You can’t get through to the ones who are that far gone — the ones who don’t simply deny facts, but actually fail to see what’s right under their noses.
The ones we need to get through to are the ones on the fringes. The ones who aren’t so fully gone that ideology is able to supersede reason.
And there are a lot of people who have remained willfully ignorant, simply because they despise the churlishness that often accompanies political arguments. We need to reach them too, because they need to realize that what’s ultimately going on here isn’t a political struggle but an philosophical one.
Are we going to let racism and brutality dictate our future? Are we going to discard science and medicine because we’re afraid of hurting people’s feelings? Is truth whatever each of us chooses it to be, or do we live in an objective reality?
Politics comes second to all that.
I don’t like Zionism. I don’t like any form of nationalism that’s based on to whom (or where) you were born. I also don’t like Judaism — or any other religion, for that matter.
I think indigenous rights arguments are stupid because as far as I am concerned, being born in a place makes you as “native” to that region as someone whose family has lived there for generations. And most Israelis who are alive today are indeed native-born.
I’ve said before that I think it was a terrible idea to establish a Jewish state smack-dab in the middle of such a hostile area, but what’s done is done. Israel is there, and it isn’t going anywhere unless its neighbors succeed in their ambition to push the Jews into the sea.
I like Israel because it is a Western-style democracy and a close ally to the United States. I have tremendous respect for what the Israeli people face on a day-to-day basis. I can’t even imagine what it must be like knowing that you are surrounded on all sides by people who quite literally want to genocide you.
Overall, I think Israel is pretty goddamned badass. So yeah, I’m anti-Zionism, anti-Judaism, pro-Israel, and only anti-Semitic at family gatherings.
Most of the time Anti-Z is simply code for Anti-S, and the one follows from the other. Most of the time — but not always. I don’t understand why you keep insisting the two are equivalent, unless you are deliberately being provocative. (In which case I support you 100%.) 👌
And for the record, it is perfectly possible to be opposed to Zionism yet still be Pro-Israel.
I don’t like Zionism. I don’t like ethnicity-based nationalism period. I think national identity is properly derived from the values of it people, rather than people deriving their the values from any fixed ancestral or cultural identity.
I couldn’t care less about these “indigenous rights” arguments you’re always having. Whether or not a Jewish state SHOULD have been established smack dab in the middle of a very hostile area is a moot point — Israel is there, and as far as I’m concerned, anyone who was born there (which at this point is probably the majority of the population) has just as much right to be there as someone whose ancestors have lived there for centuries.
If there is any silver lining to be found in what’s occurred over these past few weeks, it’s that so many men have been able to come out and tell their stories — of sexual abuse, of false accusations, or both.
I think we’ve awoken something big. People are finally starting to realize that men are on the fast track to becoming second-class citizens, and that is definitely not okay.
It’s up to us to make sure people don’t slip back into their complacency once the Kavanaugh thing blows over. I have a young son, and I don’t want him growing up to be denied opportunities or victimized on account of his gender.
For the record, I am utterly appalled at the way Brett Kavanaugh has been abused by Senate Democrats, the media, and my son’s paternal grandmother. I’ve had more than enough of the Democratic Party weaponizing mentally-ill women against the rest of us by hand-feeding them Marxist-feminist ideology and spite.
I can only imagine what Brett and his family must be going through, and anyone who wasn’t moved by his tears when he spoke of his ten-year-old daughter is a fucking monster.
I mean it — these Pussy Hats are complete sociopaths, and they’ve done more harm to women than I would have imagined possible when they began crawling out of the woodwork in 2011.
We cannot allow such neo-Stalinist tactics to continue. Kavanaugh needs to be voted up or down, and Creepy Porn Lawyer just needs to go away.
Never thought I’d want to fist-bump a Republican so badly:
In Europe, people are afraid to call out Islamic terrorism for fear of being targeted — or otherwise violating some ridiculous “hate speech” law, resulting in fines or even imprisonment.
In America, we’re afraid to call out Islamic terrorism for fear of being labeled “racist”.
The verdict? The terrorists won. And Islamic terrorism is going to keep on winning unless we can agree to speak openly and honestly about it without fear of unwarranted reprisals.
This doesn’t mean we need another round of Team America World Police or any further invasions of our privacy.
What it does mean is not being afraid to identify the motives of people who have dedicated themselves to the destruction of an entire civilization. It means recognizing religious extremism for what it is rather than drawing from an arsenal of ad hominems, red herrings, and false equivocations whenever someone proves bold enough to raise the subject.
It means recognizing that while Christians have indeed been responsible for some of the worst atrocities in human history — and Hindu extremists seem poised to slaughter Muslims over every little religious beef (lol plz) — the predominant form of religious terrorism the world faces today is Islamic.
It also means recognizing that condemning radical Islam does not make one Islamophobic. (Nor a racist, seeing how we’ve managed to extend the concept of race further than any other society in human history.)
Why aren’t we as willing to identify acts of Islamic terrorism as we are so-called “hate crimes”? Is it somehow more acceptable to despise an entire civilization, rather than an ethnicity or skin color?
If so, would it not follow that the man who kills a stranger over the color of his skin is somehow LESS guilty than the man who kills over a personal grudge?
Facts may be swept under the rug to keep our Safe Spaces looking pristine, but Reality has a way of creeping up behind us. And sooner or later, Reality will sweep the rug right out from under our feet.
To those who seek to hold Western Civilization responsible for Islamic terrorism:
Can you imagine blaming the Jews for the Holocaust?
Can you imagine blaming the slaves for the bloodiest war in our nation’s history?
Was the rape victim “asking for it” because of the manner in which she dressed?
If you answered ‘no’ to all three questions, then you likely hail from a modern, liberal society — be you from the East or the West. For this very reason, there are people who would like to see you dead.
We need to stop whitewashing the past and present for fear of offending Muslims — most of whom don’t have a goddamned thing to do with terrorism anyway.
And to anyone looking to blame the Western world for the overall violence in the Middle East: I encourage you to open a history book, because the Middle East has been a hotbed of violence since the dawn of civilization. It predates Israel, it predates America — it even predates Islam.
The whole SCOTUS nomination-confirmation process has become a joke. I nominate my guy, your guys try to knock him down, and when it’s your turn, I’ll do the same to you. When the two-party system system seeps into our highest courts (as it did long ago), then we’re in trouble.
SCOTUS judges are supposed to be impartial; they’re not supposed to have ties to any political factions, but the reality is that unless they have those ties, they’re not about to get nominated.
A few things to keep in mind, though:
(1) SCOTUS judges picked by Republican presidents have been traditionally less likely to engage in judicial activism (i.e., legislating from behind the bench) or otherwise let their personal views influence their rulings.
(2) They have also proven more resistant to party ideology, as evidenced by how many times Republican-appointed judges have pissed off Republican presidents and legislators. You almost never see this happen with Democrats, and standing up to the other two branches is why we have a SCOTUS in the first place.
(3) Judges picked by Republicans have always had the better track record when it comes to protecting individual liberties. The sole exception to this lies with abortion, but the reality is that Roe v. Wade is in no danger of being overturned at the Federal level. The real threats to abortion (and they are legion) come from the states.