Politics Hypocrisy of The Right.

[Gralin]

The SHOCKING! revelation that Putin’s gangsta state has been sneakily funding far-right propagandists in the United States has certainly caused A Splash. Not unreasonably, those at the centre of the scandal — Tenet Media’s owners Lauren Chen and Liam Donovan, along with professional binfluencers Matt Christensen, Tayler Hansen, Benny Johnson, Dave Rubin, Lauren Southern and Pim Tool — have thus far defended themselves by simply claiming Useful Idiot and/or Victim status. Thus while more than handy at detecting the evil influence of (((Soros))) & Co. at every political moment, the group was, unfortunately, deeply incurious as to who was paying them millions of dollars to shitpoast far-right talking-points.

Lauren ‘The Great Replacement’ Southern, Tenet Media & Daddy Putin

The SHOCKING! revelation that Putin’s gangsta state has been sneakily funding far-right propagandists in the United States has certainly caused A Splash. Not unreasonably, those at the centre…

slackbastard.anarchobase.com

The only reason they even wanted to talk to their shadowy benefactor was because his fake profile said he was into "social justice".

90% of Tim Pool's money

 

[peternorth]

If you don’t like it, leave.

Many outraged callers to 3aw today bemoaning the state of the state. Not without merit one must acknowledge. But don’t like it leave applies to everyone yes?

 

[Carringbush2010]

Not surprised at the use of 'if you don't like it leave' as, 'that's racist', no it isn't.

At worst, it's blunt. People need to stop being overly sensitive, and worse people need to stop feigning offence in bad faith in pursuit of their agenda.

On the flip side people need to stop using this term as an excuse to be racist.

The use of this from both angles is abhorrent.

 

[kickazz]

Not surprised at the use of 'if you don't like it leave' as, 'that's racist', no it isn't.

At worst, it's blunt. People need to stop being overly sensitive, and worse people need to stop feigning offence in bad faith in pursuit of their agenda.

On the flip side people need to stop using this term as an excuse to be racist.

The use of this from both angles is abhorrent.

Yeah if nothing else it's a refusal to counter criticism of (any) status quo with facts or logic.

 

[Carringbush2010]

Yeah if nothing else it's a refusal to counter criticism of (any) status quo with facts or logic.

For some yes, like I said, the term is being used in bad faith, depending on one's view.

If you have an actual look at the term itself it is certainly not offensive, it is only offensive if you go looking for the offence.

Fair argument that those who find offence to this term are either overly sensitive or are feigning sensitivity in bad faith. That's really the limit here.

So which is it?

 

[kickazz]

For some yes, like I said, the term is being used in bad faith, depending on one's view.

If you have an actual look at the term itself it is certainly not offensive, it is only offensive if you go looking for the offence.

Fair argument that those who find offence to this term are either overly sensitive or are feigning sensitivity in bad faith. That's really the limit here.

So which is it?

It is far from an offensive phrase. It is very, very defensive.

 

[Carringbush2010]

It is far from an offensive phrase. It is very, very defensive.

It is neither offensive or defensive, it is only either if one views it that way.

And that's the point, phrases like this which are just a term to explain something are hijacked for agenda purposes or people are just offended by it for no rational reason or used as an excuse to be racist.

 

[Ghost Patrol]

Not surprised at the use of 'if you don't like it leave' as, 'that's racist', no it isn't.

At worst, it's blunt. People need to stop being overly sensitive, and worse people need to stop feigning offence in bad faith in pursuit of their agenda.

On the flip side people need to stop using this term as an excuse to be racist.

The use of this from both angles is abhorrent.

So you are saying it's not racist, unless it's being used by racists?

 

[Carringbush2010]

So you are saying it's not racist, unless it's being used by racists?

Umm no, I'm saying it's racist if that is the intent.

It's really not hard to figure out.

 

[Gethelred]

Umm no, I'm saying it's racist if that is the intent.

It's really not hard to figure out.

Dude, c'mon.

Intellectual superiority is - by far - the worst possible pose you could choose.

 

[skipper kelly]

Intellectual superiority

and moral superiority are 2 of the main driving forces behind internet arguing.

 

[kranky al]

Arizona GOP Only Cares About Proof of Citizenship for Democrats

Read more here.

www.democracydocket.com

Exhibit a,b,c all the way through to z for the prosecution
Mod Edit: Democracy Docket

Democracy Docket - Bias and Credibility

LEFT BIAS These media sources are moderate to strongly biased toward liberal causes through story selection and/or political affiliation. They may

mediabiasfactcheck.com

Overall, we rate Democracy Docket as left-biased based on editorial positions that favor the left. We also rate them High for factual reporting due to proper sourcing and a clean fact-check record.

 

[Lsta062]

Not surprised at the use of 'if you don't like it leave' as, 'that's racist', no it isn't.

At worst, it's blunt. People need to stop being overly sensitive, and worse people need to stop feigning offence in bad faith in pursuit of their agenda.

On the flip side people need to stop using this term as an excuse to be racist.

The use of this from both angles is abhorrent.

It can be racist. Racism in of itself stems from race-based arrogance.

This statement can indicate that someone does not acknowledge criticism of this country by anyone other than the dominant race despite everyone here (that are citizens) being equal citizens. That’s race-based arrogance, or racism.

So yes, it can definitely be a racist statement. I don’t see it as explicit racism though because it depends on why a person said it.

