What is wrong with America

[Farmer Saint]

15 minutes ago, The Kraken said:

“Far right” and “radical lefties”, honestly, both of you are a pair of fuckwits who have no idea of the true terminologies you happily throw about.

Exactly this. 

[Sir Ralph]

1 hour ago, The Kraken said:

“Far right” and “radical lefties”, honestly, both of you are a pair of fuckwits who have no idea of the true terminologies you happily throw about.

I do understand what the radical left is. I'm referring to groups such as Antifa, Extinction Rebellion, Black Lives Matter, Palestine Action, etc. The ideology of some of these extreme left wing groups has unfortunately filtered down into society nowadays and has influenced some. As I'm such a fuckwit you explain to me the types of groups that are radical left then?

I didnt define the far right but its not what SOG refers to.

Edited 12 hours ago by Sir Ralph

[Sir Ralph]

1 hour ago, Farmer Saint said:

Exactly this. 

See above. You explain what the radical left is then

[The Kraken]

12 minutes ago, Sir Ralph said:

I do understand what the radical left is. I'm referring to groups such as Antifa, Extinction Rebellion, Black Lives Matter, Palestine Action, etc. The ideology of some of these extreme left wing groups has unfortunately filtered down into society nowadays and has influenced some. As I'm such a fuckwit you explain to me the types of groups that are radical left then.

I didnt define the far right but its not what SOG refers to.

BLM are extreme left? Really? I mean, I don’t agree with a lot of what their activists have stood for, but radical left? Not sure I can see that one.

Edited 12 hours ago by The Kraken

[The Kraken]

ER don’t seem to me to be political. They have an agenda but it’s a bit different from politics.

[The Kraken]

Palestine action also, seems like it’s nothing to do with right wing or left wing politics, just an idealism that we should probably stay out of.

[Sir Ralph]

4 minutes ago, The Kraken said:

BLM are extreme left? Really?

And I'm the one who doesnt understand radical left. More recently they have tried to portray themselves as moderates but I suggest you read a few more articles about their original intentions.

[The Kraken]

Just now, Sir Ralph said:

And I'm the one who doesnt understand radical left. More recently they have tried to portray themselves as moderates but I suggest you read a few more articles about their original intentions.

They.

its always the same with you. “Read a few more articles”. Nothing to say yourself.

[Sir Ralph]

8 minutes ago, The Kraken said:

They.

its always the same with you. “Read a few more articles”. Nothing to say yourself.

I use the word 'they' because I dont align myself with the radical left. I would suggest the use of that word is accurate. Should I use 'we'?!

I would maybe recommend reading more about the people involved in this before calling me names.  Its easy to find this stuff so maybe its you that doesnt understand the background to these groups. As I asked you before, what is the radical left then?

The failure to crush other Left-wing extremists created Palestine Action

The Truth About Black Lives Matter | The Heritage Foundation

Edited 12 hours ago by Sir Ralph

[The Kraken]

I’m still not sure you’re even real.

[The Kraken]

I fucking hope not. 
 

Good night!

[Sir Ralph]

2 hours ago, The Kraken said:

I fucking hope not. 
 

Good night!

Brilliant. Call me names because you disagree with me / dont understand, then go home with nothing to say when asked a question. You have entered into a discussion you have no idea about yourself. Another one line wonder on this forum.

As i said before, you need to understand the people behind these groups and what their true political ideologies and objectives are. A very reasonable hypothesis is that groups founded by people who openly call themselves Marxists or are supported by Marxist organisations are likely to be radical left wing groups. But you wouldnt know about that because you dont understand the topic you have got involved in, ironically.

Edited 9 hours ago by Sir Ralph

[JohnnyShearer2.0]

17 hours ago, Sir Ralph said:

Thats fine you can disagree. I obviously never said it was ok to be a dick or threaten people, etc. My personal experience is that people's views havent changed but they are now more willing to confront some of the BS that the woke brigade has pushed unchallenged for the last 10 years or so. 

There is a lot of shit coming those influenced by the radical left over recent years on social media, accusing quite reasonable people of having said or done terrible things and making threats to people for holding different views to them. It works both ways.

Being a dick comes isnt an exclusive trait to people you dont agree with. It also includes people who have the same views as you.

Sorry but why are you trying to pivot to a left versus right agenda?

I didn't mention any of that only that my examples are people in the spotlight with a lot of influence which in turn has emboldened a lot of people. 

Not sure why you're saying its both sides when I didn't mention any in the first place.

[Farmer Saint]

10 hours ago, Sir Ralph said:

I do understand what the radical left is. I'm referring to groups such as Antifa, Extinction Rebellion, Black Lives Matter, Palestine Action, etc. The ideology of some of these extreme left wing groups has unfortunately filtered down into society nowadays and has influenced some. As I'm such a fuckwit you explain to me the types of groups that are radical left then?

I didnt define the far right but its not what SOG refers to.

Antifa, maybe, the rest, no.

These aren't anarchists, they are groups that have specific issues that they think need to be addressed, like denouncing racism, killing in Palestine and the killing of the planet.

Radical left are anarchists or old school Marxists or Communist groups.

[egg]

1 hour ago, JohnnyShearer2.0 said:

Sorry but why are you trying to pivot to a left versus right agenda?

I didn't mention any of that only that my examples are people in the spotlight with a lot of influence which in turn has emboldened a lot of people. 

Not sure why you're saying its both sides when I didn't mention any in the first place.

Indeed. This is the way it's going. People with right leaning views are trying to argue that anything to the left of their outlook is far left. It's absolute nonsense, and through design or fault it's making the political debate US like, ie right versus left but with centrist views being lumped in with left leaning views. To be fair, I'm also hearing people with right or right ish leaning views being described as fascists, so the stupidity and ignorance is widespread. 

[sadoldgit]

12 hours ago, The Kraken said:

“Far right” and “radical lefties”, honestly, both of you are a pair of fuckwits who have no idea of the true terminologies you happily throw about.

Given that I use “far right” in the same way that politically commentators do to describe people with those agendas, why do you say that I don’t understand what it means? If I am wrong about people like Robinson, Hopkins etc. how would you describe their views? Slightly right of centre? I have given a general definition of what “far right” is and the people whose views tick those boxes are generally labelled as such. If I am a “fuckwit” then so are a great many political commentators. 

[Turkish]

2 minutes ago, sadoldgit said:

Given that I use “far right” in the same way that politically commentators do to describe people with those agendas, why do you say that I don’t understand what it means? If I am wrong about people like Robinson, Hopkins etc. how would you describe their views? Slightly right of centre? I have given a general definition of what “far right” is and the people whose views tick those boxes are generally labelled as such. If I am a “fuckwit” then so are a great many political commentators. 

Incorrect

Far right is a label you throw around at pretty much everyone who doesn’t agree with you. Setting yourself up as some sort of elite political commentator is laughable. 
 

Yes you are a fuckwit 

Edited 2 hours ago by Turkish

[Farmer Saint]

2 minutes ago, sadoldgit said:

Given that I use “far right” in the same way that politically commentators do to describe people with those agendas, why do you say that I don’t understand what it means? If I am wrong about people like Robinson, Hopkins etc. how would you describe their views? Slightly right of centre? I have given a general definition of what “far right” is and the people whose views tick those boxes are generally labelled as such. If I am a “fuckwit” then so are a great many political commentators. 

Yes, they are on the right, not the far right.

[AlexLaw76]

[sadoldgit]

1 hour ago, JohnnyShearer2.0 said:

Sorry but why are you trying to pivot to a left versus right agenda?

I didn't mention any of that only that my examples are people in the spotlight with a lot of influence which in turn has emboldened a lot of people. 

Not sure why you're saying it’s both sides when I didn't mention any in the first place.

He shares the views of the people who are being criticised so he is using the playbook deflection line because those views are becoming harder to defend. Don’t look here, look over there. Trump does it daily. 

[sadoldgit]

6 minutes ago, Farmer Saint said:

Yes, they are on the right, not the far right.

Then you have to define “right.” Does it include Islamophobia, homophobia, racism etc?  I know people who vote Tory and describe their views as right of centre but don’t subscribe to the above. 
Would you say that Robinson’s view are “right” for example?

Edited 2 hours ago by sadoldgit
Added text

[Farmer Saint]

4 minutes ago, sadoldgit said:

Then you have to define “right.” Does it include Islamophobia, homophobia, racism etc?  I know people who vote Tory and describe their views as right of centre but don’t subscribe to the above. 

Those traits traditionally occur across the spectrum, it's only recently that there has been a mainstream party (Reform) that has consolidated those peoples views. That's not far right though, it's just right.

Edited 2 hours ago by Farmer Saint

[badgerx16]

7 minutes ago, sadoldgit said:

Then you have to define “right.” Does it include Islamophobia, homophobia, racism etc?  I know people who vote Tory and describe their views as right of centre but don’t subscribe to the above. 
Would you say that Robinson’s view are “right” for example?

Common across the political spectrum, not exclusive to the "right".

[sadoldgit]

Further definitions of what we understand “far right” to mean from other “fuckwits”

In the UK, “far right” is a contested political label and is usually applied to certain ideologies, parties, and activists rather than being a neutral description.  It combines both specific extremist movements and, more loosely, some hard‑line anti‑immigration or nationalist figures in the public eye.[wikipedia +1]
What “far right” usually means
In UK public debate, “far right” typically refers to politics that combine ethnic or cultural nationalism, strong anti‑immigration stances, hostility to Islam or multiculturalism, and conspiracy‑style narratives about “elites” or demographic “replacement”.  Some parts of this spectrum also include white supremacist, neo‑Nazi or overtly anti‑democratic ideas, which are treated by authorities as extremist or terror‑linked.[institute +2]
Prominent parties and movements
Commentators and researchers often class groups such as the British National Party (BNP), Britain First, For Britain, Generation Identity England, Patriotic Alternative and related networks as part of the far right in the UK context.  Some of these groups have been sanctioned, banned from social‑media platforms or even proscribed under terrorism legislation because of incitement to hatred or support for political violence.[wikipedia +3]
Individual activists in the public eye
Individual street agitators and organisers associated with anti‑Muslim marches, hard‑line nationalist rallies or violent rhetoric are often labelled “far right” in mainstream coverage.  High‑profile examples have included figures connected to groups like the English Defence League or Britain First, as well as organisers and influencers linked to recent anti‑migrant and anti‑Muslim protests.[bbc +2]
How media and campaigns use the term
Mainstream political leaders, anti‑racist groups and a range of celebrities have recently talked about a “rise of the far right”, often in connection with the growth of parties like Reform UK and street mobilisations led by nationalist agitators.  At the same time, some commentators criticise “far right” as being used too loosely in media debate, arguing that it can sometimes blur distinctions between extremist groups and more conventional right‑wing or populist parties.[youtube +2]
Public perception and controversy
Public perception is shaped by news reporting on hate crimes, riots and extremist plots that trace back to far‑right networks or propaganda.  Because “far right” is a political label, people on the receiving end often reject it and describe themselves instead as “patriots”, “anti‑establishment” or defenders of free speech, which keeps the debate about who is “far right” highly contested.[thecritic +2]

[Farmer Saint]

10 minutes ago, sadoldgit said:

Would you say that Robinson’s view are “right” for example?

I never read anything from him as not interested in individuals like that.

[sadoldgit]

Again, using AI which has reviewed 9 different sources, this is how it defines the current use of “far right.”

