Free Press/Fake Press

[gourimoko]

Nope just showing how inconsistent you are as always. Just another example. Please educate yourself on shitposting. You still aren't grasping what it means.

How am I being inconsistent? In what respect? You have yet to demonstrate this; like not once...

 

[David.]

http://www.sfgate.com/news/article/...-frat-house-a-Daughter-6464740.php#item-39786

Here you go @ David. Enjoy

What do you want me to pull from this article? Saying something off color is rape culture?

That parents don't want their kids fucked? That last one isn't new, and whether they'd like to believe it or not it's going to happen with or without a bed sheet with words. The only thing we are going to decide is if it's by guys like me, or young guys who would have otherwise been hypersensitized by pc culture and turned into purse holders by would have otherwise been normal but now fat girls with oversized ironic glasses.

 

[Tornicade]

What do you want me to pull from this article? Saying something off color is rape culture?

That parents don't want their kids fucked? That last one isn't new, and whether they'd like to believe it or not it's going to happen with or without a bed sheet with words. The only thing we are going to decide is if it's by guys like me, or young guys who would have otherwise been hypersensitized by pc culture and turned into purse holders by would have otherwise been normal but now fat girls with oversized ironic glasses.

you seemed rather obsessed with campus house signs so I indulged your obsession.

A simple thanks would of sufficed. as a bonus they had the top 16 university campus scandals around the nation listed as well.

 

[Jack Brickman]

Honestly, if students put banners up on university-owned frat houses, I think the university is within their rights to punish those houses if they disagree with the message on the banners. I'm not saying they should punish them in every instance, but they own the houses and thus can intervene if they are unhappy with what the tenants are doing.

Private houses, though...whatever. I guess that's up to the landlord.

Regardless, there are occasionally consequences to being a dick.

 

[DJTJ]

@CommD

Will you let it die yet? 2 weeks ago man and you're still pushing this narrative.

@AZ_ @AZ_ @AZ_ @AZ_ @AZ_ @AZ_ @AZ_

In what world do you continuously escape bans for shit like this? I've never once seen someone tag people to start massive arguements and pages of dialogue in such a baiting manner.

@Randolphkeys @Maximus

 

[AZ_]

@CommD

Will you let it die yet? 2 weeks ago man and you're still pushing this narrative.

@AZ_ @AZ_ @AZ_ @AZ_ @AZ_ @AZ_ @AZ_

Why have numerous Trump picks and/or aides resigned over ties.

Trump seems like a real pussy to not fight for the truth.

 

[Real Deal]

Just came to stop by and say hello to Boobie.

Can't wait for those Indians games!!

 

[gourimoko]

In what world do you continuously escape bans for shit like this? I've never once seen someone tag people to start massive arguements and pages of dialogue in such a baiting manner.

@Randolphkeys @Maximus

He's done this shit repeatedly... It's why I said a few weeks back that we need to start a thread with user-moderation, where certain members would be politely asked NOT to participate. It would be nice to have a politics thread without bullshit like this in it, but, it seems like a few users are not going to let that happen.

 

[Alexander43]

Just because someone posts something that goes against your belief doesn't mean it's a shit post. I'm a long time reader but just recently joined. It seems there's only a handful of people here who support Trump and the rest all gang together and are like a pack of wolves ready to devour anyone who dares to post something that goes against what they think. Just an observation from a new member. Carry on.

ps. sorry for the shit post.

 

[DJTJ]

Just because someone posts something that goes against your belief doesn't mean it's a shit post. I'm a long time reader but just recently joined. It seems there's only a handful of people here who support Trump and the rest all gang together and are like a pack of wolves ready to devour anyone who dares to post something that goes against what they think. Just an observation from a new member. Carry on.

ps. sorry for the shit post.

There are people who support Trump who have respected view points, even if they're disagreed with.

I fundamentally disagree with Q, but very rarely do I ever feel like he's just posting garbage and intentionally trying to start fights. He's actually incredibly reactionary.

I don't really enjoy Dave, but the more I read into his posts, the more I understand his view point and can at least respect it.

Caf sneaks in with good posts.

As does Wrathe, and Max, and countless others.

There's a difference here.

 

[Sebastian]

Well...it's not our ledge -- its theirs. Plus, the only weapon they have is a form of shame "how dare you say that." Well, just dare, and say it. What are they going to do? The one thing that's good about that "shame" attitude is that it forces you to think through your arguments more clearly, and/or make sure they're more solid.

It's tough knowing what is actually going on in a country like Sweden because even Swedes themselves don't agree. And when official information is essentially censored...who the hell knows?

Here's an interview with Tino Sanandaji, a Swedish economist. He's of Kurdish descent, born in Iran, educated at University of Chicago, talking about immigration and the data. It's a very good, even-handed read overall, but this part jumped out at me:

TS: Some 92% of those unaccompanied migrants were male last year…Yes, there is definitely something strange going on. More than half of the world’s refugees are women. In World War II, when Sweden took refugees from Finland, they were children and 90% were below the age of 10. But now almost all of them are late teenagers – supposedly; we know many are older for a fact. When other countries age test it turns out that the majority are not children. And when there are crimes committed and the age is investigated, often we get these absurd reports where some of these guys are older than 30 and yet the government puts them with other real minors in schools or housing, and this is creating a lot of anger now. The media created this taboo where because they are officially supposed to be children we can’t question it, and you are fascist if you do. Yet most people can see that many are adults.

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/sweden-brink-interview-dr-tino-sanandaji-erico-matias-tavares

And he talks about that phenomenon more broadly -- that Swedish elites have always had a certain world view, and do not like hearing facts that contradict that view. So, the people see one reality, and the press and politicians report something else.

Just don't let them shut you up.

Immigration policy and sociological policy in Sweden is very complicated and nuanced. For Trump to characterize it as a disaster, without knowing anything about it, is what people took exception to. The problem with discussing the real situation on the ground in Sweden is wrapped in numerous political, sociological and historical layers. I will try to address your points one by one as otherwise it will turn into a maze that will serve no one. This will be a long read:

1) Yes people are disagreeing about what is the actual national opinion on immigration. No surprise there. There are few nations in lock-step on anything. However, whereas it is true that support for the SD, and accompanying stricter controls, has gone up modestly, there is not a wide call to seal borders, but it has triggered a healthy discussion in society which is very beneficial as,

2) Historically party politics in Sweden is little more than a cover for a handful of people to make the most important domestic and foreign policy decisions. Once the King (Gustav V) ceased voluntarily exercising his powers granted through the Constitution in the Act of Succession of 1810 (which was written to accommodate the election of Napoleon's Marshal Jean Baptiste Bernadotte as Crown Prince) in 1918, and officially after the new Instrument of Government of 1974, the Prime Minister and a few chosen cabinet members have exercised most of the executive authority. MPs are selected on party lists and are not analogous to US Reps. MPs have little input on even something as big as whether or not Sweden should develop nuclear weapons. That decision was made by the same six men without consultation over a period of 15 years. This method of governance has led to a rather cloistered decision making process that is often not responsive to the people. This began to change in the 1960s but there is still a fair amount of that still present. As a consequence,

King Carl XVI Gustav and his many hats.

3) The issue of immigration has not been as well debated as in some other nations. As it is not discussed often, this allows fringe elements to shape the narrative and this is how any discussion of policy either devolves to accusations of racism or actual racists trying to inflame opinion. What is true is that the Government still needs wide-spread support for any major policy like immigration and the overwhelming majority of Swedes do support the policy of the past few decades. However, the Syrian crisis is one of a magnitude unseen since the early-1990s when refugees from the Balkans spread through Europe. This has led to a call for, and implementation, to better vetting and stricter border controls. Immigration and asylum policies are now openly discussed widely with input from the electorate. This has changed discourse away from the egg-shell/mass-rape polarization to something more constructive. It should be noted that there still has been no mass shift in opinion or an imminent SD Government being formed. Speaking of the Balkans,

4) The violent crime often cited, that is bomb or grenade attacks in Mälmo, are not conducted by Muslim immigrants but by the Serb and Croat mafia that have entrenched themselves in Sweden since arriving in the 1990s. Like any organized crime syndicates, these folks are hard to root out and I imagine they'll have as much success as the US has had with the Italian or Russian mafia. As for the crime involving Muslims,

5) Assimilation is very difficult in any society; particularly when you don't look like the native population. It usually takes 2-4 generations for full assimilate. Until then, immigrants and their children will always have a hard time getting the great jobs or best housing. That is true of everywhere and the Swedish experience is really little different than any other Western nation (except Norway). Obviously there will be violent malcontents who throw rocks and burn things. I think the difference with the US and Sweden is how law enforcement handles those types of people. Nordic nations tend not to force confrontation and would rather negotiate. It is part of their social DNA as collaborative societies. That said, the notion that entire cities are off-limits and that there are no-go zones is highly exaggerated.

6) So in my view the real question is what is the proper balance to ensure absorption of immigrants in decent numbers while not alienating them or native-Swedes because the job and housing market (housing being a historical problem in Sweden since the 1960s) can't keep up. That is an extremely complex question that is being addressed somewhat successfully considering the level of violence exhibited in other Western European nations is much higher than in Sweden where despite high-profile events like the Megafon people burning cars happen, the crime statistics have not gone up even with the mass influx of the past two years.

 

[David.]

Just because someone posts something that goes against your belief doesn't mean it's a shit post. I'm a long time reader but just recently joined. It seems there's only a handful of people here who support Trump and the rest all gang together and are like a pack of wolves ready to devour anyone who dares to post something that goes against what they think. Just an observation from a new member. Carry on.

ps. sorry for the shit post.

It's Human nature, and that fucking rep button is like a congratulatory masturbation hand that says "thanks for being on my team!"

Ironically, there's in fighting on the right and there's more people on the left and no infighting over there.

It's hard to win an argument when there's 15 of them and five of you who agree with each other to varying extents. But, fuck it, you try.

I'm not going to be right every time I open my.. keyboard. Having these discussions, especially when the scales are against you, is a fun challenge. I'm not right every time I post, won't get the most support every post, but who cares. You lose when you take this too seriously.

 

[David.]

Immigration policy and sociological policy in Sweden is very complicated and nuanced. For Trump to characterize it as a disaster, without knowing anything about it, is what people took exception to. The problem with discussing the real situation on the ground in Sweden is wrapped in numerous political, sociological and historical layers. I will try to address your points one by one as otherwise it will turn into a maze that will serve no one. This will be a long read:

1) Yes people are disagreeing about what is the actual national opinion on immigration. No surprise there. There are few nations in lock-step on anything. However, whereas it is true that support for the SD, and accompanying stricter controls, has gone up modestly, there is not a wide call to seal borders, but it has triggered a healthy discussion in society which is very beneficial as,

2) Historically party politics in Sweden is little more than a cover for a handful of people to make the most important domestic and foreign policy decisions. Once the King (Gustav V) ceased voluntarily exercising his powers granted through the Constitution in the Act of Succession of 1810 (which was written to accommodate the election of Napoleon's Marshal Jean Baptiste Bernadotte as Crown Prince) in 1918, and officially after the new Instrument of Government of 1974, the Prime Minister and a few chosen cabinet members have exercised most of the executive authority. MPs are selected on party lists and are not analogous to US Reps. They have little input on evens something as big as whether or not Sweden shoo;d develop nuclear weapons. That decision was made by the same six men without consultation over a period of 15 years. This method of governance has led to a rather cloistered decision making process that is often not responsive to the people. This began to change in the 1960s but there is still a fair amount of that still present. As a consequence,

King Carl XVI Gustav and his many hats.

3) The issue of immigration has not been as well debated as in some other nations. As it is not discussed often, this allows fringe elements to shape the narrative and this is how any discussion of policy either devolves to accusations of racism or actual racists trying to inflame opinion. What is true is that the Government still needs wide-spread support for any major policy like immigration and the overwhelming majority of Swedes do support the policy of the past few decades. However, the Syrian crisis is one of a magnitude unseen since the early-1990s when refugees from the Balkans spread through Europe. This has led to a call for, and implementation, to better vetting and stricter border controls. Immigration and asylum policies are now openly discussed widely with input from the electorate. This has changed discourse away from the egg-shell/mass-rape polarization to something more constructive. It should be noted that there still has been no mass shift in opinion or an imminent SD Government being formed. Speaking of the Balkans,

4) The violent crime often cited, that is bomb or grenade attacks in Mälmo, are not conducted by Muslim immigrants but by the Serb and Croat mafia that have entrenched themselves in Sweden since arriving in the 1990s. Like any organized crime syndicates, these folks are hard to root out and I imagine they'll have as much success as the US has had with the Italian or Russian mafia. As for the crime involving Muslims,

5) Assimilation is very difficult in any society; particularly when you don't look like the native population. It usually takes 2-4 generations for full assimilate. Until then, immigrants and their children will always have a hard time getting the great jobs or best housing. That is true of everywhere and the Swedish experience is really little different than any other Western nation (except Norway). Obviously there will be violent malcontents who throw rocks and burn things. I think the difference with the US and Sweden is how law enforcement handles those types of people. Nordic nations tend not to force confrontation and would rather negotiate. It is part of their social DNA as collaborative societies. That said, the notion that entire cities are off-limits and that there are no-go zones is highly exaggerated.

6) So in my view the real question is what is the proper balance to ensure absorption of immigrants in decent numbers while not alienating them or native-Swedes because the job and housing market (housing being a historical problem in Sweden since the 1960s) can't keep up. That is an extremely complex question that is being addressed somewhat successfully considering the level of violence exhibited in other Western European nations is much higher than in Sweden where despite high-profile events like the Megafon people burning cars happen, the crime statistics have not gone up even with the mass influx of the past two years.

I know I'm cherry picking, but I guess people on the right are focused on the statistics that look fuxkjng nuts, butmost of the push back seems to be predicated on your point 5, that its 'because they don't look like us'.

I don't know who believes it's because they're brown, but I think the huge differences in culture and the crime associated (apparently the correlation may or may not be strong?) With the ideology are considered more prudent and you guys think it's because we think its because they're brown. Or that we think all Muslims are bad.

 

[Sebastian]

I know I'm cherry picking, but I guess people on the right are focused on the statistics that look fuxkjng nuts, butmost of the push back seems to be predicated on your point 5, that its 'because they don't look like us'.

I don't know who believes it's because they're brown, but I think the huge differences in culture and the crime associated (apparently the correlation may or may not be strong?) Are considered more prudent and you guys think it's because we think its because they're brown. Or that we think all Muslims are bad.

I wouldn't presume to equate people who lean Right in the US with people who lean Right in Sweden. There are so many differences it is a bad analogue.

It should be noted that large numbers of Muslim Albanians emigrated to Sweden in the 1990s. I don't recall reading religious differences being a huge barrier (though organized crime was and is).

As for your point on the race, I would add that European racism is different than in the US and in some/many occasions is worse. We have a melting pot mentality in the US. We are used to seeing people of all backgrounds here and have always welcomed them; at least officially. But Europe has never been that way until VERY recently when nations with Empires saw influxes of people from Africa and Asia. For Nordic nations lack of exposure to other races is far more pronounced than that of mainland Europe. So yes, racism has played a role whether people admit it or not.

But, if you want a case-study in how two similar nations have different solutions to immigration with people who have very different cultural backgrounds I would have you look at the Norwegian model. They place a heavy emphasis on assimilation and allow much lower numbers of immigrants in. Its worth a google search.

Perhaps @BimboColesHair can add more.

 

[Tornicade]

Just because someone posts something that goes against your belief doesn't mean it's a shit post. I'm a long time reader but just recently joined. It seems there's only a handful of people here who support Trump and the rest all gang together and are like a pack of wolves ready to devour anyone who dares to post something that goes against what they think. Just an observation from a new member. Carry on.

It's Human nature, and that fucking rep button is like a congratulatory masturbation hand that says "thanks for being on my team!"

Ironically, there's in fighting on the right and there's more people on the left and no infighting over there.

It's hard to win an argument when there's 15 of them and five of you who agree with each other to varying extents. But, fuck it, you try.

I'm not going to be right every time I open my.. keyboard. Having these discussions, especially when the scales are against you, is a fun challenge. I'm not right every time I post, won't get the most support every post, but who cares. You lose when you take this too seriously.

ps. sorry for the shit post.

Wait a minute David.... I thought you was true center?

Alexander if you think Notorius posting tactics would generate favor if he was anti trump.... I don't think that's the case.

as far as the Narrative.. Every topic and bullet point on this board is usually gonna be slanted to one line of a thought over another and most of the posters in the "pack" your referring to have at one time or another been on the other side of that narrative.


I don't post to try and "win" or suppress others thoughts.