 

[peternorth]

It can be racist. Racism in of itself stems from race-based arrogance.

This statement can indicate that someone does not acknowledge criticism of this country by anyone other than the dominant race despite everyone here (that are citizens) being equal citizens. That’s race-based arrogance, or racism.

So yes, it can definitely be a racist statement. I don’t see it as explicit racism though because it depends on why a person said it.

why and how it was said. goes both and all ways.

It is an interesting point through, I haven't heard/seen direct reference or use of the slogan from one group (anglo aussies) towards members of the same group. But i do not doubt it has been said before.

 

[Lsta062]

why and how it was said. goes both and all ways.

It is an interesting point through, I haven't heard/seen direct reference or use of the slogan from one group (anglo aussies) towards members of the same group. But i do not doubt it has been said before.

Yeah true. It’s possible that there are people who genuinely love all Australian policies and tell anyone who disagrees with anything to leave regardless of race, but that’s usually not the case. It’s usually directed at minorities by someone from the dominant race.

But yeah, if it applies to minorities, then I don’t know why anyone saying this thinks it doesn’t apply to members of the dominant group. A minority member could tell a racist white Australian that if they don’t like multiculturalism, then they can just leave Australia and find a homogenous white nation to live in. You know, tit for tat

 

[peternorth]

Yeah true. It’s possible that there are people who genuinely love all Australian policies and tell anyone who disagrees with anything to leave regardless of race, but that’s usually not the case. It’s usually directed at minorities by someone from the dominant race.

But yeah, if it applies to minorities, then I don’t know why anyone saying this thinks it doesn’t apply to members of the dominant group. A minority member could tell a racist white Australian that if they don’t like multiculturalism, then they can just leave Australia and find a homogenous white nation to live in. You know, tit for tat

yep spot on darce

 

[Gough]

Yawn, another one.

Anti-LGBTQ activist finally seems to admit to his gay adult video past - LGBTQ Nation

He alluded to his appearance in “Jerk-Off Race” as a "mistake" and suggested that public schools led him astray.

www.lgbtqnation.com

 

[peternorth]

Tom Elliott bemoans the lack of manual able drivers, like when he was young he and others learnt to drive it

 

[Gethelred]

Tom Elliott bemoans the lack of manual able drivers, like when he was young he and others learnt to drive it

I look forward to him waxing eloquently on the merits of a society before sliced bread.

 

[Not Important]

 

[peternorth]

GWS forward again refuses to play in pride round on religious grounds

GWS player Haneen Zreika will once again skip playing in the AFLW’s pride round on religious grounds, 3AW Mornings has learnt. Ms Zreika has publicly opted not to play in the AFLW’s pride round in recent seasons and the Giants have confirmed she again won’t feature in her side’s game against...

www.3aw.com.au

Tom Elliott says her continual refusal to play in the league’s pride weekend is a perfect example of why themed rounds shouldn’t exist.



Tom supports this (reading between the lines). From this it appears one player refuses to play, a minority (figure). Yet in many other issues, tom would bemoan the minorities running the world.

In another time, them muslims are bad according to some because in some islamic countries homosexuality is banned. Same people denounce pride round.

 

[schneebly111]

Tom Elliott says her continual refusal to play in the league’s pride weekend is a perfect example of why themed rounds shouldn’t exist.

So if the AFLW season went into April (or the AFL season had a player in this situation) and a player of Muslim/Arab background announced, due to the Australian military’s history of killing Muslims from Gallipoli to Afghanistan, they were going to boycott Anzac round or abstain from the forced minute’s silence, if Tom Elliott or the other reactionary shock jocks would be saying that’s why Anzac round shouldn’t exist?

No, I think in that case we’d really see a “hypocrisy of the right”.

 

[peternorth]

So if the AFLW season went into April (or the AFL season had a player in this situation) and a player of Muslim/Arab background announced, due to the Australian military’s history of killing Muslims from Gallipoli to Afghanistan, they were going to boycott Anzac round or abstain from the forced minute’s silence, if Tom Elliott or the other reactionary shock jocks would be saying that’s why Anzac round shouldn’t exist?

No, I think in that case we’d really see a “hypocrisy of the right”.

.

i did forget to mention anzac day in my original post. one wonders if themed rounds include anzac.

 

[schneebly111]

i did forget to mention anzac day in my original post. one wonders if themed rounds include anzac.

Absolutely they do. But not the the shock jock clowns who only say they’re against “themed” rounds as an excuse to beat down on indigenous, LGBT, migrants.

By all means Anzac round is a themed round (has “nothing” to do with footy as the others do) but as these same shock jocks love hyper nationalism and military glorification they’ll blow a gasket if anyone suggested ending Anzac round.

It’s straight up hypocrisy.

 

[peternorth]

Absolutely they do. But not the the shock jock clowns who only say they’re against “themed” rounds as an excuse to beat down on indigenous, LGBT, migrants.

By all means Anzac round is a themed round (has “nothing” to do with footy as the others do) but as these same shock jocks love hyper nationalism and military glorification they’ll blow a gasket if anyone suggested ending Anzac round.

It’s straight up hypocrisy.

and then you have equality and aboriginals. The way to help them is to apparently treat everyone equally, not provide allowances/better treatment to a race/group (in this case the indigenous) . "We should be united".