 

In UK politics, “far right” is a political label used by journalists, academics and campaign groups, not an official category, and it is often contested by those it is applied to.  It is generally used for politicians linked to hardline anti‑immigration, nationalist or anti‑Islam positions and to parties described as part of the far‑right spectrum.[bylinetimes +2]
How the label is used
Commentators tend to apply “far right” when a politician or party is seen as going beyond mainstream conservative positions into ethnic nationalism, cultural supremacism or conspiracy‑style rhetoric about migrants and “elites”.  Anti‑fascist and anti‑racist organisations also use the term in reports to describe figures they view as connected to extremist movements or street activism, which then feeds into media language.[wikipedia +2]
Reform UK and Nigel Farage
Nigel Farage, long associated first with UKIP and then with Reform UK, is now frequently described in European and UK commentary as a leading figure of the “far right” in Britain, especially because of his hardline migration stance and nationalist rhetoric.  A major anti‑fascist group has recently described Reform UK under Farage as the biggest far‑right political threat in Britain, illustrating how campaigners place him and parts of his party on the far‑right spectrum, even though he rejects that label himself.[lemonde +2]

[AlexLaw76]

Jesus 😂😂😂

[egg]

5 minutes ago, Farmer Saint said:

I never read anything from him as not interested in individuals like that.

Yep. I'm pleased to say that I haven't read or listened to anything from bloke. He's just another noisy mouthpiece. 

[Farmer Saint]

Just now, sadoldgit said:

Again, using AI which has reviewed 9 different sources, this is how it defines the current use of “far right.”

 

In UK politics, “far right” is a political label used by journalists, academics and campaign groups, not an official category, and it is often contested by those it is applied to.  It is generally used for politicians linked to hardline anti‑immigration, nationalist or anti‑Islam positions and to parties described as part of the far‑right spectrum.[bylinetimes +2]
How the label is used
Commentators tend to apply “far right” when a politician or party is seen as going beyond mainstream conservative positions into ethnic nationalism, cultural supremacism or conspiracy‑style rhetoric about migrants and “elites”.  Anti‑fascist and anti‑racist organisations also use the term in reports to describe figures they view as connected to extremist movements or street activism, which then feeds into media language.[wikipedia +2]
Reform UK and Nigel Farage
Nigel Farage, long associated first with UKIP and then with Reform UK, is now frequently described in European and UK commentary as a leading figure of the “far right” in Britain, especially because of his hardline migration stance and nationalist rhetoric.  A major anti‑fascist group has recently described Reform UK under Farage as the biggest far‑right political threat in Britain, illustrating how campaigners place him and parts of his party on the far‑right spectrum, even though he rejects that label himself.[lemonde +2]

I'm not sure I get your point? Is it that commentators are using far right and far left to describe people that aren't to create further divide, because I think that is correct, and is the point that is being made by Kraken.

[sadoldgit]

7 minutes ago, Farmer Saint said:

I never read anything from him as not interested in individuals like that.

If you are going to engage in discussion about the growth of “far right” views in this country you really need to. Otherwise you end up like The Kraken and call people “fuckwits” when they are just using definitions that are widely used in the mainstream media.

[Farmer Saint]

5 minutes ago, sadoldgit said:

If you are going to engage in discussion about the growth of “far right” views in this country you really need to. Otherwise you end up like The Kraken and call people “fuckwits” when they are just using definitions that are widely used in the mainstream media.

The mainstream media are generally fuckwits controlled by people trying to create divide in the country. You have consistently argued that, so I would suggest NOT using their definitions.

And no, I'm not clicking on stuff he's said as that just helps his profile.

Edited 1 hour ago by Farmer Saint

[sadoldgit]

Just now, Farmer Saint said:

I'm not sure I get your point? Is it that commentators are using far right and far left to describe people that aren't to create further divide, because I think that is correct, and is the point that is being made by Kraken.

My point is that I use exactly the same labels that the general media uses for people with certain views and ideologies. If you wish to call those views “right” that is your definition. Others would call those views “far right.” We can spend all day throwing definitions around. It is simpler to talk about people with those views, but then you need to know who those people and what their views are.

[Sir Ralph]

47 minutes ago, egg said:

Indeed. This is the way it's going. People with right leaning views are trying to argue that anything to the left of their outlook is far left. It's absolute nonsense, and through design or fault it's making the political debate US like, ie right versus left but with centrist views being lumped in with left leaning views. To be fair, I'm also hearing people with right or right ish leaning views being described as fascists, so the stupidity and ignorance is widespread. 

You can say that but you obviously havent read about the background and reasons of the founders of these organisations, so you havent engaged with the point I made, just ignored it. I suspect you have a shallow understanding of the background of these groups other than what you read in the Guardian.

When the founders of these groups are self stated marxists or anarchists and some of the other objectives of these groups align with anarchist views (stop funding the police, that the current political system needs to be changed, among other matters), then I fail to see how this isnt a valid point. If there was a group of neo-nazis that started a group and said it was to back Donald Trump, for example, I think I would have my concerns about that. 

Edited 1 hour ago by Sir Ralph

[egg]

6 minutes ago, AlexLaw76 said:

Jesus 😂😂😂

Very topical. Good lad.

🤱🌟

[Farmer Saint]

1 minute ago, sadoldgit said:

My point is that I use exactly the same labels that the general media uses for people with certain views and ideologies. If you wish to call those views “right” that is your definition. Others would call those views “far right.” We can spend all day throwing definitions around. It is simpler to talk about people with those views, but then you need to know who those people and what their views are.

So do you think Nigel Farage is far right then?

[sadoldgit]

2 minutes ago, Farmer Saint said:

The mainstream media are generally fuckwits controlled by people trying to create divided in the country. You have consistently argued that, so I would suggest NOT using their definitions.

And no, I'm not clicking on stuff he's said as that just helps his profile.

Fine, but then the discussion breaks down because you don’t have the same reference points. When I talk about the mainstream media I am  not talking about the front page of the Daily Mail. I am talking about vey well regarded journalists. They aren’t all rubbish.

[Sir Ralph]

10 minutes ago, egg said:

Yep. I'm pleased to say that I haven't read or listened to anything from bloke. He's just another noisy mouthpiece. 

This is exactly the problem. Why havent you listened to him to form a view? You have just accepted what the BBC have told you and moved on. You may come to the conclusion that he is a racist or maybe you wont but at least take a view from your own experience. You probably should bearing in mind he is having an influence on politics. Just because you might disagree with someone you dont ignore them.

Edited 1 hour ago by Sir Ralph

[sadoldgit]

1 minute ago, Farmer Saint said:

So do you think Nigel Farage is far right then?

I think you will find that a great many people do, given his background. And yes, I do too. Why? He ticks all the boxes ( read above)

[egg]

Just now, Sir Ralph said:

You can say that but you obviously havent read about the background and reasons of the founders of these organisations, so you havent engaged with the point I made, just ignored it. I suspect you have a shallow understanding of the stated objectives of these groups other than what you read in the Guardian.

When the founders of these groups are self stated marxists or anarchists and some of the other objectives of these groups align with anarchist views (stop funding the police, that the current political system needs to be changed, among other matters), then I fail to see how this isnt a valid point. If there was a group of neo-nazis that started a group and said it was to back Donald Trump, for example, I think I would have my concerns about that. 

You're becoming a bit of a prick mate. I don't read the guardian, that's not my politics, and highlights your daft view that anyone to the left of you is a raving leftie. 

No, I haven't read their backgrounds, and don't have to. I judge them by their actions, not their stated views and intentions. 

[egg]

2 minutes ago, Sir Ralph said:

This is exactly the problem. Why havent you listened to him to form a view? You have just accepted what the BBC have told you and moved on. You may come to the conclusion that he is a racist or maybe you wont but at least take a view from your own experience. You probably should bearing in mind he is having an influence on politics. Just because you might disagree with someone you dont ignore them.

