A Philosopher's Blog

Confederates & Nazis

Posted in Ethics, Philosophy, Politics, Race, Uncategorized by Michael LaBossiere on August 18, 2017

While there has been an attempt to revise the narrative of the Confederate States of America to a story of state’s rights, the fact of the matter is that succession from the Union was because of slavery. At the time of succession, those in the lead made no bones about this fact—they explicitly presented this as their prime motivation. This is not to deny that there were other motivations, such as concerns about state’s rights and economic factors. As such, the Confederacy’s moral foundation was slavery. This entails a rejection of the principle that all men are created equal, a rejection of the notion of liberty, and an abandonment of the idea that the legitimacy of government rests on the consent of the governed. In short, the Confederacy was an explicit rejection of core stated values of the United States.

While the Confederacy lost the war and the union was reformed, its values survived and are now explicitly manifested in the alt-right. After all, it is no coincidence that the alt-right has been marching in defense of Confederate monuments and often makes use of Confederate flags. They are, after all, aware of the moral foundations of their movement. Or, rather, immoral foundations.

While the value system of the Confederacy embraced white supremacy and accepted slavery as a moral good, it did not accept genocide. That is, the Confederacy advocated enslaving blacks rather than exterminating them. Extermination was, of course, something the Nazis embraced.

As is well known, the Nazis took over the German state and plunged the world into war. Like the Confederate states, the Nazis embraced the idea of white supremacy and rejected equality and liberty. The Nazis also made extensive use of slave labor. Unlike the Confederate states, the Nazis infamously engaged in a systematic effort to exterminate those they regarded as inferior. This does mark a moral distinction between the Confederate States of America and Nazi Germany. This is, however, a distinction between degrees of evil.

While the Nazis are generally regarded by most Americans as the paradigm of evil, many in the alt-right embrace their values and some do so explicitly and openly, identifying as neo-Nazis. Some do make the claim that they do not want to exterminate what they regard as other races; they profess a desire to have racially pure states. So, for example, some in the alt-right support Israel on the grounds that they see it as a Jewish state. In their ideal world, each state would be racially pure. This is why the alt-right is sometimes also referred to as the white nationalists. The desire to have pure states can be seen as morally better than the desire to exterminate others, but this is also a distinction in evils rather than a distinction between good and bad.

Based on the above, the modern alt-right is the inheritor of both the Confederate States of America and Nazi Germany. While this might seem to be merely a matter of historic interest, it does have some important implications. One of these is that it provides grounds that the members of the alt-right should be regarded as on par with members or supporters of ISIS or other such enemy foreign terrorist groups. This is in contrast with regarding the alt-right as being entirely domestic.

Those who join or support Isis (and other such groups) are regarded as different from domestic hate groups. This is because ISIS (and other such groups) are foreign and are effectively at war with the United States. This applies even when the ISIS supporter is an American who lives in America. This perceived difference has numerous consequences, including legal ones. It also has consequences for free speech—while advocating the goals and values of ISIS in the United States would be regarded as a threat worthy of a response from the state, the alt-right is generally seen as being protected by the right to free speech. This is nicely illustrated by the fact that the alt-right can get permits to march in the United States, while ISIS supporters cannot. One can imagine the response if ISIS supporters did apply for permit or engaged in a march.

While some hate groups can be regarded as truly domestic in that they are not associated with foreign organizations engaged in war with the United States, the alt-right cannot make this claim. At least they cannot to the degree they are connected to the Confederate States of America and the Nazis. Both are foreign powers at war with the United States. As such, the alt-right should be regarded as on par with other groups that affiliate themselves with foreign groups engaged in war with the United States.

