Sfdebris.net

Captain Crimson wrote: ↑Wed Jan 27, 2021 2:57 pm Who cares if both sides are terrible. How is that any justification for these thin-skinned SJW writers to blame the consumer for not liking what they put out? "It's your fault, you're dumb, you're not the fan I want, you're an istaphobe!" I'm tired of that.

Going pretty mask off there.

Captain what does lefties making bad media have to do with MAGA?

It's fun to watch these right leaning bozos lose their shit when the left is proven correct.

To steal a phrase from them: "The right had it coming"

Yeah, I don't think either side is right all the time and instead of admiting their mistake they try to demonized the opponents making themselves insane.

CmdrKing wrote: ↑Tue Jan 26, 2021 2:14 pm GreyICE is referring more to the internal factions of the major parties than the various minor parties.
I would say though that while there is internal discord among Republicans, theirs is really more about how far they’re willing to follow their ideology to its natural conclusion, whereas Democrats internal conflict comes from fundamentally different ideas of what the goals and acceptable means or obtaining them are.

Eh, there's actual numerous factions. I'd say, without diving too deep into ideology:

Neoconservatives/Corporate Conservatives
Paleoconservatives
Christian Theocrats (aka "the Christian Right")
The Macho "being a man is my identity" Men
The Rural left-behind (everything that is hitting the middle class in the cities hit the middle class in the country 20 years earlier)
Anarcho-Capitalists/Minarchists (small, but have a large ideological impact: see Rand Paul)
Tea Party (which could now be called the Trump Party)

While there's overlap between all of these groups, they've all got distinctly different goals. The problem is that the Republican method of problem solving is to step behind closed doors, hash out an agreement that everyone can like, and then step out and pretend they're all one party.

It's quite an illusion, down to them fooling some of their opponents, but it's not actually a good method of debate resolution. Namely, it all tends to break down among certain things. Look at "Obamacare" - there's fundamentally different things that each of those factions wanted out of "repeal Obamacare", and they weren't able to closed door horse trade it. So they just dumped it in a closet and ignored it, even though it was a platform of their entire party just a year before. Paleoconservatives don't really dislike "Obamacare" (it was, after all, previously "Romneycare") while other factions hate it, and even what parts they hate were different.

Since people aren't actually mayflies, their party faithful do remember this shit, and it's started to really drive cracks through the facade. A lot of the factions have realized the truth, which is that neoconservatives have ruled the roost since Nixon, and that neo-conservatives have a lot in common with fascists, including being perfectly happy to use someone until they're useless, but they're never going to actually give them anything.

The modern right still has roots in more classic American liberalism which is rooted in what resembles what I think might be British style secularism. The glaring difference being the US is gigantic now and has an expansive federalist state infrastructure.

The issue is the information/global age and dissolving of conventional standards that people rely on for general commerce. Much of the right wing, from local business to religion is effected and depreciated as standards develop.

BridgeConsoleMasher wrote: ↑Wed Jan 27, 2021 11:25 pm The modern right still has roots in more classic American liberalism which is rooted in what resembles what I think might be British style secularism. The glaring difference being the US is gigantic now and has an expansive federalist state infrastructure.

The issue is the information/global age and dissolving of conventional standards that people rely on for general commerce. Much of the right wing, from local business to religion is effected and depreciated as standards develop.

Classic liberalism is trying to claw its way back, but is mostly just a name for corporatism, and is mostly just a rebranding of neoconservative once everyone realized the main difference between neoconservatism and fascism was semantic.

Reading this thread from the beginning makes me said. So many posts defending traitors to the United States trying to overthrow democracy and saying, "The Left would do the same thing!"

Yeah, I do wonder how many of them really believe it or can't stand the idea of being morally wrong.

CharlesPhipps wrote: ↑Fri Feb 05, 2021 11:06 pm Reading this thread from the beginning makes me said. So many posts defending traitors to the United States trying to overthrow democracy and saying, "The Left would do the same thing!"

I'm pretty positive now that if Donald Trump had shot someone on the street then shitheads like Admiral X would be quicker to blame the left for that person's death than Trump. "If it weren't for the left, Trump would have never shot him!" Basically the GOP and far-right terrorists will always be absolved of their actions because that's how much they despise the left.

It's the same shit Trump did when confronted with the fact that right-wing terrorists were a imminent threat his reply was "but the left wing is just as bad and maybe even worse".

And when those right wing rioters stormed the capitol, what was the talking point? "IT WAS ACTUALLY ANTIFA ACTORS!" But then when those "actors" are identified as Trump supporters going back years? "THEY'RE DEEP UNDERCOVER ANTIFA, A PLOT YEARS IN THE MAKING!"