That's what I'm starting to come round to. I don't really think there any thing left to use on them but give them a taste of their own medicine and shut them down the same way they've shut their opponents down. Even when you vote their opponents into power to oppose them they do whatever they can to shut them down whether it is or isn't in the rules or not. So I am beginning to question my own beliefs and doubt opposing censorship or supporting free speech. It's not so liberals or SJWs I'm thinking about here it's how do we deal with the rising militancy of anti-fascists. They believe anything is justified against whatever they consider 'fascist' and including violence so how do you take that on when they can always fall back on the argument that they feel they're justified because they're fighting the good fight against 'racism' and 'fascism' while they're smashing apartments up, shutting down social events and denying people access to events they disagree with. The only way short of violence to deal with them is ban, censor and dismantle until their ideology is broken and disempowered to such a level they pose no threat any more as the far right did until recent times.
Sanders, Warren, and Franken having a field day with Trump's nominees... Exposing them with pretty simple questions.
It's most serious when it comes to history because the answers [such as they are] are not set in stone. There are different ways of looking at a war or revolution or crisis or rule, it's not a matter of this is the definitive explanation of X and thus all other views are heretical. It's precisely why 2,000 years later historians are still writing about Caesar. It's not a matter of one book wrapping it up and that's that, it's constantly being poured over and analysed and interpreted. The way history is studied is always changing as well so making it more dogmatic and narrow is guaranteed to teach the wrong lessons to future generations. You are probably right as well about the choices people make and how conservative leaning people may be more inclined to enter business. So even in the *good old days* the ratio was still slanted to liberals just nowhere near as much now.
I don't like Trump but I don't see the point of protesting today. 2000 fair enough Bush stole the election in Florida (1960 was dodgy as well) and that wasn't great for democracy, not to mention the disastrous consequences of him being president. Trump democratically won the election fair and square. How can you protest a democratic result? You can disagree with it.
I seem to remember some people doing here when tories got in last time. bit odd really, just shows how dumbed down its all become, in peoples minds a general election is no different to X-factor final night.
There are protest for every election. People have the right to do it, and they exercised that right. Nobody is protesting the result. They are protesting the person elected. Same thing happened to Obama... Well...not exactly the same. EDIT: Also, considering majority of voters did not vote for him, I think there is some traction to the opposition towards him.
Nowt wrong with a bit of nationalism. I'm still undecided on Trump but at the end of the day if there were more people like him, Farage, Le Pen, Wilders etc. the world (and certainly Europe) wouldn't be in such a mess as it is now. Just ask the citizens of Germany and France if globalism and open borders/free movement is for them when they're being murdered by Islamic terrorists.
If people think they should protest, and have something to protest, then by all means. However, I am not versed in the nuances of UK politics, so I can't say I can give an informed opinion on that.
Well, surely it couldn't be any worse? How could people dying in their own country to a ****ed up ideology be worse than those people i've mentioned having more power.
This country, relatively young as it is, has been through much, much, tougher times than the past 8 years.
Reports of things getting chippy between protesters and police now. Certainly not the way to make a point at this junction and is just all-around counter productive... "D.C. Interim Police Chief Peter Newsham said officers have arrested more than 90 people in connection with protests that turned violent on Friday and caused “significant damage to a number of blocks in our city.” He said a “a very small percentage” of the thousands who came to demonstrate the inauguration resorted to violence. Newsham said demonstrators threw rocks and overturned trash cans, and broke windows at a bank, several shops including a Starbucks and an Au Bon Pain, and shattered car windows. Police said those arrested were charged with rioting. “It’s disappointing that it had to happen,” Newsham said, praising how officers responded. “We knew this was going to be a long day. . . . Anyone who thinks they can come here and break the law, we will take them into custody.” Protesters vandalize city, try to disrupt Trump’s oath, as police arrest nearly 100
Very true, but irrelevant to what's going on right here right now, which is what not only citizens of the US but most of the civilised world are only interested in at the moment. Some of the things going on today pale into insignificance with most stuff that's happened in the past.
My point is that you seem to thing that it's OK for the people of a country to rebel if the leadership hasn't been elected by over half of the voters. Not only does that apply to the UK's current government but most of the governments that they've ever had. In which case I'd have to ask the question why hold elections in the first place if people are just supposed to ignore the outcome if it doesn't suit them. Trump said today that America would lead the world by example. What America is is an example of one ****ed- up country.
