Welcome to the ICM Forum. If you have an account but have trouble logging in, or have other questions, see THIS THREAD.
Podcast: Talking Images (Episode 16 released September 13th)
4th ICM Film Festival Jury Recruiting (Fest is Nov16-Dec14)

Polls: Romance (Results), 1951 (Results), 500<400 (Sep 23rd), 2008 (Oct 4th)
Challenges: Animation, Silent Era, Russia/USSR
Film of the Week: La religieuse, October nominations (Sep 25th)
World Cup S4: QF Schedule, Match QFC: Germany vs Italy (Oct 1st), Match QFD: Estonia vs Russia (Oct 11th)

US Politics thread

Post Reply
User avatar
AdamH
Site Admin
Posts: 12597
Joined: May 05, 2011
Contact:

Re: US Politics thread

#17761

Post by AdamH » June 26th, 2020, 12:15 pm

The Easter, Christmas etc. discussion is absolute nonsense and typical of the 'political correctness gone mad' rubbish that people like to come out with. People take one isolated (and not always true) story and suddenly come up with a huge list of things that aren't allowed to be done anymore. It frustrates me incredibly and adds so much to the ignorance and hatred from certain groups of people in the world.

Edit: I haven't been following this thread properly (as I try desperately to avoid the political lounges) so I'm assuming I've missed the joke/sarcasm from Onderhond and he doesn't believe the parts he was writing about not being able to do x, y or z or is simply repeating what some ill-informed people say about the matter (or people with a very clear agenda). Apologies if I have, indeed, missed that and I am misinterpreting his post.

User avatar
Onderhond
Posts: 4898
Joined: Dec 23, 2012
Contact:

#17762

Post by Onderhond » June 26th, 2020, 12:50 pm

St. Gloede wrote:
June 26th, 2020, 11:53 am
However, I don't see/understand what you advocate here. It seems to be you are saying "Don't address the issues". Is that correct? If people can't point out that X is problematic for X reason without there being two counter camps automatically, the second one can't be reached by reason, what can we really do here? Are you just saying appeal to their emotions? If so, sure, please do.
I guess what I am saying is "start by addressing the important issues". It's like when you want a compulsory eater to lose weight, the first action isn't to put him on a diet, you begin by taking away the problem that makes him a compulsory eater (low self esteem, loneliness, ...). If you don't address that part first, a diet might work for 1 week, 2 weeks, maybe even a month, but he'll always revert to his old state.
By some definitions that could fit under "racism"
Yeah, nowadays even semantics are extremely fluid, so everything can be everything. Labeling moderate views as something vile/taboo is basically the modus operandi of the vocal part of the populist left. That's also related to this discussion, but let's just stick to the classic, firmer definition of the word. Disinterest in others is mostly a neutral state, it's more a matter of wanting to take or carry the responsibility of that disinterest where the debate starts.
Is most of this remotely true though?
Well yes, the only charged example here is the Mario one, but "Easter" has been scrapped/replaced from certain advertisements, we now have a "wintermarkt" (winter market) instead of a "kerstmarkt", there are rainbow Petes (bonus points for the gay community there) and 1 Fawlty Towers episode + the whole Little Britain series was pulled for the BBC streaming service. Oh, and most of the Leopold II statues have been removed already. I specifically picked things that happened and are real.
and if people will go crazy if someone critiques something they like ... What do you want people to do?
Well, there is a difference between saying "I don't like Black Pete" and "I don't like Black Pete and people who do are racist". I think most people can stomach the former, not the latter. I do understand that the former will get you no attention (and a status quo) though.
Towards the end I used the method you seem to advocate, i.e. appealing to emotions
I don't think I was advocating to appeal to people's emotions. I'm saying don't react to people's venting, but try to find out what's really bothering them. These are usually two very different things. Anyone who's had his partner start shit with him for completely nonsensical reasons should be able to understand that :D

User avatar
AdamH
Site Admin
Posts: 12597
Joined: May 05, 2011
Contact:

#17763

Post by AdamH » June 26th, 2020, 12:56 pm

One note, the Fawlty Towers episode is available (just that they added a warning). Little Britain, I don't really care about as it was awful. All of these programmes are easily available online anyway or on DVD/Blu Ray.

