SUPERTHREAD: 2020 United States Elections

[loomer]

To be clear, are you asking me to prove that the Judeo-Bolshevism conspiracy theory is a thing, or just that it's been relevant to people calling Sanders a communist as a smear?

Specifically that calling Sanders a communist an only be due to racial stereotypes and not because of his policies.

Nope, not to hand, though I doubt it'd be elusive if I searched for long. But you're making a major mistake here by assuming it's an either/or dichotomy rather than both potentially coexisting.

[Jub]

Nope, not to hand, though I doubt it'd be elusive if I searched for long. But you're making a major mistake here by assuming it's an either/or dichotomy rather than both potentially coexisting.

It's a percentages game at that point then. Is it a large enough percentage to, as TRR has called for, have the entire US political media call it out as being specifically racist?

[loomer]

Nope, not to hand, though I doubt it'd be elusive if I searched for long. But you're making a major mistake here by assuming it's an either/or dichotomy rather than both potentially coexisting.

It's a percentages game at that point then. Is it a large enough percentage to, as TRR has called for, have the entire US political media call it out as being specifically racist?

A, it's not racist, it's anti-Semitic - the two are related but distinct forms of discrimination and it's unhelpful to collapse them into each other. B, the media already is calling it out here and there and I don't see TRR calling for 'the entire US political media [to] call it out' (for someone who raises a stink about words being put in your mouth, I'd expect better from you.) My point was that it's an old, well-established dog whistle that shouldn't be dismissed out of hand and should be considered and exposed in public fora to see how and if it's played a role.

[muse]

Oh dear...

[Jub]

A, it's not racist, it's anti-Semitic - the two are related but distinct forms of discrimination and it's unhelpful to collapse them into each other. B, the media already is calling it out here and there and I don't see TRR calling for 'the entire US political media [to] call it out' (for someone who raises a stink about words being put in your mouth, I'd expect better from you.) My point was that it's an old, well-established dog whistle that shouldn't be dismissed out of hand and should be considered and exposed in public fora to see how and if it's played a role.

And...? Seriously, what do you propose be done about this might be anti-Semitic talking point?

[loomer]

A, it's not racist, it's anti-Semitic - the two are related but distinct forms of discrimination and it's unhelpful to collapse them into each other. B, the media already is calling it out here and there and I don't see TRR calling for 'the entire US political media [to] call it out' (for someone who raises a stink about words being put in your mouth, I'd expect better from you.) My point was that it's an old, well-established dog whistle that shouldn't be dismissed out of hand and should be considered and exposed in public fora to see how and if it's played a role.

And...? Seriously, what do you propose be done about this might be anti-Semitic talking point?

Have you considered taking adult literacy lessons? I spell out what I think should be done about it, which is that it should be considered and exposed in public fora to see how and if it's played a role in the campaign against Sanders rather than being dismissed out of hand.

[Jub]

Have you considered taking adult literacy lessons? I spell out what I think should be done about it, which is that it should be considered and exposed in public fora to see how and if it's played a role in the campaign against Sanders rather than being dismissed out of hand.

By your own admission that's already being done. So where's your complaint?

[loomer]

Have you considered taking adult literacy lessons? I spell out what I think should be done about it, which is that it should be considered and exposed in public fora to see how and if it's played a role in the campaign against Sanders rather than being dismissed out of hand.

By your own admission that's already being done. So where's your complaint?

Buddy, I don't have one with the media. I just said that it's an old conspiracy and dog whistle in response to you saying we should withhold discussion - since you invented the 'mass callout' part - unless something is 'overt' (which... is not how dog whistles work, dude) and you decided to demand sources and manufacture a complaint.

[Jub]

Buddy, I don't have one with the media. I just said that it's an old conspiracy and dog whistle in response to you saying we should withhold discussion - since you invented the 'mass callout' part - unless something is 'overt' (which... is not how dog whistles work, dude) and you decided to demand sources and manufacture a complaint.

Read the fucking thread I was replying to TTR saying:

"But the more I think about it, the more I feel that there is something really deeply troubling about the constant allegations of communist sympathies against Sanders. I can't be the only one who feels that the constant Red-baiting of Bernie Sanders (who is a democratic socialist, not a communist), and the accusations that he is sympathetic to or conspiring with foreign communist regimes, has a definite anti-Semitic subtext. Allegations of "Jewish Bolshevism" are a very old Anti-Semitic trope, one used by the Nazis, among others, to try to justify their crimes. So its rather disconcerting to see even supposedly "moderate" figures using false allegations of communist loyalties against the first serious Jewish candidate for the Presidency, especially after a Sanders rally was crashed by a literal Nazi.

Bottom line, I think there is some deep anti-Semitic subtext here which has been largely ignored."

And then this:

"[P]eople should at least be willing to back him up when he's being targeted by anti-Semitic narratives. That's something that should be called out regardless of your politics or whether you're well-liked. Nazis are hostis humani generis."

I didn't introduce asking everybody to call this out TRR did and I was responding to him.

So...

[loomer]

Buddy, I don't have one with the media. I just said that it's an old conspiracy and dog whistle in response to you saying we should withhold discussion - since you invented the 'mass callout' part - unless something is 'overt' (which... is not how dog whistles work, dude) and you decided to demand sources and manufacture a complaint.

Read the fucking thread I was replying to TTR saying:

"But the more I think about it, the more I feel that there is something really deeply troubling about the constant allegations of communist sympathies against Sanders. I can't be the only one who feels that the constant Red-baiting of Bernie Sanders (who is a democratic socialist, not a communist), and the accusations that he is sympathetic to or conspiring with foreign communist regimes, has a definite anti-Semitic subtext. Allegations of "Jewish Bolshevism" are a very old Anti-Semitic trope, one used by the Nazis, among others, to try to justify their crimes. So its rather disconcerting to see even supposedly "moderate" figures using false allegations of communist loyalties against the first serious Jewish candidate for the Presidency, especially after a Sanders rally was crashed by a literal Nazi.

Bottom line, I think there is some deep anti-Semitic subtext here which has been largely ignored."

And then this:

"[P]eople should at least be willing to back him up when he's being targeted by anti-Semitic narratives. That's something that should be called out regardless of your politics or whether you're well-liked. Nazis are hostis humani generis."

I didn't introduce asking everybody to call this out TRR did and I was responding to him.

So...

I did read it, fuckhead. TRR didn't demand, as you have invented, 'the entire US political media call it out'. I get that you're eager to get one over on me but try and actually pick your shots so you don't look like a complete fuckwit. Go and stick your absurd ideas about how we should only call out 'overt' dog whistles (the entire point of dog whistles is to be covert) up your arse where they belong.

[Jub]

I did read it, fuckhead. TRR didn't demand, as you have invented, 'the entire US political media call it out'. I get that you're eager to get one over on me but try and actually pick your shots so you don't look like a complete fuckwit. Go and stick your absurd ideas about how we should only call out 'overt' dog whistles (the entire point of dog whistles is to be covert) up your arse where they belong.

So what do you interpret "[P]eople should at least be willing to back him up when he's being targeted by anti-Semitic narratives. That's something that should be called out regardless of your politics or whether you're well-liked. Nazis are hostis humani generis." to mean? Keep in mind the poster saying it and their stylistic tendency towards exaggeration.

Also, what is your standard for calling Sanders a communist without it being a dog whistle? Please provide me a full breakdown of your exact criteria.

[loomer]

I did read it, fuckhead. TRR didn't demand, as you have invented, 'the entire US political media call it out'. I get that you're eager to get one over on me but try and actually pick your shots so you don't look like a complete fuckwit. Go and stick your absurd ideas about how we should only call out 'overt' dog whistles (the entire point of dog whistles is to be covert) up your arse where they belong.

So what do you interpret "[P]eople should at least be willing to back him up when he's being targeted by anti-Semitic narratives. That's something that should be called out regardless of your politics or whether you're well-liked. Nazis are hostis humani generis." to mean? Keep in mind the poster saying it and their stylistic tendency towards exaggeration.

A willingness of people generally to discuss, consider, and expose the potential presence and impact of dog whistles utilizing anti-semitic propaganda, perhaps? You know, like any normal, rational human being would read that post to be about, rather than a frothing fuckwit like yourself?

[Jub]

A willingness of people generally to discuss, consider, and expose the potential presence and impact of dog whistles utilizing anti-semitic propaganda, perhaps? You know, like any normal, rational human being would read that post to be about, rather than a frothing fuckwit like yourself?

Seeing as I ninja'd you how about this:

What is your standard for calling Sanders a communist without it being a dog whistle? Please provide me a full breakdown of your exact criteria. Is it impossible due to the history involved?

[loomer]

A willingness of people generally to discuss, consider, and expose the potential presence and impact of dog whistles utilizing anti-semitic propaganda, perhaps? You know, like any normal, rational human being would read that post to be about, rather than a frothing fuckwit like yourself?

Seeing as I ninja'd you how about this:

What is your standard for calling Sanders a communist without it being a dog whistle? Please provide me a full breakdown of your exact criteria. Is it impossible due to the history involved?

I don't have a rigorous one at this time. I'm just saying that dismissing the possibility out of hand in favour of reserving it for 'overt' dog whistles (which, again, is what dog whistles are meant to avoid being) is silly in the face of a longstanding conspiracy theory and dogwhistle.

[Jub]

I don't have a rigorous one at this time. I'm just saying that dismissing the possibility out of hand in favour of reserving it for 'overt' dog whistles (which, again, is what dog whistles are meant to avoid being) is silly in the face of a longstanding conspiracy theory and dogwhistle.

So you think it's likely that calling Sanders a communist is mostly (somewhat? barely?) an anti-Semitic dog whistle in spite of the fact that calling socialists communists is a common US political tactic going back to the Cold War.

You have no proof. No definition. What you want to happen is already happening both in the media and in this thread.

So the fuck did you want besides an argument?

[loomer]

I don't have a rigorous one at this time. I'm just saying that dismissing the possibility out of hand in favour of reserving it for 'overt' dog whistles (which, again, is what dog whistles are meant to avoid being) is silly in the face of a longstanding conspiracy theory and dogwhistle.

So you think it's likely that calling Sanders a communist is mostly (somewhat? barely?) an anti-Semitic dog whistle in spite of the fact that calling socialists communists is a common US political tactic going back to the Cold War.

You have no proof. No definition. What you want to happen is already happening both in the media and in this thread.

So the fuck did you want besides an argument?

I tell you what - you go ahead and show me where I've said anything to the effect of what you think I've said rather than 'it's a long-rooted conspiracy theory that we shouldn't ignore and should be willing to confront and discuss'.

Go on. I'll wait.

EDIT:
Also the irony of the guy inventing arguments demanding to know what I want besides an argument is just *chef's kiss*.

[Jub]

I tell you what - you go ahead and show me where I've said anything to the effect of what you think I've said rather than 'it's a long-rooted conspiracy theory that we shouldn't ignore and should be willing to confront and discuss'.

Go on. I'll wait.

EDIT:
Also the irony of the guy inventing arguments demanding to know what I want besides an argument is just *chef's kiss*.

Answer the question: Is there a way to call Sanders a communist without you taking it as a dog whistle?

[loomer]

I tell you what - you go ahead and show me where I've said anything to the effect of what you think I've said rather than 'it's a long-rooted conspiracy theory that we shouldn't ignore and should be willing to confront and discuss'.

Go on. I'll wait.

EDIT:
Also the irony of the guy inventing arguments demanding to know what I want besides an argument is just *chef's kiss*.

Answer the question: Is there a way to call Sanders a communist without you taking it as a dog whistle?

Sure. But I'm still waiting for you to show me a post where I say anything like what you're supposing I've said. Incidentally, your argument about it being a common tactic used to discredit socialists doesn't necessarily go against the possibility of it exploiting the Judeo-Bolshevist conspiracy theory - unless you think it was never used by politicians in the US during the cold war?

[Jub]

Sure. But I'm still waiting for you to show me a post where I say anything like what you're supposing I've said. Incidentally, your argument about it being a common tactic used to discredit socialists doesn't necessarily go against the possibility of it exploiting the Judeo-Bolshevist conspiracy theory - unless you think it was never used by politicians in the US during the cold war?

It's a common tactic but that doesn't show that it's being used here. So can you show that it is being used against Sanders? If not you're talking about us discussing something that may or may not be happening, without any way to define if it is happening, and in a nation where socialism is often equated to communism regardless of who's pushing the idea. We may as well talk about the invisible pink elephant that may or may not be on my shoulder at the moment.

So again I ask. What the fuck is your point?

[loomer]

Sure. But I'm still waiting for you to show me a post where I say anything like what you're supposing I've said. Incidentally, your argument about it being a common tactic used to discredit socialists doesn't necessarily go against the possibility of it exploiting the Judeo-Bolshevist conspiracy theory - unless you think it was never used by politicians in the US during the cold war?

It's a common tactic but that doesn't show that it's being used here. So can you show that it is being used against Sanders? If not you're talking about us discussing something that may or may not be happening, without any way to define if it is happening, and in a nation where socialism is often equated to communism regardless of who's pushing the idea. We may as well talk about the invisible pink elephant that may or may not be on my shoulder at the moment.

So again I ask. What the fuck is your point?

I think I've explained my point repeatedly in fairly simple English, but I guess I can spell it out for you one more time: Given the deep roots of anti-semitism in anti-communist propaganda and the conspiracy theory of the Judeo-Bolshevist movement and its long historic use as a dogwhistle, it would be silly to declare that discussing its potential use and impacts should not be done until it becomes 'overt'. Basically, I'm proposing 'huh, let's take a look to see if it is a factor, and if it is, we should be willing to confront it' and you're spitting the dummy at the possibility of being open to the possibility because it's not overt and might be hard to disentangle from ordinary smears.

That you find this point somehow hard to grasp isn't really my problem, but given your tendency to invent things (still waiting for you to show me those posts, by the way) and desperately try to get one over on me, it's kind of sad to see.

[Jub]

I think I've explained my point repeatedly in fairly simple English, but I guess I can spell it out for you one more time: Given the deep roots of anti-semitism in anti-communist propaganda and the conspiracy theory of the Judeo-Bolshevist movement and its long historic use as a dogwhistle, it would be silly to declare that discussing its potential use and impacts should not be done until it becomes 'overt'. Basically, I'm proposing 'huh, let's take a look to see if it is a factor, and if it is, we should be willing to confront it' and you're spitting the dummy at the possibility of being open to the possibility because it's not overt and might be hard to disentangle from ordinary smears.

That you find this point somehow hard to grasp isn't really my problem, but given your tendency to invent things (still waiting for you to show me those posts, by the way) and desperately try to get one over on me, it's kind of sad to see.

So you started all this because I wasn't willing to play nice with a hypothetical..?

EDIT: Also, if you want to talk maybe start by talking about the specifics of the issue. Are then any times Sanders has been called a communist by a political opponent or major media outlet that stand out to you as being particularly suspect? Right now you're saying we should talk about a fire but you can't even show smoke.

[loomer]

I think I've explained my point repeatedly in fairly simple English, but I guess I can spell it out for you one more time: Given the deep roots of anti-semitism in anti-communist propaganda and the conspiracy theory of the Judeo-Bolshevist movement and its long historic use as a dogwhistle, it would be silly to declare that discussing its potential use and impacts should not be done until it becomes 'overt'. Basically, I'm proposing 'huh, let's take a look to see if it is a factor, and if it is, we should be willing to confront it' and you're spitting the dummy at the possibility of being open to the possibility because it's not overt and might be hard to disentangle from ordinary smears.

