Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

Bump TopicReply to this topicRSS feed Start new topic Start Poll

Outline · [ Standard ] · Linear+

> Ben Shapiro dealing with Social Justice Warriors, Dealing with people in denial?

tokdukun
post Jan 12 2019, 10:41 PM

Casual
***
Group: Junior Member
Posts: 356

Joined: Nov 2006



QUOTE(khelben @ Jan 12 2019, 08:57 PM)
Those stuff are not exactly radical? If you watch the vid, he's basically saying that if you support syariah, you support ISIS.
Thing is, supporting syariah doesn't mean you're radical, at least imo. Doesn't mean you gotta fly planes into buildings and kill all jews.
Haha I love Milo's debates on faminazis but like Shapiro, he's quite ignorant with Islam stuff again. He thinks tudung is an oppression on women.
*
Supporting syariah is being radical.

A country is governed by its constitution, unless the constitution is changed to go syariah, it is against the constitution.

To support syariah is to go against the constitution, no 2 way around it.

Many don't consider agreeing to civil law is being Islamic, when in fact it is. I remember ustaz Nik Omar said civil law can be Islamic, if it is fair and orderly. It's about the principle, not just punishment form. I agree with him, respecting the law and rights of all citizens must take precedence.

But of course extremists don't like to hear that, and we know how he and Amanah all hated by PAS, the embodiment of extremist Islam they don't want to admit.
Flaming_lion
post Jan 13 2019, 02:49 PM

An Innocent Lion
****
Group: Senior Member
Posts: 647

Joined: Aug 2010
QUOTE(UncleJackChicken @ Jan 12 2019, 11:54 AM)
I see. thank qiu. Hard to debate anything when you have the extreme from both end in the same discussion table.

Also, I am seeing the trend of feminism move getting a louder voice, though they used to be regarded as the unrepresentative rare minorities, but hey if they keep preaching the same thing, people will believe eventually? : O
*
The problem is that this thing has become rather complex. The culture started decades ago. You see, all these movements, the "BLM", feminists, LGBT, etc..., are spin-offs of civil liberty movements. The important thing to understand is that, majority of these movements are "Big Tent" movements whereby, they consist of people from far left to far right, but focused on specific issues. For instance, a conservative gay, who believes in free market and family values, but because the conservative parties will not accept them, they take their cause to the socialists or the liberals where they are more likely to be accepted. Feminism too, used the same approach and sooner or later, these groups hijacked the left-leaning groups and started mixing their "conservative" values.

Tell a lie a thousand times, and it becomes the truth. All you need is for that one time for the lie to become the truth.

QUOTE(damonlbs @ Jan 12 2019, 12:54 PM)
also

left - mother/ female
right - father / male
basically this

if one off balance already there will be trouble

user posted image
*
Very much, but seems like the whole world is going crazy for some shitty reason.

QUOTE(silic0sis @ Jan 12 2019, 05:25 PM)
In US it's a bit different, the right in US is more anarchistic.

Left and right in US is about big and small government, equality of opportunity vs equality of outcome.

The left is big government and ideologically support equality of outcome (socialism and socialistic ideology),
whereas the right is small government (where government has less/limited power thus leaning towards anarchism) and believe in equality of opportunity (so concepts like free speech/marketplace of ideas, free market/capitalism).

Both the left and right in US are actually "liberals", liberals on the left today are modern liberals whereas American conservatives of today are classical liberals.
In US, it's different. The right in US is fighting against control, that's what all these anti sjw stuff is about. SJWs basically want to make it federal law that government must, for example, force workplace to have 50% females, or that management should have 30% blacks (quota type systems) or government must fine people for using wrong gender pronouns.

Conservatives in US believe the government has no right to interfere in individual beliefs (that's why stuff like hate speech must also be allowed to exist) and conservatives believe the role of government is specifically stated in the constitution, government should not be able to do more than what is stated in constitution. That's also why they support guns because they believe people should have power over government, if government goes rogue, the people should have the ability to fight back - that's what the whole well armed militia is about.
*
lolwut?! In America, it isn't any different to any other part of the world, and no, their right isn't exactly "anarchist". In fact, their right is much more structured compared to their left. Pro-constitution, pro-guns, pro-military, pro-nationalism, support for tougher laws, censorship, Christian Democracy, protectionism for local businesses and stringent laws for immigrants. Their so called "underground militia" generally believe that America is under attack and that their government are under the control of the enemiesm, and they do believe in those things that I mentioned earlier. None of these are indication of them being anarchist. But I understand why people will have such a believe, because of how deceptive their politics is.

In most countries, you see a balance between left or right. Countries in general tend to be driven center-left or center-right. The same can't be said about America. The reason is because American politics is driven on the right. As in between the far right and the center right. Their elections is essentially an election where people elect between a right-wing party and a center party. There is nothing "Left" about the Democrats. They are in actual fact, a small tent party consisting of people from center-left to center-right. Hillary Clinton is far from being a liberal. Her husband is much more of a liberal than her. Contrary to what people generally believe, Democrats too support guns but they want control, they support the constitution but they want it more inclusive, they want tougher laws but for businesses, etc...

So therefore, I would disagree that their right-wing is pro-anarchists. Americans, the conservatives in particular, a lot of shit to be honest. They want small government, yet want big military. They want less immigrants, yet they want cheap labour. They don't want government in their bedrooms, yet they have trouble accepting LGBT. They hate the idea of a theological state, yet demand Christian values be part their government. They are a confused bunch. Don't forget, these so called people you call "anarchists" voted for Trump, who far from being an Anarchists.

Don't get me wrong, the SJWs are idiotic baboons. Those snowflakes are going to be the biggest cancer of 21st century. It is because of them, the left have shifted from equality of opportunities to equality of outcomes. But to say that their right-wing are anarchists, that's very wrong. They are delusional and they want to believe that they are anarchists, but they are far from it.


silic0sis
post Jan 13 2019, 05:24 PM

New Member
*
Group: Junior Member
Posts: 32

Joined: Aug 2005


QUOTE(Flaming_lion @ Jan 13 2019, 02:49 PM)
lolwut?! In America, it isn't any different to any other part of the world, and no, their right isn't exactly "anarchist". In fact, their right is much more structured compared to their left. Pro-constitution, pro-guns, pro-military, pro-nationalism, support for tougher laws, censorship, Christian Democracy, protectionism for local businesses and stringent laws for immigrants. Their so called "underground militia" generally believe that America is under attack and that their government are under the control of the enemiesm, and they do believe in those things that I mentioned earlier. None of these are indication of them being anarchist. But I understand why people will have such a believe, because of how deceptive their politics is.

In most countries, you see a balance between left or right. Countries in general tend to be driven center-left or center-right. The same can't be said about America. The reason is because American politics is driven on the right. As in between the far right and the center right. Their elections is essentially an election where people elect between a right-wing party and a center party. There is nothing "Left" about the Democrats. They are in actual fact, a small tent party consisting of people from center-left to center-right. Hillary Clinton is far from being a liberal. Her husband is much more of a liberal than her. Contrary to what people generally believe, Democrats too support guns but they want control, they support the constitution but they want it more inclusive, they want tougher laws but for businesses, etc...

So therefore, I would disagree that their right-wing is pro-anarchists. Americans, the conservatives in particular, a lot of shit to be honest. They want small government, yet want big military. They want less immigrants, yet they want cheap labour. They don't want government in their bedrooms, yet they have trouble accepting LGBT. They hate the idea of a theological state, yet demand Christian values be part their government. They are a confused bunch. Don't forget, these so called people you call "anarchists" voted for Trump, who far from being an Anarchists.

Don't get me wrong, the SJWs are idiotic baboons. Those snowflakes are going to be the biggest cancer of 21st century. It is because of them, the left have shifted from equality of opportunities to equality of outcomes. But to say that their right-wing are anarchists, that's very wrong. They are delusional and they want to believe that they are anarchists, but they are far from it.
*
It's very different in the sense that conservatives want government to have limited power and limited control.
This is very different to what we typically think of conservatives, which is often religious based and where policy is dictated by religious doctrine. In this sort of system, there is more control and less freedom. In the US it's the opposite. In the US, the conservative's "religious doctrine" is the constitution which affords them all the freedoms.

It is equality of opportunity vs equality of outcome in US.

Equality of outcome is where you want a specific outcome and you use policy to try force the outcome, this is what the left pushes for. For example, workplace diversity is a leftist movement. An example of this would be if America was made up of 30% blacks, 50% whites and 20% blacks, the outcome you'd "ideally" have is one where management is made up of 30% blacks, 50% whites and 20% blacks. To enforce this sort of stuff, the left wants government to step it and make it regulation. This is what the left is all about today. Quota systems and socialistic programs to bring up to par groups of people who are not doing as well.

Equality of opportunity is basically merit system, using the same example, conservatives don't care about equalizing races because ideologically, they don't believe your race matters.

The important thing to realize is that both left and right are "liberals", the ideological difference is the difference between a modern liberal and a classical liberal. Conservatives are very similar in this sense to libertarians who are further right (towards anarchism). The reason they are not as far right is that they believe certain things should be governed by government, and those things are written in the constitution. Conservatives believe that if it's not in the constitution, the government has no right to get involved, but they are classical liberals, they believe in the original concept of liberalism which is about individual freedoms.

Regarding individual freedoms, we can use gay marriages as an example.
The left wants to accept gay marriages and they want everyone to accept gay marriages. If you own a church and a gay couple wants to get married in that church, you must by law allow them to get married in that church.
The right doesn't care if you as a man want to get married to another man but they don't believe government has the right to force the belief onto other people, so if you own a church and a gay couple wants to get married in that church, conservatives do not believe government has the right to force the church to allow the gay couple to get married there. The owner has the right to say no if he disagrees with the concept of gay marriages and the government has no right to interfere.
That's the difference ideologically. So there are many people on the right who may be against gay marriages, and conservative ideology says it's fine for you to be against it if you want, the government has no right to tell you what you can or can't believe.

It's socialism (equality of opportunity) vs capitalism (equality of outcome).
For socialistic policies and systems to work, you need money from the people so you have to tax higher. This is what the left believes in.
The right in general reject welfare, and because they cut on welfare and socialistic programs, they can lower taxes, in theory at least. The problem is if the programs still go on and you reduce taxes.

Limited government (smaller government) is necessary for conservative ideology to work. For capitalism to work, government should not interfere in economics, it's supposed to be free market, the role of the government according to the constitution is only to regulate, to make sure the market remains free. The more the government interferes, the less free it is. So taxes for welfare and healthcare for example are anti free market and anti capitalism thus anti conservative ideology.

It's the same with things like free speech, that is why conservatives believe in allowing hate speech. They see allowing it as a necessary evil because conservatives believe in market place of ideas, and they don't believe government has the right to step in. This is where the whole Jordan Peterson thing comes in and why he became famous. What he is fighting for is free speech, where government does not have the right to come in a create policies that tell you what you can or can't say. This is the opposite of what the left is fighting for with gender pronouns and safe spaces, where they believe government should step in and police certain speech.

To address what you said here:
"Pro-constitution, pro-guns, pro-military, pro-nationalism, support for tougher laws, censorship, Christian Democracy, protectionism for local businesses and stringent laws for immigrants."

To conservatives, the constitution is their bible, and part of the pro border control is because to conservatives, the most important function of the government is to ensure the security of it's people and of the country. To them, that is the number 1 role of government, so you will see a lot of support towards policies that go in that direction.

Foreign military policy is not a left vs right thing, there are democrats who believe US should expend militarily around the world like obama and there are republicans that believe US should limit it's intervention and military influence around the world. Trump, although republican, supports decreasing military expansion and reducing military bases around the world. His goal is to stop US from being the world police and to pull out US military bases from around the world which many argue against. Among his campaign promises was to decrease US military around the world and to stop believe the world police because he believes that it's not the responsibility of the US and it's wasting American tax payer money, that's probably why he's rushing to bring troops back from syria too which is probably going to be a major blunder.

Regarding laws, conservatives are in general anti regulation (pro deregulation), they always want to reduce the number of regulations because ideologically, regulations can be seen as interference towards the market which makes the market less "free" thus anti conservatism. But when it comes to security of the nation, again, that is supposed to be the #1 job of the government. This was one of trump's campaign promises too, he's actually cutting regulations at record rates.

Regarding protectionism, ideologically Conservatives are anti protectionism because they are pro capitalism, pro free market, which is the opposite of protectionism. Trump has been doing protectionism though with steel and such which is anti conservatism. A lot of trump voters and conservatives support what he's doing because it's their livelihood, but it's actually against conservative ideology. If you read some of the current big names on conservatives side like ben shapiro, they go all out attacking trump for the tariffs, protectionism and how it's anti free market. There is some counter argument though, basically the argument is like this, I support free market, but if the other country I'm trading with does not practice free market with me, is it wrong for me to also not practice free market with them? This was trump's counter argument as well - among conservatives this is an on going debate.

Regarding guns, the idea is that it's also a form of check and balance against the government. The idea is that if the government goes rogue, the people have the ability to stand up to the government and fight back. That's what the whole well armed militia thing is about, it's about check and balance and limiting the government's power.

Also another important thing to note, republicans are not necessarily the same as conservatives ideologically. Keep in mind, republicans are politicians, it is a political party. In the end politicians want power, influence, wealth and that of course goes against conservative ideology of small/limited government. It's important to note because what the republican party does is not always inline with conservative ideology, it's just that the US is a 2 party system and the republican party is the closest the conservatives have to a party that is inline ideologically. If you notice, I always refer to the right as conservatives and not republicans because they are separate, 1 is an ideology the other is a political party.

Back to anarchism,
The right are not anarchists, they don't believe they are anarchists and they dont want to be anarchists. Libertarians lean further in that direction.
The conservatives lean towards anarchism, but not as far as the libertarians because they believe in the constitution. They believe there are certain roles the government has to play to maintain security and ensure/protect the freedoms of the constitution. This is ideologically different from what anarchists believe. The difference is basically, should government build roads or not? That's where conservatives and anarchist/libertarians split. They have different ideological beliefs on what free market is and what free market should be and what sort of role government should play.

It's like socialists are not communist but they lean closer toward that direction. The more you control what sort of jobs people can get (quota systems), the more you control where people's money go and how it's used (taxes for socialistic programs), the closer you get to communism. It doesn't make them communists, but they lean toward that direction.

On a scale where the left is communism (government has total power, the people have none) and the right is anarchism (the people have total power, the government has none), liberals lean further left, libertarians lean further right and conservatives are closer to center, but still right leaning.

This post has been edited by silic0sis: Jan 13 2019, 06:25 PM
ALeUNe
post Jan 13 2019, 08:36 PM

I'm the purebred with aristocratic pedigree
Group Icon
Group: VIP
Posts: 9,621

Joined: Jan 2003
From: Mongrel Isle
Member Group: Newbie
Joined: Oct 2018
itekderp
post Jan 13 2019, 08:38 PM

On my way
****
Group: Senior Member
Posts: 632

Joined: May 2014
QUOTE(Yung_Psyke @ Jan 12 2019, 07:01 AM)
its quite obvious that you didn’t even press play, either that or you just got an iq of a carrot and unable to comprehend a word he said
*
Fuck you don't insult carrots.
ALeUNe
post Jan 13 2019, 08:39 PM

I'm the purebred with aristocratic pedigree
Group Icon
Group: VIP
Posts: 9,621

Joined: Jan 2003
From: Mongrel Isle
When KNN Commies™️ and KNN terrorists disagree with Ben Shapiro, you'd know Ben is right.
ALeUNe
post Jan 13 2019, 08:48 PM

I'm the purebred with aristocratic pedigree
Group Icon
Group: VIP
Posts: 9,621

Joined: Jan 2003
From: Mongrel Isle
QUOTE(khelben @ Jan 12 2019, 11:56 AM)
Ben Shapiro quite ignorant wan when it comes to Islam stuff.

He has a video about "Islam radical minority myth", and his conclusion is most muslims support syariah law therefore they are radicals.

laugh.gif
*
Your post can bullshit ang moh leftists in the West.
He is a Jew. His motherland deals with KNN terrorists for God-know many years.

We born in Malaysia. We see Shariah.
You can't bullshit us.
Ben is right.

This post has been edited by ALeUNe: Jan 13 2019, 08:48 PM
JimbeamofNRT
post Jan 14 2019, 12:34 AM

Getting Started
**
Group: Junior Member
Posts: 234

Joined: Sep 2012

QUOTE(Boldnut @ Jan 12 2019, 04:49 PM)
ayam born in wrong era liao. Need time machine

those days in my mom/aunt era, can 1 leg kick everything all in 1 everything & smart, most of them not fat look decent also when they were young.
*
too much chemical consumed , summore the amount of make up these millennials put onto their face

summore walk a bit also grumbling, must park near to mall's entrance

but can sign up for expensive gym session

5 Pages « < 3 4 5Top
Bump TopicReply to this topicTopic OptionsStart new topic
 

Switch to:
| Lo-Fi Version
0.0426sec    1.49    5 queries    GZIP Disabled
Time is now: 18th January 2019 - 04:04 AM