Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by martyb on Sunday August 21 2016, @12:19PM   Printer-friendly
from the oxford-comma-—-use-it! dept.

In a rather well-timed yet coincidental counterpoint to Why we're Losing the Internet to the Culture of Hate, Milo Yiannopoulos over at Breitbart brings us this:

A warped currency today governs popular culture. Instead of creativity, talent and boldness, those who succeed are often those who can best demonstrate outrage, grievance and victimhood.

Even conservatives are buying into it. Witness, in the days since Breitbart executive chairman Stephen K. Bannon was announced as Donald Trump's campaign manager, how establishment stooges have bought into the worst smear-tactics of the left. As with the left, nothing is evaluated on its quality, or whether it's factually accurate, thought-provoking or even amusing: only whether it can be deemed sexist, racist or homophobic.

Campuses are where the illness takes its most severe form. Students running for safe spaces at the slightest hint of a challenge to their coddled worldview. Faculties and administrations desperately trying to sabotage visits from conservative speakers (often me!) to avoid the inevitable complaints from tearful lefty students.

In this maelstrom of grievance, there is one group boldly swimming against the tide: trolls.

Trolling has become a byword for everything the left disagrees with, particularly if it's boisterous, mischievous and provocative. Even straightforward political disagreement, not intended to provoke, is sometimes described as "trolling" by leftists who can't tell the difference between someone who doesn't believe as they do and an "abuser" or "harasser."

Yeah, you knew I wouldn't let that kinda SJW nonsense slide without comment.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 21 2016, @03:04PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 21 2016, @03:04PM (#391036)

    > First, the Republican party is not "Trump's party". Trump is simply not a Republican.

    Have you not been paying attention? Trump is the ultimate republican.
    The only difference is that he's willing to say out loud what they've been saying through subtext for decades.

    Take any standard republican position, amp it up to 11 and that's Trump's position.

    Starting Score:    0  points
    Moderation   +1  
       Flamebait=1, Insightful=2, Total=3
    Extra 'Insightful' Modifier   0  

    Total Score:   1  
  • (Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Sunday August 21 2016, @03:43PM

    by Runaway1956 (2926) Subscriber Badge on Sunday August 21 2016, @03:43PM (#391056) Journal

    Then why do so many R's hate him? Or, more accurately, why do so many party officials hate him?

    Trump is not going to advance the party - Trump is going to advance Trump, and incidentally, maybe he will promote the "American People".

    • (Score: 3, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 21 2016, @03:51PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 21 2016, @03:51PM (#391058)

      > why do so many party officials hate him?

      (a) The rank and file define the party, not the officials
      (b) The officials hate him because he doesn't play coy like they do. He lays bare the ugliness that has been at the heart of the party for decades and that ugliness drives away voters who have been on the margins.

      • (Score: 3, Informative) by The Mighty Buzzard on Sunday August 21 2016, @05:03PM

        (a) The rank and file define the party, not the officials

        Bullshit. The ones making the decisions define the party and we the people get left without recourse if they decide to fuck us.

        --
        My rights don't end where your fear begins.
        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 21 2016, @05:57PM

          by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 21 2016, @05:57PM (#391117)

          > The ones making the decisions define the party and we the people get left without recourse if they decide to fuck us.

          Then leave the party.
          If you choose to stay then that means you accept those decisions.
          A party that is all leaders and no followers is no party at all.
          You, mr individualism above all else, should know that.

          • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 21 2016, @06:06PM

            by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 21 2016, @06:06PM (#391124)

            Funny how that applies to Trump but not Saunders.

            • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 21 2016, @06:15PM

              by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 21 2016, @06:15PM (#391128)

              What's your point? Nobody is making the bernie or bust people stay in the party. If you disagree so strongly with the core party beliefs then you should absolutely leave for a party that you do agree with.

              • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 21 2016, @07:24PM

                by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 21 2016, @07:24PM (#391168)

                You seem to be conveniently forgetting the whole conspiracy by the DNC to sabotage the Saunders campaign.

                Truly the will of the rank and file there.

                And how many times have we seen the very public prostrations of Bernie supporters holding there noses and voting for Hillary just. one. more. time (*cough*Nader*cough*).

                • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 21 2016, @08:53PM

                  by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 21 2016, @08:53PM (#391220)

                  > You seem to be conveniently forgetting the whole conspiracy by the DNC to sabotage the Saunders campaign.

                  You mean a couple of excitable people in the DNC talking smack about sanders?

                  Yeah, yuuuuge conspiracy. Totally hijacked the entire process.

                  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 22 2016, @12:17PM

                    by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 22 2016, @12:17PM (#391579)

                    Wasn't one of those "couple of excitable people" the person in charge of the party?
                    It doesn't take a large number of people to make a conspiracy, it only requires two.

                    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 22 2016, @02:03PM

                      by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 22 2016, @02:03PM (#391624)

                      No it wasn't. As the person in charge she should have slapped it down though.
                      That was a failure of leadership and is why she got the boot.

          • (Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Sunday August 21 2016, @11:15PM

            I do, sweety. Which is why I belong to no party.

            --
            My rights don't end where your fear begins.
            • (Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 22 2016, @02:24AM

              by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 22 2016, @02:24AM (#391411)

              What a lame-ass cop-out answer.
              No one thought we were talking about you in the specific.
              Just shed your fragile ego and admit you made a poorly thought through argument.

              • (Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Monday August 22 2016, @02:30AM

                I know, right? What in the world would possess anyone to think they were being spoken to when you hit reply to their comment?

                --
                My rights don't end where your fear begins.
                • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 22 2016, @04:14AM

                  by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 22 2016, @04:14AM (#391451)

                  You were the one who started with the royal "we."

                  > The ones making the decisions define the party and we the people get left without recourse if they decide to fuck us.

                  It is funny how you just can't admit you're wrong. What's gonna happen? Does your world implode if you say it?
                  Are you so rigid that a single crack in the facade must inevitably leads to a total crack-up?

      • (Score: 3, Interesting) by Runaway1956 on Sunday August 21 2016, @06:54PM

        by Runaway1956 (2926) Subscriber Badge on Sunday August 21 2016, @06:54PM (#391155) Journal

        Oooh! I'll jump right on that one!

        The "rank and file" have told the officials to go screw themselves, this time around. The "party", the officials, DO NOT WANT TRUMP!! We all know that. But, your "rank and file" insisted on Trump, holding him out to be better than any of the - what was it, 17 alternatives offered by the party?

        That's the "revolution" I've mentioned in the past.

        The other party had it's own "revolution", but the party officials quashed it. They ramrodded through the party choice, and told the voters they could all get fucked.

        So - which is better, the D's or the R's?

        I'm still voting for Stein. I don't want to vote for the lesser evil. Stein may not be great, but at least she is "good".

        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 21 2016, @07:02PM

          by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 21 2016, @07:02PM (#391160)

          What is your point?
          You now seem to be agreeing that trump is the ultimate republican.

          But you do seem to be disagreeing that clinton won the popular vote.
          She got ~17M, Sanders got ~13M.

          But nothing is stopping bernie voters from going to some other party.

          • (Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Sunday August 21 2016, @07:24PM

            by Runaway1956 (2926) Subscriber Badge on Sunday August 21 2016, @07:24PM (#391169) Journal

            Well, you defined what you meant. Yes, I'll have to agree that Trump appeals to the rank and file Republicans. He most certainly is not the "ultimate Republican" from the standpoint of party officials, which is what I thought you meant earlier.

      • (Score: 1, Troll) by Azuma Hazuki on Sunday August 21 2016, @09:00PM

        by Azuma Hazuki (5086) on Sunday August 21 2016, @09:00PM (#391228) Journal

        Yyyyyyyup. Drumpf is the collective karma of 50 years of the Republican party deciding their voter base was going to be the kind of person who pronounces "African-American" with two Gs in it. Among many, many other sins. If he did not exist, it would be necessary to invent him.

        --
        I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 21 2016, @05:07PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 21 2016, @05:07PM (#391092)

      Because they don't want all their dirty linen out in the open where the thinking people may see it. The undecided or non racists idiots. Republicans still need some normal people to vote for them to boost their numbers. There just aren't enough crazies...Yet.