That you find this point somehow hard to grasp isn't really my problem, but given your tendency to invent things (still waiting for you to show me those posts, by the way) and desperately try to get one over on me, it's kind of sad to see.

So you started all this because I wasn't willing to play nice with a hypothetical..?

EDIT: Also, if you want to talk maybe start by talking about the specifics of the issue. Are then any times Sanders has been called a communist by a political opponent or major media outlet that stand out to you as being particularly suspect? Right now you're saying we should talk about a fire but you can't even show smoke.

I didn't start shit, buddy - you did. I posted that it's a theory with deep roots and you bounced in to scream 'prove it impacted the campaign!' and then invented an argument TRR wasn't making about demanding the entire political establishment call it out without investigation.

As for your second? I'm saying we should be open to the possibility of fire. I really don't understand why you think it's a good idea to respond to what amount to 'huh, maybe we should take a look' with a demand for the rigid criteria and factual proof that would emerge as a result of taking a look. You're essentially arguing we shouldn't look unless we know what we'll find which is, well, just plain dumb.

By the way - still waiting on those posts that say what you think I've said.

[Ralin]

Oh for fuck's sake Jub. Loomer made a general statement that implying Jews are or are in league secret communist infiltrators is a long-standing form of anti-Semitic propaganda. He didn't make any argument other than an implied 'So you should take it seriously when someone says something about Sanders that can be taken that way, not just brush it off as TRR being dumb and overreacting.' You took that and replied asking that he go beyond a general cautionary statement and prove that this or some other specific case wasn't just the usual 'call left-leaning people commies' bullshit that you see in American politics, which he declined to do. Then it escalated because you were over-aggressive and Loomer responded in kind because he has a chip on his shoulder or something.

Neither of you is wrong, but you've been talking past each other for a page and it's mostly you that's driving it.

[Jub]

Oh for fuck's sake Jub. Loomer made a general statement that implying Jews are or are in league secret communist infiltrators is a long-standing form of anti-Semitic propaganda. He didn't make any argument other than an implied 'So you should take it seriously when someone says something about Sanders that can be taken that way, not just brush it off as TRR being dumb and overreacting.' You took that and replied asking that he go beyond a general cautionary statement and prove that this or some other specific case wasn't just the usual 'call left-leaning people commies' bullshit that you see in American politics, which he declined to do. Then it escalated because you were over-aggressive and Loomer responded in kind because he has a chip on his shoulder or something.

Neither of you is wrong, but you've been talking past each other for a page and it's mostly you that's driving it.

If loomer, or TRR for that matter, is ready to say that we should talk about a thing he should give an example better than; literally nothing. If either of them could point to a specific event, media outlet, etc. I'd be willing to take them seriously. As is they want to generalize about a generalization and expect me to take them seriously.

[loomer]

Oh for fuck's sake Jub. Loomer made a general statement that implying Jews are or are in league secret communist infiltrators is a long-standing form of anti-Semitic propaganda. He didn't make any argument other than an implied 'So you should take it seriously when someone says something about Sanders that can be taken that way, not just brush it off as TRR being dumb and overreacting.' You took that and replied asking that he go beyond a general cautionary statement and prove that this or some other specific case wasn't just the usual 'call left-leaning people commies' bullshit that you see in American politics, which he declined to do. Then it escalated because you were over-aggressive and Loomer responded in kind because he has a chip on his shoulder or something.

Neither of you is wrong, but you've been talking past each other for a page and it's mostly you that's driving it.

If loomer, or TRR for that matter, is ready to say that we should talk about a thing he should give an example better than; literally nothing. If either of them could point to a specific event, media outlet, etc. I'd be willing to take them seriously. As is they want to generalize about a generalization and expect me to take them seriously.

So, you still seem confused. What I'm saying is that maybe it's worth taking a look to see - you know, the process that precedes bringing specific events to the table? That's what you seem to find objectionable as a concept.