The easy and obvious reply is that both the Confederacy and the Nazis were defeated and no longer exist. On the one hand, this is true. The Confederacy was destroyed and the succeeding states rejoined the United States. The Nazis were defeated and while Germany still exists, it is not controlled by the Nazis. On the other hand, the Confederacy and the Nazis do persist in the form of various groups that preserve their values and ideology—including the alt-right. To use the obvious analogy, even if all territory is reclaimed from ISIS and it is effectively defeated as a state, this does not entail that ISIS will be gone. It will persist as long as it has supporters and presumably the United States would not switch to a policy of tolerating ISIS members and supporters simply because ISIS no longer has territory.

The same should hold true for those supporting or claiming membership in the Confederacy or the Nazis—they are supporters of foreign powers that are enemies of the United States and are thus on par with ISIS supporters and members in terms of being agents of the enemy. This is not to say that the alt-right is morally equivalent to ISIS in terms of its actions. On the whole, ISIS is indisputably worse. But, what matters in this context, is the expression of allegiance to the values and goals of a foreign enemy—something ISIS supporters and alt-right members who embrace the Confederacy or Nazis have in common.

My Amazon Author Page

My Paizo Page

My DriveThru RPG Page

Follow Me on Twitter

Advertisements

52 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. drewdog2060drewdog2060 said, on August 18, 2017 at 9:14 am

    If one follows through on the logic of your argument, should not those organisations which express admiration/support for North Korea also be banned? Such organisations exist in my country (the United Kingdom) and include groups such as the Revolutionary Communist Party and I am aware that you have similar organisations in the USA. Given that North Korea has expressed hostile intentions towards America (and following your argument to it’s logical conclusion), shouldn’t any individuals/organisations in support of North Korea be regarded in the same manner as ISIS?
    I dislike both the extreme right and the far left. However I think a distinction needs to be drawn between those who advocate violence and/or actively engage in it, and those who advocate unpleasant views but within the democratic framework (I.E. without calling for the use of violence to achieve their ends).
    Here in the UK the government has banned several far-right organisations which engage in and advocate the use of vilence, for example Combat 18. However other extreme right groups (such as the British National Party) are allowed to operate as they don’t (officially at least) advocate the use of violence.
    ISIS is banned due to it’s advocacy and engagement in acts of violence and any civilised person would support the banning and elimination of Islamic State due to the threat it clearly poses to democratic values. Is there not a distinction to be drawn though between groups such as IS (which should clearly be eliminated) and those who seek (peacefuly) to propagate Islam? I am not a Muslim (I’m an agnostic), but it strikes me that any religious group (Christian, Muslim or whatever) is entitled to call for a society based on what it considers to be it’s values. What is not entitled to do is to advocate force to achieve its ends.

  2. magus71 said, on August 18, 2017 at 10:16 am

    “While there has been an attempt to revise the narrative of the Confederate States of America to a story of state’s rights, the fact of the matter is that succession from the Union was because of slavery. At the time of succession, those in the lead made no bones about this fact—they explicitly presented this as their prime motivation.”

    Wow. This was actually the argument made by the Left and what I was taught in school: that in fact succession, and thus the civil war to reunite the country, were not about slavery, but about state’s rights. This was not the position of conservatives.

    And why was the Left’s narrative that succession and thus the war not attributed to slavery? Because, once one admits this, then you have to admit that the slaves were freed by white people. 360,000 Union soldiers died in the fighting. And once one admits that, a huge chunk of the Democrat platform falls away. But the Democrats are willing to send our country into a civilization death spiral by constantly summoning the passions of revenge and envy so that they have talking points for every election. Even though it’s their party who sponsored the KKK and wrote the Jim Crow laws. Cultural Marxism at its best.

    • WTP said, on August 18, 2017 at 11:59 am

      Wow. This was actually the argument made by the Left and what I was taught in school

      Bingo. Exactly what I’ve been arguing since AP American History class back in the 10th grade. It’s been a rather lonely fight. It’s scary how people, smart people (supposedly) just take that in because that is what they were told to write on the test if they wanted to pass.

