iBeng
Intentionally left blank
- Apr 3, 2012
- 58,140
- 66,407
- AFL Club
- Brisbane Lions
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
LIVE: Richmond v Melbourne - 7:25PM Wed
Squiggle tips Demons at 77% chance -- What's your tip? -- Team line-ups »
It's a good deal closer.
Who are the Proud Boys?
This isn't telling me very much. If you want me to do my own research, that's fine.What are the Proud Boys? An organization? A movement? A gang?
This isn't telling me very much. If you want me to do my own research, that's fine.
They sound like a frat for neo-nazis.What they SAY they are and what they ACTUALLY are can be two very different views and or opinions...
They sound like a frat for neo-nazis.
What they SAY they are and what they ACTUALLY are can be two very different views and or opinions...
Feigning ignorance, really?It's a good deal closer.
Who are the Proud Boys?
If I knew who the Proud Boys were, I wouldn't have asked.Feigning ignorance, really?
Newton's third law applied to sociology.
Problem, is, perpetual motion isn't a reality yet.
Push a pendulum hard in one direction, and it'll swing back in the other... with just a little less force each time.
It depends a little on what it is. I think the meme about the $2000 pointed out a valid hypocrisy. I've got no idea how the dating one is relevant to the thread. If we're showing individual people on the right (or left for the other thread) are hypocrites/liars, well the threads will fill up pretty quickly.If it's so simple, there should be no difficulty in explaining it.
I despise the obsession with hypocrisy, because hypocrisy alone does not mean that you are wrong. To accuse/smear someone/a position with being hypocritical is to avoid their argument entirely in favour of attacking their behaviour or person. This is not productive, and doesn't serve any position save the one that you already hold.
I've said it in the other thread, and I'll say it again: these are pretty ******* simple things to do. For something to function in this thread, it needs to demonstrate 1) hypocrisy, and 2) be 'of the right', so needs to somewhat be about right wing concerns. A reddit post about dating does not really demonstrate hypocricy, nor does it discuss right/left wing issues at all, so doesn't really qualify for this thread.
And memes can fu** right off.
It automatically means they're wrong in at least 50% of their positions.It depends a little on what it is. I think the meme about the $2000 pointed out a valid hypocrisy. I've got no idea how the dating one is relevant to the thread. If we're showing individual people on the right (or left for the other thread) are hypocrites/liars, well the threads will fill up pretty quickly.
I think this thread and the left one can be useful. It does provide a forum for both sides to respond to unfair criticisms. And I think it can be good to point out when politicians/activists/media opinion makers are hypocritical; albeit, I agree that doesn't automatically mean they're wrong.
See, you'd think so, but for whatever reason people have filled the other thread with stuff that either isn't hypocrisy or isn't directed at the left. This thread isn't so well populated, and in general there's been a bit more effort exerted here to at least attempt the thread topic.It depends a little on what it is. I think the meme about the $2000 pointed out a valid hypocrisy. I've got no idea how the dating one is relevant to the thread. If we're showing individual people on the right (or left for the other thread) are hypocrites/liars, well the threads will fill up pretty quickly.
Most of the content of both threads is people responding to false accusations of hypocrisy. I've read them. What can I say; I was extremely bored during night shifts last year.I think this thread and the left one can be useful. It does provide a forum for both sides to respond to unfair criticisms. And I think it can be good to point out when politicians/activists/media opinion makers are hypocritical; albeit, I agree that doesn't automatically mean they're wrong.
I'd be interested to know how/why.It automatically means they're wrong in at least 50% of their positions.
It depends on the context. If someone is making an Argument for A, responding "but that is hypocritical" is, I agree with you, not a relevant argument. Whether someone is being hypocritical, or simply their position has changed (or neither has occurred and they've been consistent), doesn't have any relevancy for whether Argument A is a good or bad idea/position.......
Most of the content of both threads is people responding to false accusations of hypocrisy. I've read them. What can I say; I was extremely bored during night shifts last year.
As for the idea that hypocrisy doesn't automatically mean someone is wrong, hypocrisy alone does not have anything to do with the proposition one puts forth. There's no automatically necessary. Hypocrisy comes from the person who is saying something, not from the subject/content of what they're saying.
It's an ad hominem attack, and that's all it is.
So, 100% of Trumpist demos are "violent" (if you count armed gangs smashing into and looting public buildings, stealing computers and beating a cop to death with a fire extinguisher as "violent"), compared with 7% of BLM protests.hey moron.
Six months of burning down buildings, looting businesses and chasing police out of their own precincts with bricks and molotovs is not the equivalent of 2 hours of trespassing on Capitol house and walking between the velvet ropes.
So, 100% of Trumpist demos are "violent" (if you count armed gangs smashing into and looting public buildings, stealing computers and beating a cop to death with a fire extinguisher as "violent"), compared with 7% of BLM protests.
More than 93% of the 7,750 Black Lives Matter protests in all 50 states and Washington D.C. between May 26 and August 22 were peaceful, according to a report by the nonprofit Armed Conflict Location & Event Data Project which researches political violence and protests across the world.More than 2,400 locations reported peaceful protests, while fewer than 220 reported “violent demonstrations.” The authors define violent demonstrations as including “acts targeting other individuals, property, businesses, other rioting groups or armed actors.” Their definition includes anything from “fighting back against police” to vandalism, property destruction looting, road-blocking using barricades, burning tires or other materials, and even toppling statues of “colonial figures, slave owners and Confederate leaders”. Where protests did turn violent they were “largely confined to specific blocks,” .
Playing with themselves 24/7.If the extremities of the left and right would just fu** off and die, the rest of us could live in peace as Essendon supporters.