There should be a thread associating builds with networks.

CNN is an exploding arrow pally.

Al Jazeera is a zealot with a merc decked out in a suicide facet vest

it's truly a sight to behold how the people who are ideologically aligned with / make excuses for / vote for nazis in their own countries (ampootin / goon-shill / excrements / void...) just uncritically bought into the "de-nazification" narrative by a dictator - who himself has been relying on nazis for personal protection and doing his dirty work around the globe for decades...

nazis are scum. that obviously includes ukrainian nazis. what our resident useful idiots are "forgetting" (because russian propaganda and faux news don't tell them), however, is that ultra-nationalists and nazis in ukraine still don't hold any significant political power (much less than in the US for example), and that it was the 2014 invasion by russia that (unsurprisingly) somewhat re-ignited nationalist sentiments.

There are some half a million elected politicians in America, and more than 600 cities with a population over 50,000, and the country is about 7.5x more populous than Ukraine. Our government dwarfs theirs. And yet, I'm unaware of any overt nazis holding any legal powers. They definitely don't have their own branch of the military, they don't make up any significant chunk of the population nor do they hold any power in government. The same can't be said for Ukraine. I'd say that Ukraine is among only a tiny list of countries with active Nazi remnants in the mainstream. I can't say they're exclusive, Serbia, Croatia maybe. Off-hand any others elude me.

There are those for whom Hitler is their spirit animal and channel his methods and intentions, like yourself and fellow Merkel-aligned krauts, but to your credit I'd distinguish your lot from actual Nazis like they have in Ukraine. We really don't have those in the US. There is no doubt some smattering of wackos, but their gatherings can't fill a high school gymnasium and when they do congregate, at least half of them are undercover agents for a true cornucopia of law enforcement departments.



We could quibble over how much of a force the Nazis constitute in Ukraine- particularly how they are geographically distributed mostly along the border with the east- but as long as we're shipping them arms to me that feels like the debates in Syria over how much of our weapons were going to Al Qaeda vs other regressive fundmentalist sunni militias. I think its the same discussion of "how many war crimes are the Ukrainians we're supporting perpetrating right now" and "how many child soldiers are fighting our behalf" and "how many ukrainian diplomats have been executed" and "how much dissent is tolerated now that opposition parties are banned and the state seized control of the media".

do you genuinely not realise how weird and hypocritical those mental gymnastics are, coming from a charlottesville apologist, a far-right hack, a downplayer of nazi symbols / rhetoric at trump rallies, a defender of ahmaud arbery's racist murderers, like yourself?

again, all nazis are scum. you, however, are not coming from a position of consistency or integrity on this issue. you're choosing which nazis to defend and which ones to denounce based on partisan considerations. you're but a useful idiot spreading russian propaganda.

I never thought of you as scum. Then again, I don't think of you much
I'm not surprised that Heinreich von Goebbels sided with Nazis war criminals, as history repeats itself. Then again, your lot can't decide which side it wants to support more, the nazis or the russians. Arm the nazis, or fund the Russians? Both! At least last time around it was simpler and a one-way relationship, but last time around the russians reached Berlin so maybe that's not an example you'd like to repeat.

This is exactly my point. The personality trait is a self-praising one, with a tendency to present these non-mainstream "critical" opinions with a delivery of exaggerated certainty or smugness. Even you here are subtly trying to hint at the superiority of these skepticists in contrast with sheep. It's the naive skepticism of snowflakes criticizing climate science because 5% or less of the climate scientists say otherwise, and discrediting the intellect of the 95% or more whose work is deeply rooted in a peer-reviewable system of systematic critical thinking. The core of this phenomenon is not about what's true. It's about "i'm right" with a dash of "told you so", and once challenged, you pull out the Nostradamus prophecy, "...not happened yet". This is coming from a guy with a job who used to be the young kiddo with the snowflake syndrome until he got to uni. Luckily I shed that off pretty quick, guess i was brainwashed.



How you say "the round of applause" captures the whole idea. Enigma on a bone nec is the equivalent of any sensible modern idea. Normal people don't expect a round of applause. The whole idea behind being non-mainstream seems to be about capturing a round of applause, and not the elusive truth. Applause from the masses would be the dream, but you are mostly applauding yourself or receive it from those who agree with you to begin with. When you have an obvious human motivation behind your political views, they become guided by bias. It's not cool to be right about unpleasant or unpopular things when you decide to want them to be true. Cool is to literally be cool and not make a fuss out of it.

This post was edited by Neptunus on Mar 28 2022 07:16am

I think this all relates to , however it applies in the round, to everyone. can you summarize in so many words what you are trying to say. I dont want to guess, and guess wrong, therefore i invite you to concisely state your view, on whatever topic you are bringing to the table.



My own view is to question something and not look at it from just one point of view. I don't think that the mainstream view is right just because its the main stream, but rather because its something i conform with. sometimes I will agree with people and sometimes I wont, and sometimes I change my view. whether one conforms to society is not dependent on the size of the community. Yes, based on upbringing and experience we are wired to think a certain way and have certain views, but the ability to disagree with a view, or have another view does not equate to having a personality trait that strives to be different even when it could be wrong, frankly, regardless of the truth (to use your terminology, also my intent was that this was taken as a neutral observation).

if any of the above has taken your comments out of context, please clarify, cheers.

--------------

Finally on Oscars night I see 1 man made a joke about another man's wife, whereupon the husband stood up and attacked the man. this is another good analogy for the Ukraine / Russia conflict. i.e. violence does not need physical contact to harm or step on another persons red lines. the spoken word is also violence.

This post was edited by ferdia on Mar 28 2022 07:40am

Not exactly the same. The crowd should be clapping their hands, blaming Will Smith for being a racist to Chis Rock and then nominate the latter for Nobel Peace Prize.

This post was edited by Norlander on Mar 28 2022 07:48am

ehmm, should it not be:
Blame Will smith for being racist and attacking Chris Rock without provocation, and then the audience nominating Tom Hanks for an Oscar / lifetime achievement award
Blame Russia for being racist and attacking Ukriane without provocation, and then the world nominating Biden for the Nobel Peace Prize ?

As I understand it Will Smith won an Oscar, also no charges pressed. I dont see Russia winning any prizes and I am pretty sure charges are already pressed. it is after all a poor analogy.



This post was edited by ferdia on Mar 28 2022 08:01am