  3. DH said, on August 18, 2017 at 10:39 am

    Mike, you do realize that by your rhetoric you have become a card-carrying member of a hate group yourself, don’t you?

    You are abandoning all vestiges of “critical thinking” in order to twist your logic to fit your hatred of the alt-right. Trying to make the case now that they are representing some foreign power at war with the US, in order to deny them the rights that come with citizenship is simply bizarre.

    Drewdog makes a good case – that if you are a member of the Communist party, does that mean you are in support of Kim Jong Un, and should be regarded as a non-citizen? That was certainly the attempt in the 1950’s when Joe McCarthy had his run. HUAC – the “House Un-American Activities Committee”. It would seem as though you would advocate re-establishing that committee to investigate the un-American activities of the alt-right. What’s next? Socialism? Does Bernie Sanders therefore represent Russia because their ideologies are in alignment?

    You have successfully taken yourself out of the game as far as I am concerned. This is not a discourse based on logic, reason, or ideas – this is hysteria based on hatred. I’ll be back when you get off of this one.

    • WTP said, on August 18, 2017 at 12:13 pm

      You are abandoning all vestiges of “critical thinking”

      Again, making an assumption… 😉

      You have successfully taken yourself out of the game as far as I am concerned. This is not a discourse based on logic, reason, or ideas – this is hysteria based on hatred. I’ll be back when you get off of this one.

      Things are gonna change, I can feel it.

      Look, not to be snarky (ok, can’t help myself), but again you respond as if what looks like a duck, walks like a duck, and talks like a duck might not still be a duck when you get back. Not encouraging you to stay way, by any means. Just curious why, if you’ve made the effort here, and I must say you have written some excellent responses here, you would go away?

      Again, you write excellent responses which Mike ignores, so it pains me to see such effort for naught. I’d suggest keeping things to one, objective point and pressing him to address that one objective thing. Just a thought.

      • DH said, on August 18, 2017 at 2:04 pm

        There are times when there are some decent, well thought out issues are discussed here. I enjoy the discourse when taking various approaches to ethical issues, for example, and I enjoy the conversation with you and the others on this forum. This topic started out being a good one, as it has teased out some very important ideals. Given my own personal & family history, for example, it has not been without a lot of thought, soul-searching, and research for me to come to the painful realization that freedom and tolerance have to apply to everyone, regardless of how I feel about them. This is a very healthy process.

        The fact that Mike has not responded to any of the posts is irrelevant to me – I’m not trying to prove him right or wrong, but I am a little disappointed that he refuses to engage on anything other than an emotional level. That, as I have said before, is a big part of what’s wrong with this country, and why I often say that he is part of the problem.

        The one hope I still hold is that he is acting truly professorial – putting forth a passionate but extremely flawed argument that he is only pretending to believe – in anticipation that we, his “students” will hone our rhetorical skills in discussing it, as we have. The topic has certainly caused me to re-read the constitution and its underpinnings, and to consult the history books and challenge my own beliefs. If that’s the way he runs his classroom, then kudos to him. Anything short of that, well, yikes.

        So I’m not really going anywhere – I’m just not going to continue contributing to this particular thread. I’ve spoken my peace. Were there anything new to discuss, I’d post again, but this latest entry is so illogical, so ludicrous, and as I said above, downright hysterical. The thread has no hope of going anywhere based on the exchange of ideas – he has none, and the rest of us pretty much agree. There comes a time when you realize that argument or discussion is futile, and that’s what I mean when I say Mike has “taken himself out of the game”.

        He is clearly motivated and blinded by hate, and this hate has consumed him to the point where there can be no reasonable discourse. It’s very sad, actually – the way he digs in really makes him no better than the alt-right or the counter-protesters – worse, in fact. As I’ve said before – Mike’s credentials give him a certain tenability – and that combination lends credence to the lunacy.

        The ones who really get it are in the video that AJ MacDonald posted – https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cA7vHtgrinM .

        I have better things to do with my time.

  4. magus71 said, on August 18, 2017 at 11:28 am

    The Left has its own Basket of Deplorables. And believe me, they’re much more well connected and powerful than people typing on 4chan /pol/.

    http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2017/04/new-domestic-terrorist-bill-ayers-working-antifa-terrorist-group/

  5. TJB said, on August 18, 2017 at 3:00 pm

    Mike, let’s talk numbers. How many white supremacists do you think are in the U.S.?

    • Michael LaBossiere said, on August 22, 2017 at 6:01 pm

      Too many? Is this a trick question?

    • Michael LaBossiere said, on August 22, 2017 at 6:02 pm

      How many Muslims who are terrorists do you think are in the US? I’m worried about both sorts of bad guys; but I’m betting there are way more white supremacists than Muslims who are terrorists.

      • WTP said, on August 25, 2017 at 12:56 pm

        Why must the muslims be terrorists to count but any ws counts? Wouldn’t the more proper comparison be between terrorist ws and terrorist muslims? This is such simple logic that even someone who “teaches” critical thinking should be ashamed to use. And no discounting people like the Ft. Hood shooter as workplace violence or mental health issues.

        TJ, why you let him get away with this crap?

        • TJB said, on August 25, 2017 at 10:30 pm

          I was getting around to it. I have been on travel in Mexico 🙂

          Mike, WTP is right: the proper comparison is white supremicist terrorists to Muslim terrorists.

          It has been estimated by the ADL that the are about 6-7 thousand KKK members. The number of Nazis must be less. So there are about 10,000 “radical” white supremacists in the U.S. it is not at all clear that the number of “radical” Muslims in the U.S. is less than this. Of course, worldwide, there are about 100M followers of the Salifist form of Islam responsible for most of the terrorism.

          • WTP said, on August 26, 2017 at 6:10 pm

            Ah, Mexico. Used to be a nice place.

          • WTP said, on August 28, 2017 at 9:30 am

            Yeah…still waiting on a response from Mike on this…Won’t happen but one other point…

            TJ, I tried to do some research on this but it got all mucked up into splitting communists into numerous factions while pooling all white supremacists and nazis into one lump. It stuns me how easily, how casually communists and communist sympathizers are accepted, how often one sees fools with Che t-shirts, how often these days the communist hammer and sickle flag is waved at protests and riots. Hell, we even have a card-carrying communist who comments here on occasion. Forget his name but he has a somewhat creepy pic of himself. Bald-ish guy from Minnesota, IIRC.

            What do you suppose the ratio is of numbers of WS/Nazis to Communists are? Best surveys I could find found that something like 45% of millennials had a favorable view of socialism. Bernie Sanders got 13 million votes in the primaries. If your count of maybe 10-20K WS/Nazis are out there, if even 1% (an absurdly low number based on surveys, etc.) of just college students are communists, that would be 200K. If say, 10% of Bernie Sanders voters are communists, that is 130K. Using either absurdly low estimate, the Communists outnumber WS/Nazis by a factor of about 10-15/1. And that is being very conservative. And Communism has killed more people, destroyed more economies, done far more damage than fascism.

  6. TJB said, on August 18, 2017 at 3:07 pm

    Mike, do you equate the “alt-right” with white supremacists?

    • CoffeeTime said, on August 19, 2017 at 4:53 pm

      TJB, I salute your attempts to bring some connection to reality into this series of posts, but I’m afraid we are in full-on fantasy, and you have a very small chance of success. Like DH, I’m not going to try.

      • TJB said, on August 19, 2017 at 5:30 pm

        Thanks, CoffeeTime. I frankly don’t know why I have stuck around for something like 10 years now. There used to be great debates with people on both sides of an issue. Now, not so much. Mike barely responds.

        In any case, the Left has totally lost it on this one, and Mike has gone down the drain with them. Trump is 71 years old, and he has been a celebrity and in our living rooms for thirty years. I have never been a big fan, but to start comparing him to Hitler is just ridiculous.

        • WTP said, on August 19, 2017 at 9:12 pm

          Got curious and looked. Mike’s last response was, I believe, 2-3 weeks ago. Though he’s had time to throw up about eight posts since then. Well, you know how busybusybusy he must be. Heh, “throw up”. I just got that. I kill me.

          • WTP said, on August 20, 2017 at 5:16 pm

            I was wrong. 13 days, as of today. Six posts, though. Four of which were about Trump.

            • WTP said, on August 22, 2017 at 8:25 am

              Of course, now we’re up to day 15, so my “2-3 weeks ago” is relevant. One wonders how long? Anyone wanna take bets on which comes first, a new post or a response to comments? Side bet on whether or not those comments will be of any substance. The last one was just a “Yes”. Busybusybusy, you know.

    • Michael LaBossiere said, on August 22, 2017 at 6:00 pm

      They seem to.

      The term is a controversial one. Some alt-right people say they are not; some say they are not and then say things about white nationalism and Jews.

      Those on the right who are not white-supremacists probably need to either reclaim the term or get a new one to distance themselves from the white supremacists.

  7. TJB said, on August 18, 2017 at 3:23 pm

    Mike: “While some hate groups can be regarded as truly domestic in that they are not associated with foreign organizations engaged in war with the United States, the alt-right cannot make this claim. At least they cannot to the degree they are connected to the Confederate States of America and the Nazis. Both are foreign powers at war with the United States. As such, the alt-right should be regarded as on par with other groups that affiliate themselves with foreign groups engaged in war with the United States.”

    Mike, you are losing it. A foreign power can be located on a map.

    • magus71 said, on August 18, 2017 at 6:36 pm

      Nazis are not a foreign power at war with America. Neither are the “Confederate States”.

      So how can alt-right be a power on par with them? That’s like saying if I form a band of guys that dress up like Spartans and lifts weights we’re on par with Sparta.

      If alt-right wants to be on par with the Nazis of history, they’ve got to step up their game. Namely, become the most disciplined and capable fighting force man for man on the planet, invade multiple countries, etc. Carrying some wooden shields with Norse runes on them ain’t gonna cut it.

      • WTP said, on August 18, 2017 at 9:30 pm

        You forgot the meth. They’re gonna need some methamphetamine if they wanna be real Nazis…oh, wait…

      • Michael LaBossiere said, on August 22, 2017 at 5:46 pm

        The Nazis and Confederate States were foreign powers; to ally with them is to ally with said powers. Now, it could be contended that they now lack actual territory-the Nazis no longer hold Germany and the land of the Confederate States was absorbed back into the United States. As such, they can be seen now as being analogous to what ISIS will be when it no longer holds territory. But, ISIS will still be a foreign terrorist group, perhaps even a foreign power.

        As such, it is reasonable to regard those who express loyalty to the Nazi party and to the CSA as being on par with anyone who allies with a foreign power or terrorist group. Yes, the same would hold for people who embrace Maoism, Stalinism and such.

        • WTP said, on August 25, 2017 at 1:00 pm

          No word on so-called Antifas carrying communist flags or those spouting hatred for the USA from the keft. You know, real, viable threats. Those aligned with those KILLING COPS ffs.

          There is no arguing withsome fools.

          • TJB said, on August 25, 2017 at 10:39 pm

            Mike, are Catholics allied with a foreign power?

            • Michael LaBossiere said, on August 28, 2017 at 7:34 pm

              Interesting question; back when Kennedy was running for office people raised that point against him.

              Answering this would involved sorting out how religions compare to political entities, etc. But, if Catholicism does make the Pope the political ruler of the church and if it required that Catholics obey the pope as their ruler, then I’d say yes. If not, I’d say no.

            • Michael LaBossiere said, on August 28, 2017 at 7:35 pm

              Hmm, people who obey God might be seen as allied with a foreign power. Unless, of course, God is American. Or everywhere.

            • TJB said, on August 28, 2017 at 8:32 pm

              Mike, do you draw distinctions between religious and a political ideologies?

            • Michael LaBossiere said, on September 8, 2017 at 4:48 pm

              Sure;though they can clearly be blended together.

        • Anonymous said, on September 5, 2017 at 2:37 pm

          Scrolling through this thread, just have a point of correction here. The American Nazi Party was founded in 1959 by George Lincoln Rockwell; however, the organization broke up in 1967 after Rockwell was assassinated. The party was re-formed in the 1990’s by Harold Covington.

          The American Nazi party that was affiliated with Nazi Germany was founded in 1936, and was also known as the German American Bund, or German American Federation. One might make the case that this party was aligned with a foreign power, (it was founded with the authority and approval of Rudolf Hess), but the connection between the 1936 and 1990’s versions of the American Nazi Party are tenuous at best. Probably similar to the connections of someone like Bernie Sanders representing Russia.

          There is plenty to disagree with, ideologically, with this current movement, but to declare them an ally of a foreign power is incorrect.

          http://www.americannaziparty.com/about/index.php

    • Michael LaBossiere said, on August 22, 2017 at 6:10 pm

      In the traditional sense of foreign power taken as country with a location on the map. But think of groups and organizations that exist across borders or exist as ideology. If a foreign group that rules a country looses its land, yet persists in its culture and values, would it then cease to be a foreign power? ISIS is now a foreign power, but should soon lose its turf. It, however, will still remain foreign and a power.

      While this is a semantic battle, I would say the important thing is not allegiance to something that holds territory, but allegiance to a foreign organization and ideology that is an established enemy of the United States. So, you could say that American Nazis are not in allegiance with Nazi Germany because it is no more, but they are in allegiance with the Nazis. When they shout “Heil Hitler” they are proclaiming their allegiance to a (dead) foreign ruler. If some fools strutted around being Commies and shouting “Hail Stalin” or “Hail Mao”, they’d be in the same boat as the Nazis. That is, the boat of people expressing their allegiance to enemy powers.

  8. magus71 said, on August 19, 2017 at 1:28 pm

    More antifa. Today in Boston. They love dead cops.

    • CoffeeTime said, on August 19, 2017 at 3:09 pm

      Magus, as always on the Internet, you need an excessive degree of paranoia. That Twitter thread reveals the source. It wasn’t Boston. It wasn’t today. I suspect the image is original, but I can’t prove it wasn’t shopped. Even when apparent evidence is “truth-y”, it should be established as true before being used; otherwise we all get diverted into claims and counter-claims on pieces of evidence that are at best tangential to the main issue.

      http://www.gettyimages.com/event/may-day-rallies-and-marches-held-across-the-country-552270711#demonstrators-participate-in-a-may-day-march-on-may-1-2015-in-chicago-picture-id471856606

      • magus71 said, on August 19, 2017 at 8:04 pm

        • WTP said, on August 19, 2017 at 8:46 pm

          “Asking individuals to refrain”? I hate to say it, but what pussies. Their administrators, that is. The cops on the beat, I pray to God, are not this pathetic. But then they do work for such clowns. Get out of Boston. Let it burn.

          • magus71 said, on August 19, 2017 at 8:51 pm

            Yeah, no kidding. But the inmates run the asylum, so you have to beg for mercy.

      • magus71 said, on August 19, 2017 at 8:05 pm

      • magus71 said, on August 19, 2017 at 8:07 pm

        Pic posted was not today; it is Antifa.

      • magus71 said, on August 19, 2017 at 8:09 pm

        • Michael LaBossiere said, on August 22, 2017 at 5:57 pm

          Be wary of Photoshop, mislabeled videos, and fake news. Putting new letters on signs in photos is now child’s play. Also, people routinely use real photos, but say lies about them. Yeah, the left does this to. I use the Google image search to check on the pictures-the images that generate the most rage are often just doctored images.

          • CoffeeTime said, on August 22, 2017 at 7:51 pm

            I am very suspicious of any image I see on the net. Video is harder to tamper with undetectably, and much stronger evidence.

            However, direct posts from these people are pretty clear:

            ‘There is no room for capitalists, conservatives, libertarians, “classical liberals” or supporters of the US constitution in our city. You MUST leave. #BostonResist’

            So the neo-Nazis want to get rid of non-whites, and Antifa want to get rid of classical liberals and anyone who supports the US constitution.

            I want to get rid of both fascism and the totalitarian left, but more the totalitarian left, because historically it has been more deadly, more vicious, and much, much better at holding on to power.

            While individuals may support ideologies and movements and specific actions to various degrees, there is ample evidence that a significant number of the supporters of the totalitarian left would support those signs. I just think that introducing specific images without sufficient evidence of authenticity distracts from the main points.

            • CoffeeTime said, on August 22, 2017 at 7:54 pm

              P.S. There was a link in my post above to a posting on the BostonAntifa Facebook page, but it is not showing. Fair enough. The post is easy to find though.

            • CoffeeTime said, on August 22, 2017 at 8:30 pm

              A further P.S. I was just browsing further, and that Antifa page contains so much ridiculous material I begin to suspect that it’s a hoax. Not that I believe ideologues can’t be that absurd – the neo-Nazis demonstrate that adequately – but it’s rare to find so much of it in such concentrations

      • magus71 said, on August 19, 2017 at 8:13 pm

        And here of course is the Antifa affiliated BLM people chanting for dead cops. This is the side the Mike is convinced is the good side.

  9. magus71 said, on August 19, 2017 at 8:41 pm

    One more for good measure. Do you support these people Mike?

    • Michael LaBossiere said, on August 22, 2017 at 5:55 pm

      Not a fan of chaos.

      I oppose unwarranted violence from the left and the right. I do see the appeal of violence to those who lack the money to buy influence, but certainly oppose murdering people.

      Most cops are just trying to keep civilization going along; so I certainly do not endorse a broad condemnation of the police. You know, because I’ve read John Locke and Hobbes. There has to be a police force and judicial system. This is not to say that it cannot be improved, but without it there would be the state of nature. And we know what that is like.

  10. WTP said, on August 20, 2017 at 9:28 pm

    Scott Adams:

    But ask yourself which one of these versions sounds less crazy:
    1. A sitting president, who is a branding expert, thought it would be a good idea to go easy on murderous Nazis as a way to improve his popularity.

    or…

    2. The country elected a racist leader who is winking to the KKK and White Supremacists that they have a free pass to start a race war now.

    or…

    3. A mentally unstable racist clown with conman skills (mostly just lying) eviscerated the Republican primary field and won the presidency. He keeps doing crazy, impulsive racist stuff. But for some reason, the economy is going well, jobs are looking good, North Korea blinked, ISIS is on the ropes, and the Supreme Court got a qualified judge. It was mostly luck.

    or…

    4. The guy who didn’t offer to be your moral leader didn’t offer any moral leadership, just law and order, applied equally. His critics cleverly and predictably framed it as being soft on Nazis.

    One of those narratives is less crazy-sounding than the others. That doesn’t mean the less-crazy one has to be true. But normal stuff happens far more often than crazy stuff. And critics will frame normal stuff as crazy whenever they get a chance.

  11. WTP said, on August 26, 2017 at 11:11 am

    OK, so I see where in my disgust I failed to read far enough into Mike’s reply. My mistake. He does, half heartedly, and in a tone that implies he has no idea such is going on, say that the same would hold for people who embrace Maoism, Stalinism and such. Note the “and such”. So it seems Mike is totally unaware that anything like this is going on:





    Or see any of the posts by Coffee or Magus on this page.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: