar. 2017
    In U.S. usage nationalism is now perhaps most frequently associated with white nationalism, and has considerably negative connotations.

    https://www.thestreet.com/politics/w...alism-14642847

    Nationalism centers on a country's culture, language, and often race. It may also include shared literature, sports, or the arts, but is primarily driven by cultural associations. And, it promotes the nation at the expense of others. Nationalist countries or leaders don't join international organizations or associations, and maintain a superior view of themselves to the detriment of other nations. Nationalism has a positive view of conquering other nations as it sees itself as the ultimate nation. Any ideologies that undercut or contradict the nation are opposed.

    Nationalism, in its extreme forms, has led to genocide, the Holocaust, and, more specifically, the ethnic cleansing in Bosnia in the 1990s.
    Again, if people want to promote non-interventionism, call it non-interventionism. But you can tell from Owens' discussion of birthrates that's not what she means.

    I'd also point out that globalism is what stopped Hitler.
    Last edited by justthefacts; 02-21-2019 at 02:32 PM.

  15. #120
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    So. MN
    Posts
    3,494

    Default

    Good Lord, what a dumb discussion. Of course, any time a Loony Lefty can associate a conservative with Hitler it's all systems go.
    Please consider donating to this site; especially if you are a frequent poster.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •