Richard Spencer

1234568

Comments

  • rgambsrgambs Posts: 8,401
    @unsung
    What's the difference between a white nationalist and a white supremacist?
    Monkey Driven, Call this Living?
  • Kev - Coat and KeysKev - Coat and Keys EarthPosts: 211
    One has white robes, the other eggshell?
    Down neon streets the streaker streaks.
    The speaker speaks,
    but the truth still leaks,
    Where even Donald Trump has got soul.
  • unsungunsung Posts: 7,604
    unsung said:
    unsung said:
    unsung said:
    Shouldn't all interactions with other people be voluntary?

    I wasn't necessarily referencing a specific example.  
    yes, as long as it doesn't infringe on someone else's rights. 
    I would agree with that.  But if I voluntarily remove myself from an interaction that is not an infringement to someone else's rights.

    For example, the baker, if they don't want to bake that cake for the gay couple then that is their right.  It is not the right of the couole to have a cake made for them.  They could go to another baker.  Nobody has a right to force another person into an association, nobody has the right to another person's labor or services.

    Otherwise it is forced and that association is forced.
    no, you cannot operate a business and refuse service to someone based on their gender, orientation, race, etc. that's called discrimination. if you don't want to serve everyone, don't start a business. opening a public business you are waiving your right to be a bigot. 
    So by opening a business you are waiving your right to voluntarily associate, is that what you are saying?

    And you discriminate on every decision that you make, your definition is a little off.
    yes, of course. 

    are you advocating going back to the days of yore when a business would be well within their right to post a sign saying "whites only"?
    Let's say someone did that now, what do you think would happen?
  • unsungunsung Posts: 7,604
    edited May 16
    unsung said:
    unsung said:
    unsung said:
    Shouldn't all interactions with other people be voluntary?

    I wasn't necessarily referencing a specific example.  
    yes, as long as it doesn't infringe on someone else's rights. 
    I would agree with that.  But if I voluntarily remove myself from an interaction that is not an infringement to someone else's rights.

    For example, the baker, if they don't want to bake that cake for the gay couple then that is their right.  It is not the right of the couole to have a cake made for them.  They could go to another baker.  Nobody has a right to force another person into an association, nobody has the right to another person's labor or services.

    Otherwise it is forced and that association is forced.
    no, you cannot operate a business and refuse service to someone based on their gender, orientation, race, etc. that's called discrimination. if you don't want to serve everyone, don't start a business. opening a public business you are waiving your right to be a bigot. 
    So by opening a business you are waiving your right to voluntarily associate, is that what you are saying?

    And you discriminate on every decision that you make, your definition is a little off.
    Yes, by opening a public business you give up your right to discriminate against groups of people for reasons prohibited by law, including race, gender, sexual orientation, etc. By gaining the benefits of access to the public as clients you give up the right to discriminate against groups of them. 
    I disagree.

    People open up a business to make money, it is in their best interest to accomodate everyone that is willing to pay.  They don't need to be forced in order to do so if they want to remain in business.


  • HughFreakingDillonHughFreakingDillon WinnipegPosts: 10,316
    unsung said:
    unsung said:
    unsung said:
    unsung said:
    Shouldn't all interactions with other people be voluntary?

    I wasn't necessarily referencing a specific example.  
    yes, as long as it doesn't infringe on someone else's rights. 
    I would agree with that.  But if I voluntarily remove myself from an interaction that is not an infringement to someone else's rights.

    For example, the baker, if they don't want to bake that cake for the gay couple then that is their right.  It is not the right of the couole to have a cake made for them.  They could go to another baker.  Nobody has a right to force another person into an association, nobody has the right to another person's labor or services.

    Otherwise it is forced and that association is forced.
    no, you cannot operate a business and refuse service to someone based on their gender, orientation, race, etc. that's called discrimination. if you don't want to serve everyone, don't start a business. opening a public business you are waiving your right to be a bigot. 
    So by opening a business you are waiving your right to voluntarily associate, is that what you are saying?

    And you discriminate on every decision that you make, your definition is a little off.
    yes, of course. 

    are you advocating going back to the days of yore when a business would be well within their right to post a sign saying "whites only"?
    Let's say someone did that now, what do you think would happen?
    we both know what would happen. what is your angle?
    www.headstonesband.com
    www.the-watchmen.com
    www.thehip.com
  • HughFreakingDillonHughFreakingDillon WinnipegPosts: 10,316
    unsung said:
    unsung said:
    unsung said:
    unsung said:
    Shouldn't all interactions with other people be voluntary?

    I wasn't necessarily referencing a specific example.  
    yes, as long as it doesn't infringe on someone else's rights. 
    I would agree with that.  But if I voluntarily remove myself from an interaction that is not an infringement to someone else's rights.

    For example, the baker, if they don't want to bake that cake for the gay couple then that is their right.  It is not the right of the couole to have a cake made for them.  They could go to another baker.  Nobody has a right to force another person into an association, nobody has the right to another person's labor or services.

    Otherwise it is forced and that association is forced.
    no, you cannot operate a business and refuse service to someone based on their gender, orientation, race, etc. that's called discrimination. if you don't want to serve everyone, don't start a business. opening a public business you are waiving your right to be a bigot. 
    So by opening a business you are waiving your right to voluntarily associate, is that what you are saying?

    And you discriminate on every decision that you make, your definition is a little off.
    Yes, by opening a public business you give up your right to discriminate against groups of people for reasons prohibited by law, including race, gender, sexual orientation, etc. By gaining the benefits of access to the public as clients you give up the right to discriminate against groups of them. 
    I disagree.

    People open up a business to make money, it is in their best interest to accomodate everyone that is willing to pay.  They don't need to be forced in order to do so if they want to remain in business.


    people's "convictions", no matter what they are, often trump their financial, or best, interest. you give people the right to discriminate, they will. we've seen that. we still see it. 

    this thread is proof of that. 
    www.headstonesband.com
    www.the-watchmen.com
    www.thehip.com
  • unsungunsung Posts: 7,604
    edited May 16
    There is no angle.

    I say all associations need to be voluntary and not forced.  You agreed that is so if nobody is having their rights trampled.  Then you tell me the bakery should have to bake a cake so now you are forcing association.  

    The customer had no rights violated.

    Or do you think the customer has the right to the cake?
  • unsungunsung Posts: 7,604
    rgambs said:
    @unsung
    What's the difference between a white nationalist and a white supremacist?
    Try and follow along.
  • HughFreakingDillonHughFreakingDillon WinnipegPosts: 10,316
    edited May 16
    unsung said:
    There is no angle.

    I say all associations need to be voluntary and not forced.  You agreed that is so if nobody is having their rights trampled.  Then you tell me the bakery should have to bake a cake so now you are forcing association.  

    The customer had no rights violated.

    Or do you think the customer has the right to the cake?
    the courts ruled you are incorrect, and I agree. the couple had their civil rights violated by being refused service based on their orientation. 

    do you think that Bunkers R' Us is within their rights to decline to serve you because they noticed your LBRTRN personalized licence plate?
    Post edited by HughFreakingDillon on
    www.headstonesband.com
    www.the-watchmen.com
    www.thehip.com
  • Go BeaversGo Beavers Posts: 5,325
    unsung said:
    There is no angle.

    I say all associations need to be voluntary and not forced.  You agreed that is so if nobody is having their rights trampled.  Then you tell me the bakery should have to bake a cake so now you are forcing association.  

    The customer had no rights violated.

    Or do you think the customer has the right to the cake?
    The customer has a right to service regardless of their race, sexual orientation, etc 
  • Go BeaversGo Beavers Posts: 5,325
    unsung said:
    rgambs said:
    @unsung
    What's the difference between a white nationalist and a white supremacist?
    Try and follow along.
    I love a good non-answer. (Because the actual answer reveals)
  • HughFreakingDillonHughFreakingDillon WinnipegPosts: 10,316
    unsung said:
    rgambs said:
    @unsung
    What's the difference between a white nationalist and a white supremacist?
    Try and follow along.
    I've been following. it's an important distinction that you have not addressed. 
    www.headstonesband.com
    www.the-watchmen.com
    www.thehip.com
  • unsungunsung Posts: 7,604
    One is filled with hate, the other wants to associate voluntarily.  That is how I see it anyway.
  • unsungunsung Posts: 7,604
    edited May 16
    This new format is terrible for quoting.
  • unsungunsung Posts: 7,604
    edited May 16
    Nobody has the right to another person's labor.
  • HughFreakingDillonHughFreakingDillon WinnipegPosts: 10,316
    unsung said:
    One is filled with hate, the other wants to associate voluntarily.  That is how I see it anyway.
    but why would you wish to exclude an entire group, or rather, only include one specific group, in your daily life? what is that based on? it ain't tolerance, I tell you that. 
    www.headstonesband.com
    www.the-watchmen.com
    www.thehip.com
  • Go BeaversGo Beavers Posts: 5,325
    unsung said:
    One is filled with hate, the other wants to associate voluntarily.  That is how I see it anyway.
    And this redefinition is how they've manipulated people and why the media has normalized them. 
  • unsungunsung Posts: 7,604
    unsung said:
    One is filled with hate, the other wants to associate voluntarily.  That is how I see it anyway.
    but why would you wish to exclude an entire group, or rather, only include one specific group, in your daily life? what is that based on? it ain't tolerance, I tell you that. 
    I can't speak for them, not really sure what the mission statement is.

    Didn't BLM issue demands for an ethno-state or states?
  • HughFreakingDillonHughFreakingDillon WinnipegPosts: 10,316
    unsung said:
    unsung said:
    One is filled with hate, the other wants to associate voluntarily.  That is how I see it anyway.
    but why would you wish to exclude an entire group, or rather, only include one specific group, in your daily life? what is that based on? it ain't tolerance, I tell you that. 
    I can't speak for them, not really sure what the mission statement is.

    Didn't BLM issue demands for an ethno-state or states?
    ok, but you seem to be advocating for whatever their mission is. why do that if you don't know what it is?

    I have no idea. 
    www.headstonesband.com
    www.the-watchmen.com
    www.thehip.com
  • BentleyspopBentleyspop Craft Beer Brewery, ColoradoPosts: 3,540
    unsung said:
    One is filled with hate, the other wants to associate voluntarily.  That is how I see it anyway.
    Both are sad.

    I currently live in a beautiful part of the country. I love the lifestyle I lead here.

    However one important thing is missing. There is almost NO cultural  diversity here. I can go days, weeks, and sometimes months without seeing a single person of color. Or a Hispanic or Asian person. It is very very lilly white here and culturally boring. Yes I know that for some people this is the perfect place.

    I look forward  to trips to culturally diverse places like Chicago, NYC, New Orleans, Miami, etc. I love to see and experience different people,cultures, religions, foods,  and hear different languages. 
    Personally I don't get why anyone would want to live a life devoid of diversity.

    My 2 cents
  • unsungunsung Posts: 7,604
    unsung said:
    unsung said:
    One is filled with hate, the other wants to associate voluntarily.  That is how I see it anyway.
    but why would you wish to exclude an entire group, or rather, only include one specific group, in your daily life? what is that based on? it ain't tolerance, I tell you that. 
    I can't speak for them, not really sure what the mission statement is.

    Didn't BLM issue demands for an ethno-state or states?
    ok, but you seem to be advocating for whatever their mission is. why do that if you don't know what it is?

    I have no idea. 

    unsung said:
    One is filled with hate, the other wants to associate voluntarily.  That is how I see it anyway.
    And this redefinition is how they've manipulated people and why the media has normalized them. 
    I was trying to tell you what I thought the difference was in the two labels.  I can't comment on either's agenda.  Thanks.
  • Halifax2TheMaxHalifax2TheMax Posts: 7,419
    But you commented on or seemed to point out an aspect of BLM's alleged agenda? Umm okay.
    09/15/1998, Mansfield, MA; 08/29/00 08/30/00, Mansfield, MA; 07/02/03, 07/03/03, Mansfield, MA; 09/28/04, 09/29/04, Boston, MA; 09/22/05, Halifax, NS; 05/24/06, 05/25/06, Boston, MA; 07/22/06, 07/23/06, Gorge, WA; 06/29/08, 06/30/08, Mansfield, MA; 08/18/08, O2 London, UK; 10/30/09, 10/31/09, Philadelphia, PA; 05/15/10, Hartford, CT; 05/17/10, Boston, MA; 05/20/10, 05/21/10, NY, NY; 06/22/10, Dublin, IRE; 06/23/10, Northern Ireland; 09/03/11, 09/04/11, Alpine Valley, WI; 09/11/11, 09/12/11, Toronto, Ont; 09/14/11, Ottawa, Ont; 09/15/11, Hamilton, Ont; 07/02/2012, Prague, Czech Republic; 07/04/2012 & 07/05/2012, Berlin, Germany; 07/07/2012, Stockholm, Sweden; 09/30/2012, Missoula, MT; 07/16/2013, London, Ont; 07/19/2013, Chicago, IL; 10/15/2013 & 10/16/2013, Worcester, MA; 10/21/2013 & 10/22/2013, Philadelphia, PA; 10/25/2013, Hartford, CT; 11/29/2013, Portland, OR; 11/30/2013, Spokane, WA; 12/04/2013, Vancouver, BC; 12/06/2013, Seattle, WA; 10/03/2014, St. Louis. MO; 10/22/2014, Denver, CO; 10/26/2015, New York, NY; 04/23/2016, New Orleans, LA; 04/28/2016 & 04/29/2016, Philadelphia, PA; 05/01/2016 & 05/02/2016, New York, NY; 05/08/2016, Ottawa, Ont.; 05/10/2016 & 05/12/2016, Toronto, Ont.; 08/05/2016 & 08/07/2016, Boston, MA; 08/20/2016 & 08/22/2016, Chicago, IL;

    Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.

    Brilliantati©
  • Go BeaversGo Beavers Posts: 5,325
    unsung said:
    unsung said:
    unsung said:
    One is filled with hate, the other wants to associate voluntarily.  That is how I see it anyway.
    but why would you wish to exclude an entire group, or rather, only include one specific group, in your daily life? what is that based on? it ain't tolerance, I tell you that. 
    I can't speak for them, not really sure what the mission statement is.

    Didn't BLM issue demands for an ethno-state or states?
    ok, but you seem to be advocating for whatever their mission is. why do that if you don't know what it is?

    I have no idea. 

    unsung said:
    One is filled with hate, the other wants to associate voluntarily.  That is how I see it anyway.
    And this redefinition is how they've manipulated people and why the media has normalized them. 
    I was trying to tell you what I thought the difference was in the two labels.  I can't comment on either's agenda.  Thanks.
    You're interpretation of the labels implies you have an idea about their agendas: one is "filled with hate", the other "wants to associate voluntarily". They're actually both of those things, but the label white nationalists is used to try and gain some sort of acceptance and can draw in the bigot who doesn't consider themselves a bigot.
  • Halifax2TheMaxHalifax2TheMax Posts: 7,419
    unsung said:
    This new format is terrible for quoting.
    One thing we can agree upon.
    Pearl Jam, bringing fans together since 1991.
    09/15/1998, Mansfield, MA; 08/29/00 08/30/00, Mansfield, MA; 07/02/03, 07/03/03, Mansfield, MA; 09/28/04, 09/29/04, Boston, MA; 09/22/05, Halifax, NS; 05/24/06, 05/25/06, Boston, MA; 07/22/06, 07/23/06, Gorge, WA; 06/29/08, 06/30/08, Mansfield, MA; 08/18/08, O2 London, UK; 10/30/09, 10/31/09, Philadelphia, PA; 05/15/10, Hartford, CT; 05/17/10, Boston, MA; 05/20/10, 05/21/10, NY, NY; 06/22/10, Dublin, IRE; 06/23/10, Northern Ireland; 09/03/11, 09/04/11, Alpine Valley, WI; 09/11/11, 09/12/11, Toronto, Ont; 09/14/11, Ottawa, Ont; 09/15/11, Hamilton, Ont; 07/02/2012, Prague, Czech Republic; 07/04/2012 & 07/05/2012, Berlin, Germany; 07/07/2012, Stockholm, Sweden; 09/30/2012, Missoula, MT; 07/16/2013, London, Ont; 07/19/2013, Chicago, IL; 10/15/2013 & 10/16/2013, Worcester, MA; 10/21/2013 & 10/22/2013, Philadelphia, PA; 10/25/2013, Hartford, CT; 11/29/2013, Portland, OR; 11/30/2013, Spokane, WA; 12/04/2013, Vancouver, BC; 12/06/2013, Seattle, WA; 10/03/2014, St. Louis. MO; 10/22/2014, Denver, CO; 10/26/2015, New York, NY; 04/23/2016, New Orleans, LA; 04/28/2016 & 04/29/2016, Philadelphia, PA; 05/01/2016 & 05/02/2016, New York, NY; 05/08/2016, Ottawa, Ont.; 05/10/2016 & 05/12/2016, Toronto, Ont.; 08/05/2016 & 08/07/2016, Boston, MA; 08/20/2016 & 08/22/2016, Chicago, IL;

    Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.

    Brilliantati©
  • dignindignin Posts: 4,834
    unsung said:
    unsung said:
    unsung said:
    One is filled with hate, the other wants to associate voluntarily.  That is how I see it anyway.
    but why would you wish to exclude an entire group, or rather, only include one specific group, in your daily life? what is that based on? it ain't tolerance, I tell you that. 
    I can't speak for them, not really sure what the mission statement is.

    Didn't BLM issue demands for an ethno-state or states?
    ok, but you seem to be advocating for whatever their mission is. why do that if you don't know what it is?

    I have no idea. 

    unsung said:
    One is filled with hate, the other wants to associate voluntarily.  That is how I see it anyway.
    And this redefinition is how they've manipulated people and why the media has normalized them. 
    I was trying to tell you what I thought the difference was in the two labels.  I can't comment on either's agenda.  Thanks.
    You're interpretation of the labels implies you have an idea about their agendas: one is "filled with hate", the other "wants to associate voluntarily". They're actually both of those things, but the label white nationalists is used to try and gain some sort of acceptance and can draw in the bigot who doesn't consider themselves a bigot.
    White nationalists are also better dressed and haven't shaved their heads completely bald, just shaved on the sides and back. That's about the only differences I can see. Just a cleaned up modern day Nazi.
  • dignindignin Posts: 4,834
    Speaking of the white race. This should bother Spencer, and maybe unsung.

    There's no such thing as a 'pure' European—or anyone else

    one self-described neo-Nazi on the district council told The New York Times that by allowing the influx, the German people faced “the destruction of our genetic heritage” and risked becoming “a gray mishmash.”

    In fact, the German people have no unique genetic heritage to protect. They—and all other Europeans—are already a mishmash, the children of repeated ancient migrations, according to scientists who study ancient human origins. New studies show that almost all indigenous Europeans descend from at least three major migrations in the past 15,000 years, including two from the Middle East. Those migrants swept across Europe, mingled with previous immigrants, and then remixed to create the peoples of today.

    http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2017/05/theres-no-such-thing-pure-european-or-anyone-else

  • HughFreakingDillonHughFreakingDillon WinnipegPosts: 10,316
    the thing of it is........we all descended from a common ancestor. there are no races. it's bullshit. 
    www.headstonesband.com
    www.the-watchmen.com
    www.thehip.com
  • unsungunsung Posts: 7,604
    Nothing is really 100%.  I'm bothered by that as much as I am of the opinion of a leftist scientist propagandist.
  • HughFreakingDillonHughFreakingDillon WinnipegPosts: 10,316
    you are bothered by what? one common ancestor? or that nothing is 100%?
    www.headstonesband.com
    www.the-watchmen.com
    www.thehip.com
Sign In or Register to comment.