Because I don't want to, don't have to, and mainly because he's just a bloke with opinions. What Farage, Starmer, Trump, etc say matters, not some bloke who seems to influence thick people. 

[sadoldgit]

7 minutes ago, Sir Ralph said:

You can say that but you obviously havent read about the background and reasons of the founders of these organisations, so you havent engaged with the point I made, just ignored it. I suspect you have a shallow understanding of the stated objectives of these groups other than what you read in the Guardian.

When the founders of these groups are self stated marxists or anarchists and some of the other objectives of these groups align with anarchist views (stop funding the police, that the current political system needs to be changed, among other matters), then I fail to see how this isnt a valid point. If there was a group of neo-nazis that started a group and said it was to back Donald Trump, for example, I think I would have my concerns about that. 

Do you think that the KKK are pro Trump/MAGA? If so, would you be “concerned.”

Edited 1 hour ago by sadoldgit

[Farmer Saint]

5 minutes ago, sadoldgit said:

Fine, but then the discussion breaks down because you don’t have the same reference points. When I talk about the mainstream media I am  not talking about the front page of the Daily Mail. I am talking about vey well regarded journalists. They aren’t all rubbish.

Who?

[Sir Ralph]

Just now, egg said:

Because I don't want to, don't have to, and mainly because he's just a bloke with opinions. What Farage, Starmer, Trump, etc say matters, not some bloke who seems to influence thick people. 

Maybe I am a prick but people that refuse to actually read things for themselves and make their own minds up without taking the time have limited value in terms of their views. I've given you reasons as to my view (which you challenged) and now I'm the prick.

[Farmer Saint]

5 minutes ago, Sir Ralph said:

This is exactly the problem. Why havent you listened to him to form a view? You have just accepted what the BBC have told you and moved on. You may come to the conclusion that he is a racist or maybe you wont but at least take a view from your own experience. You probably should bearing in mind he is having an influence on politics. Just because you might disagree with someone you dont ignore them.

Even though you have, multiple times, refused to read and denounced articles that I have posted because they are from the Guardian, or have something to do with Gary Stevenson?

[badgerx16]

15 minutes ago, sadoldgit said:

If you are going to engage in discussion about the growth of “far right” views in this country you really need to. .

In my opinion Tommy Robinson is an odious loudmouthed, bigotted, cunt, why would I want to read snything he wrote ?

[Sir Ralph]

1 minute ago, Farmer Saint said:

Even though you have, multiple times, refused to read and denounced articles that I have posted because they are from the Guardian, or have something to do with Gary Stevenson?

No I read the Guardian articles. I agree I havent listened to your Gary Economics videos becuase they are long and I have actually listened to him talk about economics before. I therefore understand the guys stance and have taken my own independent view on him (not influencd by others)

[Farmer Saint]

5 minutes ago, Sir Ralph said:

Maybe I am a prick but people that refuse to actually read things for themselves and make their own minds up without taking the time have limited value in terms of their views. I've given you reasons as to my view (which you challenged) and now I'm the prick.

With people like Yaxley-Lennon it is best to take their actions as a view of who they are, as they will always tamper down their views when interviewed to sound more reasonable and less objectionable to the general public.

Also in today's world, clicks are what matters and how people get on the map, hence why I won't click on anything he says.

Edited 1 hour ago by Farmer Saint

[Sir Ralph]

2 minutes ago, badgerx16 said:

In my opinion Tommy Robinson is an odious loudmouthed, bigotted, cunt, why would I want to read snything he wrote ?

So how have you formed your strong opinion on him if you havent read anything?

Edited 1 hour ago by Sir Ralph

[AlexLaw76]

I won’t read / listen to what Owen Jones says, the odious hard-left c**t 

So, there!!

[egg]

3 minutes ago, badgerx16 said:

In my opinion Tommy Robinson is an odious loudmouthed, bigotted, cunt, why would I want to read snything he wrote ?

That's a better way of putting it.