Encyclopaedia Metallum: The Metal Archives

Message board

* FAQ    * Search   * Register   * Login 



Reply to topic
Author Message Previous topic | Next topic
Resident_Hazard
Possessed by Starscream's Ghost

Joined: Thu Oct 07, 2004 2:33 pm
Posts: 2497
Location: United States
PostPosted: Tue Aug 07, 2018 12:54 pm 
 

Derigin wrote:
Admittedly, he's not wrong though SweetLeaf95. It pretty much is a right-wing practice and policy to have allowed asbestos to flourish as it has. They have little interest nowadays in actually cutting its use, so long as friendly corporations want it. The Democrats aren't innocent in this either - given that they took their sweet time cutting down on asbestos and enforcing new regulations limiting its use - but at least they're more willing to do something about it. Although they still wont outright ban it. Both parties are pretty shit, but at least one is less shit than the other.



Despite their small gains in recent years, the modern Libertarian party seems more lost and unfocused than ever. They either side hard with borderline anarchist views or fall straight into the Republican camp. The old idea that they are "the best ideas of Republicans and best ideas of Democrats with none of the crap" seems to have been long ago abandoned.

Letting major, and possibly corrupt corporations get away with whatever they want coupled with a disinterested view on the environment is something on which Republicans and Libertarians both agree. The only difference between the two is that Libertarians will complain if corporations get "help" or subsidies from the government, but that's because they've started acting like literally any tax money spent on literally anything is bad. Both Republicans and Libertarians seem to have lost the ability to understand nuance, instead taking hardlines on their ideologies, and both shit on Democrats in equal measure, while Libertarians are cautious to ever complain about Republicans.

I think a big problem with Libertarians is an inability to separate the movement from Ron Paul and, worse, Rand Paul--the younger Paul never being anything more than your average line-towing Republican crony. He has almost universally sided with anything Trump has done, which one would think a Libertarian would find appalling. Because of this, they are more easily allied with Republicans, often sharing staunchly identical views.
_________________
Warm Fuzzy Cynical comics.
Warm Fuzzy Cynical Facebook page.

Top
 Profile  
Derigin
The Mountain Man

Joined: Sun Jan 01, 2006 6:25 am
Posts: 5183
Location: Canada
PostPosted: Tue Aug 07, 2018 1:02 pm 
 

Resident_Hazard wrote:
Letting major, and possibly corrupt corporations get away with whatever they want coupled with a disinterested view on the environment is something on which Republicans and Libertarians both agree.

It's also something that Democrats, likewise, have historically agreed on. I know you're well deep into your interest in that party - maybe having drunk the kool-aid, I don't know - but the notion that any political party in the United States has historically had much of an interest in the environment at the cost of the interests of friendly corporations is a false one. The Democrats do a half-ass job of presenting themselves as the champions of the environment, labour, the people, while at the same time not compromising the interests of corporations that fill the party coffers. Perhaps that might change into the future, but I wouldn't hold my breath - not unless there is a concerted effort by the party to get rid of corporate fundraising (and notice how little attention that gets from any party). Your country is one dominated by corrupt corporate interests, and those corporate interests have their fingers in everyone's pies. What makes the Republicans and Libertarians awful is that they openly condone and embrace it, while the Democrats do so quietly and privately.
_________________
¯\_(ツ)_/¯

R.I.P. Diamhea 1987-2018
Live young, die free. Gone, but not forgotten.

Top
 Profile  
SweetLeaf95
Metalhead

Joined: Tue Dec 16, 2014 1:19 am
Posts: 634
Location: United States
PostPosted: Tue Aug 07, 2018 1:14 pm 
 

He is correct in this scenario, but the way that it was worded read to me like "any policy that is libertarian, or conservative/republican is always greedy or bad". It was the generalization that rubs me the wrong way. In this instance, I agree.
_________________
"It's not the kill, it's the thrill of the chase" - Deep Purple

Top
 Profile  
severzhavnost
Metalhead

Joined: Sun Oct 12, 2008 10:16 pm
Posts: 2303
Location: Ottawa
PostPosted: Tue Aug 07, 2018 3:04 pm 
 

Ya know what's hilarious about the loonies whining that Alex Jones got kicked off of Facebook? It was their favorite president who killed the only possible argument that Facebook shouldn't be allowed to do so! When net neutrality was alive, there at least was a flimsy claim that Facebook, as a business that runs on the Internet (which was a public utility under NN), should be bound to act like a public utility too. Donald Trump actually made it possible for his own most outspoken supporters to be booted off Facebook :lol:

For the record, I kinda liked getting rid of Net Neutrality. I'm happy with the Internet being a free-for-all of private businesses who can choose to associate (or not) with whomever they like, even though for the moment that means the platforms are controlled by people hostile to ideas I might support.
To anyone who gets "censored" - not even the right word - by the Tech Left: make your own!!! Show some of that independent entrepreneurial spirit you praise so much, and congregate on your own sites, instead of sitting around bitching about big bad Facebook.
_________________
Apteronotus wrote:
Mütiilation. There should be a missing I, not an extra one. Really a missed wordplay opportunity.

Top
 Profile  
capeda
Metalhead

Joined: Wed Nov 13, 2002 8:48 pm
Posts: 510
Location: United States
PostPosted: Tue Aug 07, 2018 3:16 pm 
 

darkeningday wrote:
I'm against corporate deplatforming but also love irony so I have no idea how to feel about Alex Jones getting kicked off all big tech. It's about on par with neo-nazis getting 86'd by federal agents, it's not good, it has concerning implications and I definitely won't cheer it on, but I also can't really be bothered to give a shit about it either. Plus it's an irony all-you-can-tweet buffet!


InfoWars app currently #4 in the iOS store since Apple hasn’t pulled it yet for some reason. AJ existed before Facebook and YouTube, and he’ll continue to exist elsewhere afterward. If anything, he has enough of a core audience to drive his listeners to competitive platforms like bitchute or Gab.

Even in spite of America’s internet regulations (or lack there of), Americans still have one of the most uncensored internet environments on the entire planet. On the flip side of the coin, China and Cuba Are victims of massive censorship that they’ll never be able to undo in this lifetime. If people want to listen to Alex Jones in the US, it’s slightly more difficult than it was yesterday. In China or Cuba, it’s outright illegal.

Don’t really care either way, though. He was good for memes back during 2016. Not sure why he’s a hot topic again. Streisand Effect is just going to give him more views in the short term of it all.

Top
 Profile  
Derigin
The Mountain Man

Joined: Sun Jan 01, 2006 6:25 am
Posts: 5183
Location: Canada
PostPosted: Tue Aug 07, 2018 3:37 pm 
 

Severzhavnost, that's not at all what Net Neutrality is about...

Net neutrality isn't about what websites can and cannot do; it's about what your ISP can and cannot do. Essentially, if you believe in net neutrality, you believe that a person's ISP shouldn't be able to determine what websites you can access, how fast those websites load for you, and which online services and platforms you can use.

Imagine, for instance, if Rogers made it so you could not access Metal Archives, or if you were to try to use Metal Archives the pages would load so incredibly slow that it wouldn't be worth visiting. Imagine if they required you to pay extra for that privilege - let's say an extra $10 a month - and/or also required such websites to bribe them to make sure they didn't suffer from such throttling. Alternatively, imagine if Rogers had a deal with Disney and therefore whenever you tried to use Netflix or Amazon Prime movies would never load, but if you used Disney-owned Hulu, movies would load normally.

The Internet as we have always known it, at least up until now, has discouraged if not outright prohibited this type of behaviour by ISPs. Obviously there are a number of companies that would love to cash in on this, and they're trying their hardest to undermine and get rid of net neutrality (often with the same misinformation campaign that leads to you thinking net neutrality = forcing websites to do things they don't want to do). When people call for making the Internet a public utility, they're arguing that net neutrality should be entrenched in law like its equivalent is with other public utilities; that your power company, for example, can't throttle your power and force you to pay extra if you're doing nothing legally wrong.
_________________
¯\_(ツ)_/¯

R.I.P. Diamhea 1987-2018
Live young, die free. Gone, but not forgotten.

Top
 Profile  
severzhavnost
Metalhead

Joined: Sun Oct 12, 2008 10:16 pm
Posts: 2303
Location: Ottawa
PostPosted: Tue Aug 07, 2018 4:13 pm 
 

Good lord... it seems I've completely misunderstood the issue, or at least, wrongly equated one issue with another. I had assumed that classifying the Internet as a "public utility" meant "government controlled". Your explanation shows clearly it's the reverse, and net neutrality laws actually opened up more content rather than enabling censorship. Thanks for the info!
_________________
Apteronotus wrote:
Mütiilation. There should be a missing I, not an extra one. Really a missed wordplay opportunity.

Top
 Profile  
rexxz
Where's your band?

Joined: Sun Apr 18, 2004 8:45 pm
Posts: 8954
Location: United States of America
PostPosted: Tue Aug 07, 2018 4:15 pm 
 

Well, you are sort of right. But "regulated" instead of "controlled". Which of course as has been explained, opens far more doors than it closes (the only ones being those of greedy ISPs).
_________________
Hexenkraft - diabolical cyberpunk darksynth
Cosmic Atrophy - extradimensional death metal

Top
 Profile  
Resident_Hazard
Possessed by Starscream's Ghost

Joined: Thu Oct 07, 2004 2:33 pm
Posts: 2497
Location: United States
PostPosted: Tue Aug 07, 2018 4:40 pm 
 

Derigin wrote:
Resident_Hazard wrote:
Letting major, and possibly corrupt corporations get away with whatever they want coupled with a disinterested view on the environment is something on which Republicans and Libertarians both agree.

It's also something that Democrats, likewise, have historically agreed on. I know you're well deep into your interest in that party - maybe having drunk the kool-aid, I don't know - but the notion that any political party in the United States has historically had much of an interest in the environment at the cost of the interests of friendly corporations is a false one. The Democrats do a half-ass job of presenting themselves as the champions of the environment, labour, the people, while at the same time not compromising the interests of corporations that fill the party coffers. Perhaps that might change into the future, but I wouldn't hold my breath - not unless there is a concerted effort by the party to get rid of corporate fundraising (and notice how little attention that gets from any party). Your country is one dominated by corrupt corporate interests, and those corporate interests have their fingers in everyone's pies. What makes the Republicans and Libertarians awful is that they openly condone and embrace it, while the Democrats do so quietly and privately.


I think it's funny to be noted as "drinking the Kool-Aid of the Democrats" when my political views have literally run the gamut of all three of these parties over the years. I once voted for Bush for fuck's sake. I voted for Gary Johnson. It is a fallacy to assume that because I'm not griping about one group that I automatically think that group is infallible or that I've drunk the kool-aid as it were. Are my posts not already damn long enough? Do I need to add several appendices to explain full detail on fucking everything?

I don't disagree with your notes on the Democrats. By and large, this country has been badly scarred by politicians and their parties too handily having their strings pulled by corporate interests. That noted, Democrats push for more meaningful change (generally, or at least publicly) when it comes to the environment, but I'm sure it'll be pointed out that I'm obviously in the pockets of Big Democrat if I don't also note that it was Nixon that created the EPA and that George Dubya Bush, while not great on his record with the environment, and someone whose wealth came from oil, didn't at least spread bullshit conspiracy theories about Global Warming.

Of course, now I'm sure I drank the Kool-Aid and am firmly in the pockets of Big Republican. Try to stay on topic and get ripped for not detailing enough tangents. The salad was full enough, the point was made. I didn't feel the need to add a four-course meal in the bowl.

Look how long this shit is already. Look at all these words. Nobody's going to read this because I had to waste time filling in points that were irrelevant to begin with.

sigh
_________________
Warm Fuzzy Cynical comics.
Warm Fuzzy Cynical Facebook page.

Top
 Profile  
Derigin
The Mountain Man

Joined: Sun Jan 01, 2006 6:25 am
Posts: 5183
Location: Canada
PostPosted: Tue Aug 07, 2018 5:18 pm 
 

That's rather short for one of your posts on this forum.

You can take offense all you like to the terminology, but to argue that you haven't become the poster boy of Democrat apologism lately would be observably incorrect. Your past political views aside, whenever there is something remotely critical of the Democrats you fight it and/or try to obfuscate it. I don't deny that if I was an American I would vote Democrat, but just like with the Liberals and the NDP here I have witnessed all too closely partisan supporters who try their utmost to paint their party as infallible. That's fine, but I will call it as I see it.

But like I said there is no denying that of the two variations of shit, I'd rather have the cow manure than the plague invested feces of the Republicans. Obviously not the same kinda crap, but both aren't particularly palatable options... Though sadly they're the only viable options there.
_________________
¯\_(ツ)_/¯

R.I.P. Diamhea 1987-2018
Live young, die free. Gone, but not forgotten.

Top
 Profile  
Resident_Hazard
Possessed by Starscream's Ghost

Joined: Thu Oct 07, 2004 2:33 pm
Posts: 2497
Location: United States
PostPosted: Tue Aug 07, 2018 5:38 pm 
 

Derigin wrote:
That's rather short for one of your posts on this forum.

You can take offense all you like to the terminology, but to argue that you haven't become the poster boy of Democrat apologism lately would be observedly incorrect. Your past political views aside, whenever there is something remotely critical of the Democrats you defend it. I don't deny that if I was an American I would vote Democrat, but just like with the Liberals and the NDP here I have witnessed all too closely partisan supporters who try their utmost to paint their party as infallible. That's fine, but I will call it as I see it.

But like I said there is no denying that of the two variations of shit, I'd rather have the cow manure than the plague invested feces of the Republicans. Obviously not the same kinda crap, but both aren't particularly palliable options... Though sadly they're the only options.


Interesting. I have not seen myself as overly defensive of the Democrats. Defensive, but not starkly so. I still follow one or two Libertarian pages on Facebook, though at this point, it's mostly to roll my eyes and observe that they think memes are the way to get elected. I guess that shit sorta worked for Trump, so maybe.

Mostly, I will avoid equivalency arguments. There's a lot of "both parties are such bullshit," which I view as caustic and counter-productive, particularly in an important election season. That creates disharmony and apathy. If they're both the same shit, why bother voting, right? It's a toxic viewpoint. I was not a fan of Bill Clinton back in the day, and I think the way he was basically allowed to be a creep is part of what makes people not care that Trump is. At one point on here, many years ago, my signature was basically bitching about "no more Bushes or Clintons", and I never wanted her to be president... Right up until I saw that the best the Republicans could muster was Donald Fucking Trump.

Yeah, they're two sides of the same shit sandwich, where the only difference is one side is made worse with the addition of mayonnaise. But is that productive? One party is clearly better right now. There are not trans people, for instance, serving as Republicans. But the Democrats are an unfocused mess. While Republicans look awful for all supporting atrocious policies, the thing that gives them strength is that they all support the atrocious policies. They look like a solid team, in that regard, which voters fall for all too easily.

It's like the Joker said in The Dark Knight:
Quote:
Nobody panics when things go "according to plan." Even if the plan is horrifying! If, tomorrow, I tell the press that, like, a gang banger will get shot, or a truckload of soldiers will be blown up, nobody panics, because it's all "part of the plan".


Republicans being those team players look like they have a plan. So even horrifying, people feel better about them--even though Trump has never had a plan about any of his shit aside from idiotic statements of "me wanna build wall" and "me wanna no Muslims come into country" and "me golf now."

And Democrat voters were fucking lazy on the last election. Yes, barring that the Electoral College fucked things, a lot of people just fucking stayed home. Why? What's the difference between Shillary and Drumpf? Doesn't matter, still screwed, right? No, there was clearly a better candidate there, as much as I didn't want to admit that of her years ago.

Apathy spreads like a disease. I'd rather avoid that right now. It matters that people get off their asses this fall and instead of seeing two cans of the same wadded shit sandwich, they see one that is actually preferable to put in their fucking mouth--and they vote in kind. Probably pretentious of me to think that anything I say or do in this fucking matters. I'm not inspiring anyone to go vote--I'm pretty sure. But I don't want to be part of the apathy.

IF Democrats can pull off their razor thin "blue wave" victory this fall, we will finally see something that can put the brakes on Trump's embarrassing, cruel, and self-serving bullshit. But Democrats need to avoid the mistakes of the past, which is assuming they've already fucking won, and they need to stop supporting literally any candidate that ran in 2016 so everyone can move forward.

Now, despite what you've seen of my recent posts in here, I'm quite certain I have bitched about all of this before. Or I'm experience Deja Vu again, and I don't even have that game. I have Shadowgate.

Please see appendix A-114^Sections 232-458, F-47^Sections 27-89, N-454^Sections 399-666.
_________________
Warm Fuzzy Cynical comics.
Warm Fuzzy Cynical Facebook page.

Top
 Profile  
Derigin
The Mountain Man

Joined: Sun Jan 01, 2006 6:25 am
Posts: 5183
Location: Canada
PostPosted: Tue Aug 07, 2018 5:48 pm 
 

RH, we do more for the cause of apathy by excusing, ignoring and/or hand-waving away any negatives of the Democrats than we would by recognizing them and accepting them. By no means should this equate the Democrats with the Republicans, but the more that we look at this the more likely it is that history won't repeat itself. I worry, on a personal level, that the Democrats will fail because those who do support them don't actively try to reach out and recognize and tackle the reasons why the vast majority of apolitical and apartisan voters may not vote for them or at all.
_________________
¯\_(ツ)_/¯

R.I.P. Diamhea 1987-2018
Live young, die free. Gone, but not forgotten.

Top
 Profile  
Resident_Hazard
Possessed by Starscream's Ghost

Joined: Thu Oct 07, 2004 2:33 pm
Posts: 2497
Location: United States
PostPosted: Tue Aug 07, 2018 6:10 pm 
 

Derigin wrote:
RH, we do more for the cause of apathy by excusing, ignoring and/or hand-waving away any negatives of the Democrats than we would by recognizing them and accepting them. By no means should this equate the Democrats with the Republicans, but the more that we look at this the more likely it is that history won't repeat itself. I worry, on a personal level, that the Democrats will fail because those who do support them don't actively try to reach out and recognize and tackle the reasons why the vast majority of apolitical and apartisan voters may not vote for them or at all.


I get your point. We're more on the same page than you think. I would have thought this was more clear in my posts, but I also assume they are mostly ignored for their length.

Issues will not be fixed by pretending they aren't there, no disagreement there. On the topic of how they can with the apolitical, though? I don't know. I can't even clearly state why I gradually stopped identifying as any given party or warmed up to the left. While I'm more likely to vote Democrat these days, I would not call myself one.
_________________
Warm Fuzzy Cynical comics.
Warm Fuzzy Cynical Facebook page.

Top
 Profile  
Morrigan
Crone of War

Joined: Sat Aug 10, 2002 7:27 am
Posts: 9512
Location: Canada
PostPosted: Wed Aug 08, 2018 12:09 pm 
 

SweetLeaf95 wrote:
I'm so sorry to hear. :(

:roll: I don't like booze.
_________________
Von Cichlid wrote:
I work with plenty of Oriental and Indian persons and we get along pretty good, and some females as well.

Markeri, in 2013 wrote:
a fairly agreed upon date [of the beginning of metal] is 1969. Metal is almost 25 years old

Top
 Profile  
Xlxlx
Argentinian Asado Supremacy

Joined: Sat Dec 24, 2011 2:16 pm
Posts: 7821
Location: The Land Down Under (no, not THAT one)
PostPosted: Fri Aug 10, 2018 4:56 pm 
 

https://www.pri.org/stories/2015-07-08/ ... orists-too

A very fascinating article on the topic of extremist violence and the way it's not as clear cut as most people think. Definitely worth a read, and very relevant considering the current socio-political climate.
_________________
Napero wrote:
(...) Bolt Thrower is to the soul what coffee is to the earthly shell.

Top
 Profile  
capeda
Metalhead

Joined: Wed Nov 13, 2002 8:48 pm
Posts: 510
Location: United States
PostPosted: Fri Aug 10, 2018 8:11 pm 
 

Xlxlx wrote:
https://www.pri.org/stories/2015-07-08/turns-out-people-get-angry-when-you-say-white-americans-are-terrorists-too

A very fascinating article on the topic of extremist violence and the way it's not as clear cut as most people think. Definitely worth a read, and very relevant considering the current socio-political climate.


Not sure if they're being intentionally misleading or if they don't understand per capita.
Using their own numbers, and ignoring subtle tricks they used like combining whites and hispanics into one "caucasian" category... for the sake of simplicity, let's just look at two races: whites and arabs.
Arab Muslims commit 53 acts of terrorism.
Whites commit 198.
There are ~2 million Arabs in the USA currently.
There are ~250 million white people in the USA currently.
Based on just this information, a randomly selected Arab would be 33x more likely than a randomly selected white person to commit an act of terrorism.

You can objectively point to Muslim Arabs as being high probability risks compared to the people these "journalists" are bitching about, as you should logically expect the majority race to commit the highest volume of crime based on their share of the population. But as I said, I'm not sure if this is outright deceit or if our education system is failing to educate people on data interpretation and basic statistics.

Top
 Profile  
GTog
Metalhead

Joined: Sun Dec 03, 2006 8:35 pm
Posts: 871
Location: United States
PostPosted: Fri Aug 10, 2018 9:08 pm 
 

Re: Blue Wave

On average, the party of the sitting president loses 33 seats in the House and 2-3 in the Senate in the midterm elections. From what I've read in all the Blue Wave articles on political websites, the Dems are expected to do about that well this November. So let's not get all excited. That's not any better than average.

I think Truman had the worst time, losing 54 House seats and 11 in the Senate. If the Dems could do that - which they won't, not by a long shot - now that would be a Blue Wave.
_________________
Metalheads never get old. We just become legendary.

Top
 Profile  
darkeningday
xXdArKenIngDayXx

Joined: Mon Aug 23, 2004 1:20 pm
Posts: 4410
Location: United States
PostPosted: Fri Aug 10, 2018 10:15 pm 
 

capeda wrote:
Xlxlx wrote:
https://www.pri.org/stories/2015-07-08/turns-out-people-get-angry-when-you-say-white-americans-are-terrorists-too

A very fascinating article on the topic of extremist violence and the way it's not as clear cut as most people think. Definitely worth a read, and very relevant considering the current socio-political climate.


Not sure if they're being intentionally misleading or if they don't understand per capita.
Using their own numbers, and ignoring subtle tricks they used like combining whites and hispanics into one "caucasian" category... for the sake of simplicity, let's just look at two races: whites and arabs.
Arab Muslims commit 53 acts of terrorism.
Whites commit 198.
There are ~2 million Arabs in the USA currently.
There are ~250 million white people in the USA currently.
Based on just this information, a randomly selected Arab would be 33x more likely than a randomly selected white person to commit an act of terrorism.

You can objectively point to Muslim Arabs as being high probability risks compared to the people these "journalists" are bitching about, as you should logically expect the majority race to commit the highest volume of crime based on their share of the population. But as I said, I'm not sure if this is outright deceit or if our education system is failing to educate people on data interpretation and basic statistics.

Yeah, but there are 1,681 people in the US with the first name Dylann, meaning someone with the name Dylann is objectively far more likely to commit an act of terrorism than an Arab. Right? RIGHT?!?

Come on dude, the point of the article is that we're dealing with statistically insignificant outliers to camouflage racist immigration policies and justify bigotry. Nowhere does the article state we need to keep a closer eye on white men to protect our country and keep its citizens safe... yet that's literally the exact line the Trump administration uses whenever pretty much any of their immigration policies are questioned.
_________________
\m/ xXdArKen uR dAyXx \m/

Top
 Profile  
capeda
Metalhead

Joined: Wed Nov 13, 2002 8:48 pm
Posts: 510
Location: United States
PostPosted: Sat Aug 11, 2018 3:03 am 
 

I was merely pointing out that they printed out an obnoxiously long article to obfuscate clear correlations without doing a single thing to refute them. And while I'd agree with your point that attacking immigration from a perspective of minimizing racism is ultimately a poor argument, it's one that seems to resonate with conservatives for some reason (hence the popularity of folks like Anne Coulter and Lauren Southern). Unless there was some hidden sarcasm pervading the article that I didn't pick up on (Poe's Law?), the author isn't going to change anyone's mind with his method of attack.

Ironically, your quip about "the Dylan factor" made a better point than anything Timothy presented.

Top
 Profile  
Napero
GedankenPanzer

Joined: Sun Jan 02, 2005 4:16 pm
Posts: 8638
Location: Finland
PostPosted: Sat Aug 11, 2018 4:19 am 
 

darkeningday wrote:
Yeah, but there are 1,681 people in the US with the first name Dylann, meaning someone with the name Dylann is objectively far more likely to commit an act of terrorism than an Arab. Right? RIGHT?!?

If any of the Dylanns had committed an act of terrorism, then yes, they'd be a statistically more likely to do it. But the sample would be very small with just a single incident to show much of a correlation.

This part of the "dialogue" irks me to no end: if we cannot discuss data, such as statistics on terrorism and its relation to the terrorists' backgrounds, then there is not much to talk about. I haven't yet had the time to look at that article, I will read it later, but if it's somehow racist or forbidden to say aloud that yes, Muslim men are statistically much more likely to commit acts of terrorism, then nothing can be done about it. And that, my dear darkeningday, is one of the things that add fuel to the fire of the Trumpeteers.
_________________
Chest wounds suck (when properly inflicted).
-Butch-

Top
 Profile  
darkeningday
xXdArKenIngDayXx

Joined: Mon Aug 23, 2004 1:20 pm
Posts: 4410
Location: United States
PostPosted: Sat Aug 11, 2018 6:38 am 
 

To say that acts of terror committed in the US is primarily an Arab problem is... ridiculously edgy at absolute best. No one here said this, but it's a belief championed by almost the whole of the Republican party, and clearly what the article Xlxl posted was addressing.

If you know anything about stats you'd know that the power is faaaaar too low to validate a regressiom analysis of any kind. Anyone who tries to draw any causal or honestly even correlational links from this dataset is talking out of his or her ass.

The only reliable predictor of terrorism is that it's committed by dudes whacked out of their gourd.
_________________
\m/ xXdArKen uR dAyXx \m/

Top
 Profile  
Napero
GedankenPanzer

Joined: Sun Jan 02, 2005 4:16 pm
Posts: 8638
Location: Finland
PostPosted: Sat Aug 11, 2018 9:19 am 
 

OK, I read the piece. It was interesting, but does nothing to change what I said.

First of all, all of those acts of terrorism are simply crimes labelled as acts of terrorism. I kinda assumed that, in this context, it would mean only cases with kill counts, but it seems there's quite a bit of else lumped in there, too. And yes, the number of cases that actually left people dead is very low. Perhaps too low to draw any real conclusions. Desperate Finnish male virgins in the age bracket 16 to 25 are more lethal than even radical Islamists, if you recall our school shooting history, at least quasi-statistically speaking.

On the other hand, if you reduce this to "Dylanns commit acts of terrorism is as valid as Muslims commit acts of terrorism", you 1) leaving the door open to someone saying "then Dylanns are almost as bad as Mohammeds", and 2) suppress the use of a statistic that actually could tell us something about terrorism and its implications, reasons, and perhaps even ways it could be tackled. If you don't wish to use statistics and research in these kinds of discussion, then don't. That just happens to be the way the extremes, left and right, conduct the business. If you don't know the facts, you're only spouting ideology. It goes for both studies on terrorism and research on climate change. I may be a simple engineer, and like stuff that has facts and/or research behind it, but I very much think managing the world based on data is better than deciding things blindly. If the body of data is too low to make any statistical analysis, then maybe the data has been collected wrong, or there simply is no real problem to discuss. Or you're using the "the jury is still out there" approach so familiar from the climate discussions.

Statistics are always prone to be misused. My absolute favourite is the idea that China is releasing more CO2 than the US, and that US should therefore do nothing about it; the fact that the number of Chinese is over three times the number of US residents never surfaces in the discussions, but I happen to consider the CO2 statistics between countries sensible only if they are counter per capita.

What's more, while a person's first name hardly causes acts of terrorism, ideologies do. Just as the article mentions. And those ideologies include both Mein Kampf and Qur'an, and a bunch of other useless books, including the Bible, for example in the cases of abortion doctor killings... a thing that was interestingly not mentioned in the article above, as it fits the definition of terrorism perfectly.

Much of the Islamic terrorism, or at least most of its body count, seems to happen in Malaysia and Africa, so blaming Arabs is a bit silly. As long as the USA refuses to pay attention to the fact that 9/11 was a completely Saudi orchestrated thing, there is very little credibility in the rest the superpower is doing in foreign lands.

And yes, a terrorist certain has something whacked out of his gourd, sure: it may be mental illness, certainty that he deserves sex from several voluptuous females while getting nothing, or religion/ideology. Take your pick or, hell, any combination.
_________________
Chest wounds suck (when properly inflicted).
-Butch-

Top
 Profile  
Derigin
The Mountain Man

Joined: Sun Jan 01, 2006 6:25 am
Posts: 5183
Location: Canada
PostPosted: Sat Aug 11, 2018 10:02 am 
 

I'm having flashbacks to a graduate course I took on "what is terrorism?" 8 months later, the twenty-five of us military studies folks could not come up with a solid answer. I very much doubt it will be resolved here. ;)

EDIT: To be fair, I gave the article a read and it was mostly "meh." I didn't really see anything revolutionary or even particularly noteworthy in the article or its assessment of the data. The one thing that did grind my gears a little is how they dismissed the concerns of the data's author, and just went "eh, fuck it, we do what we want." That's fine, but the academic in me is cringing at that. Taking someone's evidence, and trying to make it fit a narrative is, sadly, what journalists do, but it isn't what scientists do, or what people should do, and while the article may itself be a self-referential post-modern piece on how that tends to happen, it's still a pretty shitty way of approaching it or relaying that lesson to the reader.
_________________
¯\_(ツ)_/¯

R.I.P. Diamhea 1987-2018
Live young, die free. Gone, but not forgotten.

Top
 Profile  
Earthcubed
The Great Fearmonger

Joined: Sun Nov 07, 2004 3:44 am
Posts: 3632
Location: eccaira nare epë Anar
PostPosted: Sun Aug 12, 2018 12:18 am 
 

The primacy of formulating The Narrative™ at the expense of fact-finding remains journalism's worst trait and frankly I think much of the last decade's sociopolitical strife in this country can be attributed to it. Yes, I understand the temptation to rush to that institution's defense in the face of the Ameri-chekist rhetoric directed at it by our tangerine-in-chief and his puerile, servile cultists. The recent victimization of journalism does not excuse poor behavior, however, and "we should selectively interpret data to tell the story we want" should be a (if not the) cardinal sin of their profession.
_________________
iamntbatman wrote:
On Friday I passed an important milestone in my teaching career: a student shat himself

FloristOfVampyrism wrote:
That wasn't meant as a k.o. though, he specifically targeted an area of the cerebellum which, if ruptured, renders you a Jehovah's witness indefinitely

Top
 Profile  
darkeningday
xXdArKenIngDayXx

Joined: Mon Aug 23, 2004 1:20 pm
Posts: 4410
Location: United States
PostPosted: Sun Aug 12, 2018 3:22 am 
 

I'm just going to leave this here as it literally speaks for itself:

Youtube: show
_________________
\m/ xXdArKen uR dAyXx \m/

Top
 Profile  
Earthcubed
The Great Fearmonger

Joined: Sun Nov 07, 2004 3:44 am
Posts: 3632
Location: eccaira nare epë Anar
PostPosted: Mon Aug 13, 2018 10:51 pm 
 

The swiss-cheesification of our security practices continues unabated

https://www.politico.com/magazine/story ... isk-219356
_________________
iamntbatman wrote:
On Friday I passed an important milestone in my teaching career: a student shat himself

FloristOfVampyrism wrote:
That wasn't meant as a k.o. though, he specifically targeted an area of the cerebellum which, if ruptured, renders you a Jehovah's witness indefinitely

Top
 Profile  
Resident_Hazard
Possessed by Starscream's Ghost

Joined: Thu Oct 07, 2004 2:33 pm
Posts: 2497
Location: United States
PostPosted: Tue Aug 14, 2018 9:29 am 
 

Earthcubed wrote:
The swiss-cheesification of our security practices continues unabated

https://www.politico.com/magazine/story ... isk-219356


Trump has flaunted security the entire time because he is too stupid to understand it's importance while, ironically, bitching constantly about "leaks" from his bullshit. I worked in just one capacity of security rules at one point, and normally, this is rather rigidly controlled. You don't take a cell phone into a scif, for instance. So that Omarosa was able to bring a phone into the scif and record shit in there is a staggering failure of security.

Oh, but he can hold meetings with Putin--in near total privacy. He cares nothing for security of his own country, but is plenty happy to go into a private room with a foreign leader who is hostile to the United States.
_________________
Warm Fuzzy Cynical comics.
Warm Fuzzy Cynical Facebook page.

Top
 Profile  
darkeningday
xXdArKenIngDayXx

Joined: Mon Aug 23, 2004 1:20 pm
Posts: 4410
Location: United States
PostPosted: Thu Aug 16, 2018 12:36 am 
 

Haha, 56 year old Social Distortion singer Mike Ness beat the shit out of a member of Gavin McInnes's far-right, borderline Nazi "Proud Boys" organization in Sacramento.

Literally, what the fuck are you doing at a Social D show if you're a hardline Trumpist. Literally.
_________________
\m/ xXdArKen uR dAyXx \m/

Top
 Profile  
Resident_Hazard
Possessed by Starscream's Ghost

Joined: Thu Oct 07, 2004 2:33 pm
Posts: 2497
Location: United States
PostPosted: Thu Aug 16, 2018 8:39 am 
 

darkeningday wrote:
Haha, 56 year old Social Distortion singer Mike Ness beat the shit out of a member of Gavin McInnes's far-right, borderline Nazi "Proud Boys" organization in Sacramento.

Literally, what the fuck are you doing at a Social D show if you're a hardline Trumpist. Literally.


I don't people who bitch about politics in art/music/media like this guy did. It's always whining that comes from people who can't handle their views being criticized or who can't handle owning up to being on the wrong side of history. To act like art occurs in a vacuum sans any politics is beyond ignorant. I don't agree with all elements of socialism, but I don't sit there and whine if a favorite band promotes it.

Using art as a tool of political criticism or expression goes back to basically the start of art. There's probably a cave painting somewhere of Og criticizing the caveman politics of Urgg at some point, we just don't know how to read it. Hell, for most of history, this was the safest possible way to criticize the people in charge, because direct criticism tended to result in, you know, prison or death.

But people bitching, "I just want to enjoy the art/etc. without all the politics" is blatant ignorance. Like seeing modern science fiction fans complain about politics or social messages in current shows and "wanting it to be like the old days (50s/60s/etc) where it was just story telling. Old tyme Star Trek was way more socially and politically motivated than modern Star Trek. Lest we forget the important message of that classic episode:

Image
They really predicted the future on that one.
_________________
Warm Fuzzy Cynical comics.
Warm Fuzzy Cynical Facebook page.

Top
 Profile  
lost_wanderer
Metal newbie

Joined: Sun May 22, 2005 4:59 pm
Posts: 291
Location: Canada
PostPosted: Thu Aug 16, 2018 1:06 pm 
 

you got to be really stupid to think nothing will happen to you if you flip the middle finger for an extended period of time at the singer of a punk band when he's performing a show.
_________________
MawBTS wrote:

"I felt a great disturbance in the Force, as if millions of screamo bands suddenly cried out in terror, and were suddenly silenced."

Top
 Profile  
Zdan
Metalhead

Joined: Tue Jul 20, 2004 6:05 pm
Posts: 2079
Location: Poland
PostPosted: Thu Aug 16, 2018 9:10 pm 
 

lost_wanderer wrote:
you got to be really stupid to think nothing will happen to you if you flip the middle finger for an extended period of time at the singer of a punk band when he's performing a show.


This is true. Does not matter if you are a Trumpist, vegan, SJW or what-the-fuck-ever. Being an asshole is not limited to one political option. Some tend to have a lot more assholes but there is no exclusive mandate that a Trumpist is one.

Top
 Profile  
Earthcubed
The Great Fearmonger

Joined: Sun Nov 07, 2004 3:44 am
Posts: 3632
Location: eccaira nare epë Anar
PostPosted: Thu Aug 16, 2018 9:21 pm 
 

The first of Manafort's criminal trials currently lies in the jury-deliberation stage, and looks like it might be going well for Manafort.
_________________
iamntbatman wrote:
On Friday I passed an important milestone in my teaching career: a student shat himself

FloristOfVampyrism wrote:
That wasn't meant as a k.o. though, he specifically targeted an area of the cerebellum which, if ruptured, renders you a Jehovah's witness indefinitely

Top
 Profile  
Xlxlx
Argentinian Asado Supremacy

Joined: Sat Dec 24, 2011 2:16 pm
Posts: 7821
Location: The Land Down Under (no, not THAT one)
PostPosted: Thu Aug 16, 2018 11:43 pm 
 

Zdan wrote:
lost_wanderer wrote:
you got to be really stupid to think nothing will happen to you if you flip the middle finger for an extended period of time at the singer of a punk band when he's performing a show.


This is true. Does not matter if you are a Trumpist, vegan, SJW or what-the-fuck-ever. Being an asshole is not limited to one political option. Some tend to have a lot more assholes but there is no exclusive mandate that a Trumpist is one.

Considering the kind of shit you have to support to be Trumpist, I'd say being an awful person is a pre-requisite.
_________________
Napero wrote:
(...) Bolt Thrower is to the soul what coffee is to the earthly shell.

Top
 Profile  
MrMcThrasher II
Metalhead

Joined: Sat Dec 29, 2012 6:01 pm
Posts: 1321
Location: United States
PostPosted: Fri Aug 17, 2018 11:12 pm 
 

So go around beating up people you don't agree with. Got it. That'll make my job so much easier rather than acting like a civilized person.
_________________
Murtal wrote:
In flames became MeloDICK Death Metal

TheDefiniteArticle wrote:
Also hopefully they take it as a sign they're not meant to make more albums.

Top
 Profile  
darkeningday
xXdArKenIngDayXx

Joined: Mon Aug 23, 2004 1:20 pm
Posts: 4410
Location: United States
PostPosted: Fri Aug 17, 2018 11:45 pm 
 

MrMcThrasher II wrote:
So go around beating up people you don't agree with. Got it. That'll make my job so much easier rather than acting like a civilized person.

Yup, that's the Proud Boys in a nutshell. An unwritten rule is that you have to beat up at least one member of Antifa to earn your Proud Boy stripes. Bonus points if they're not white.

So you can see why Mike Ness might feel compelled to punch one of them, during his own concert, while he's playing, and while he's being vociferously harassed by one of them.
_________________
\m/ xXdArKen uR dAyXx \m/

Top
 Profile  
Xlxlx
Argentinian Asado Supremacy

Joined: Sat Dec 24, 2011 2:16 pm
Posts: 7821
Location: The Land Down Under (no, not THAT one)
PostPosted: Sat Aug 18, 2018 12:02 am 
 

MrMcThrasher II wrote:
So go around beating up people you don't agree with. Got it. That'll make my job so much easier rather than acting like a civilized person.

I wonder how you extrapolated this from me saying that Trumpists are awful people (which they all are, every single one, by default).

If we're talking proper Nazis though (and these are two demographics that intersect quite often), yeah, sure, beat the shit out of them. I hope all Nazis die horrible, miserable, violent deaths. Every single one.

No apologies. Not anymore.
_________________
Napero wrote:
(...) Bolt Thrower is to the soul what coffee is to the earthly shell.


Last edited by Xlxlx on Sat Aug 18, 2018 12:45 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Top
 Profile  
lost_wanderer
Metal newbie

Joined: Sun May 22, 2005 4:59 pm
Posts: 291
Location: Canada
PostPosted: Sat Aug 18, 2018 12:26 am 
 

A video about a black man meeting a KKK member. The two eventualy became friends. It's not easy but it's not impossible to make peace between people that are ennemies. If the black man, when he went to kkk rallies would have done what the proud boys did at the punk show, things would have end up really differently and for the worst. Sometimes it's a question of respect.




Youtube: show
_________________
MawBTS wrote:

"I felt a great disturbance in the Force, as if millions of screamo bands suddenly cried out in terror, and were suddenly silenced."

Top
 Profile  
Morrigan
Crone of War

Joined: Sat Aug 10, 2002 7:27 am
Posts: 9512
Location: Canada
PostPosted: Sat Aug 18, 2018 2:29 am 
 

Oh fuck Daryl Davis. He's failed to "convert" white supremacists far more than he has succeeded and shown more contempt for BLM than white supremacists. What he's doing might barely work on a few individuals, but doesn't apply on a global scale. He's a tool, a useful idiot for the Klan.

Also, expecting black people to be nice and gentle towards the fucking KKK in the hope that maybe one of them will "de-convert" from their bigotry is extremely fucked up. Putting the burden of erasing bigotry on the minorities that suffer from this bigotry, who get constantly discriminated against, dehumanized, beaten and even murdered by people from those groups? If only they'd be nicer right? Get the fuck outta here with this bullshit.
_________________
Von Cichlid wrote:
I work with plenty of Oriental and Indian persons and we get along pretty good, and some females as well.

Markeri, in 2013 wrote:
a fairly agreed upon date [of the beginning of metal] is 1969. Metal is almost 25 years old

Top
 Profile  
into_the_pit
Veteran

Joined: Wed Aug 18, 2004 7:40 pm
Posts: 2618
Location: Hedonist Occupation Government
PostPosted: Sat Aug 18, 2018 2:57 am 
 

^amen to that!
_________________
Blort wrote:
"The neo-Hegelian overtones contrast heavily with the proto-Nietzschean discordance evident in this piece."
"Um, what work are you examining here?"
"Chainsaw Gutsfuck."

Top
 Profile  
lost_wanderer
Metal newbie

Joined: Sun May 22, 2005 4:59 pm
Posts: 291
Location: Canada
PostPosted: Sat Aug 18, 2018 3:08 am 
 

Morrigan wrote:
Oh fuck Daryl Davis. He's failed to "convert" white supremacists far more than he has succeeded and shown more contempt for BLM than white supremacists. What he's doing might barely work on a few individuals, but doesn't apply on a global scale. He's a tool, a useful idiot for the Klan.

Also, expecting black people to be nice and gentle towards the fucking KKK in the hope that maybe one of them will "de-convert" from their bigotry is extremely fucked up. Putting the burden of erasing bigotry on the minorities that suffer from this bigotry, who get constantly discriminated against, dehumanized, beaten and even murdered by people from those groups? If only they'd be nicer right? Get the fuck outta here with this bullshit.




I'm not stupid enough to say that it's the only solution to a real complex problem. And if it's only one person to do that, it's sure that it will not change anything. Is hatred and violence the only solution?
_________________
MawBTS wrote:

"I felt a great disturbance in the Force, as if millions of screamo bands suddenly cried out in terror, and were suddenly silenced."

Top
 Profile  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic Go to page Previous  1 ... 89, 90, 91, 92, 93, 94, 95 ... 108  Next


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Face_your_fear_79, MorbidEngel and 4 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

 
Jump to:  

Back to the Encyclopaedia Metallum


Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group