I haven't experienced any of the things at all that you've listed about Easter, Christmas markets etc. In Edinburgh, we have a "Christmas Market". Easter is advertised as normal with Easter eggs and the usual stuff (not sure how many people care anymore about anything other than getting chocolate eggs...). I actually don't remember Easter ever being a big deal here except for getting eggs but I've never been religious. Certainly not noticed any change at all in adverts. Christmas has always been a much bigger thing as remains huge (although of course most people now just care about seeing family, presents etc.). You'll find, at least in the UK, that the vast majority of "PC gone mad" incidents tend to be one tabloid story about a village with a school policy or something made up and spread through social media.

People share stuff saying "you're not allowed to say merry Christmas anymore!!!" even in the UK when that's also made up. I thought "Happy holidays" was an American thing. I've never heard anyone in the UK say "happy holidays". People say "merry Christmas" normally or variants of that.

User avatar
Onderhond
Posts: 4898
Joined: Dec 23, 2012
Contact:

#17764

Post by Onderhond » June 26th, 2020, 1:01 pm

AdamH wrote:
June 26th, 2020, 12:56 pm
Little Britain, I don't really care about as it was awful.
I don't care about any of the above to be honest, but others clearly do. And dismissing it as "bullshit" is what creates the polarization, because for them it's obviously not bullshit, but something they care about (for whatever reason).

I do agree that it's not a full-on, organized culture war though, but that was hardly the point.

User avatar
AdamH
Site Admin
Posts: 12597
Joined: May 05, 2011
Contact:

#17765

Post by AdamH » June 26th, 2020, 1:06 pm

Yes, my point about Little Britain added nothing to the discussion but it is a very dated programme that was very much of its time (I didn't even like it at the time but I know it was popular many years ago). I'm not generally in favour of removing programmes because I think removing them simply adds fuel to the fire and allows people with racist and ignorant views to have some more ammunition. I have no problem with a very brief 'warning' message. I don't think removing the programmes helps the situation and probably has the reverse effect from what is intended. The people who make the decisions to remove these programmes aren't generally linked to the groups of people who then become targetted by racists or people claiming it's 'PC gone mad', culture being destroyed etc.

User avatar
Dolwphin
Posts: 4418
Joined: Jul 10, 2011
Location: Sweden
Contact:

#17766

Post by Dolwphin » June 26th, 2020, 1:20 pm

St. Gloede wrote:
June 25th, 2020, 11:29 pm
Dolwphin wrote:
June 25th, 2020, 11:06 pm
There you go with your strange hyperbole again. Holding facilities for asylum seekers are not fascism. It Is not violence, but rather common sense. Everything Is fascism according to you hence my jokes In this thread.
Why are you lying?

I haven't even called ANYTHING fascism in this thread... I even started by dismissing the idea that Social conservatism, wanting strict immigration, etc. was fascism or Fascist-adjacent - highlighting clear, specific issues.

Yet you only lie and strawman.

What have been jokes? Your support/defense of concentration camps? Was Auschwitz ok the first few years? That is the serious implication if you are offended the term concentration camps are used to describe concentration camps despite, for you, bringing up the image of death camps.

Asylum centres are ok, concentration camps are not ... Give them case workers, process their applications, approve or decline. You keep defending inhumane practices...

I'm calling out your disturbing remarks, and if you are now claiming the "joking" defense... Great.

You never answered my question of why you only argued semantics instead of the real issues.

Is it, because, as you say above, it is common sense?

I hope you are trolling.
This "controversy" is about right-wing populism *really* inherently being *fascism*. Something you seem at least open to. Maybe you have not literally mentioned anything, however it is implied and implicit in your stance Imho, although did you not just mention "concentration camps" as a specific example? Such rhetoric won't convince anyone to reverse/soften actual authoritarian tendencies present within some self-described right-wing populists world view.

Yes I'm fine with more humane holding facilities. And common sense regarding uppehållstIllstånd, It Is somewhat amazing who get to stay and who gets deported sometimes.

I'm just disagreeing with NJR and his smearing of the great show RIsIng. And stating obvious facts: left/right-wing populism exists , over-lap exists between both strands of populism regarding economic policy, and there exist voters with leftist views on economics and (moderate) conservative social views on certain Issues

But you engage in hyperbole and/or concrete examples from the political arena which is not necessary. Voters / Politicians. Campaign rhetoric / Policy agenda.
Top 250 | RYM | Letterboxd

Member of the Experimental Mafia | What's My Line? #1 Fan

User avatar
Dolwphin
Posts: 4418
Joined: Jul 10, 2011
Location: Sweden
Contact:

#17767

Post by Dolwphin » June 26th, 2020, 2:13 pm

Top 250 | RYM | Letterboxd

Member of the Experimental Mafia | What's My Line? #1 Fan

User avatar
St. Gloede
Moderator
Posts: 11227
Joined: May 06, 2011
Contact:

#17768

Post by St. Gloede » June 26th, 2020, 2:14 pm

Onderhond wrote:
June 26th, 2020, 12:50 pm
St. Gloede wrote:
June 26th, 2020, 11:53 am
However, I don't see/understand what you advocate here. It seems to be you are saying "Don't address the issues". Is that correct? If people can't point out that X is problematic for X reason without there being two counter camps automatically, the second one can't be reached by reason, what can we really do here? Are you just saying appeal to their emotions? If so, sure, please do.
I guess what I am saying is "start by addressing the important issues". It's like when you want a compulsory eater to lose weight, the first action isn't to put him on a diet, you begin by taking away the problem that makes him a compulsory eater (low self esteem, loneliness, ...). If you don't address that part first, a diet might work for 1 week, 2 weeks, maybe even a month, but he'll always revert to his old state.
But what are the important issues? This again puts the onus on helping the majority feel as comfortable as possible about not hurting others. I understand its effectiveness, but if say black people can not protest systematic abuse because certain white people can't handle it, and we need to place our focus on helping these people and not making them feel personally attacked it just seems that something is severely wrong.

This is what I pointed out two weeks ago too - i.e. that for the majority we need to cuddle and understand - for those angry and protesting what they see as abuse. You must understand that everyone will react in this way to what feels like affronts towards them - and yes, we can try to push for meaningful, careful dialog, but the flipside is that a portion of those marginalized often get madder as they see/feel they don't matter.
By some definitions that could fit under "racism"
Yeah, nowadays even semantics are extremely fluid, so everything can be everything. Labeling moderate views as something vile/taboo is basically the modus operandi of the vocal part of the populist left. That's also related to this discussion, but let's just stick to the classic, firmer definition of the word. Disinterest in others is mostly a neutral state, it's more a matter of wanting to take or carry the responsibility of that disinterest where the debate starts.
I was referring more to supporting systematic racism, i.e. the common academic definition, but I understand "racism" is a loaded word that can seem to only refer to hatred and of course makes people uncomfortable.
Is most of this remotely true though?
Well yes, the only charged example here is the Mario one, but "Easter" has been scrapped/replaced from certain advertisements, we now have a "wintermarkt" (winter market) instead of a "kerstmarkt", there are rainbow Petes (bonus points for the gay community there) and 1 Fawlty Towers episode + the whole Little Britain series was pulled for the BBC streaming service. Oh, and most of the Leopold II statues have been removed already. I specifically picked things that happened and are real.
This is where I have to take an extreme issue with what you are saying.

Advertisers choosing to go a different route is not some abstract evil boogieman, nor is a TV channel taking down an episode or a show. You are talking about individual organizations, companies, people doing what they think is best - it is not this large left forcing this through and breaking up traditional culture.

I.e. these things are not "real".

People are not stopped from watching Falwty Towers (all the left media I saw decried the takedown as absurd btw) or celebrating easter. This is just not real.
and if people will go crazy if someone critiques something they like ... What do you want people to do?
Well, there is a difference between saying "I don't like Black Pete" and "I don't like Black Pete and people who do are racist". I think most people can stomach the former, not the latter. I do understand that the former will get you no attention (and a status quo) though.
Agreed, but so what? I don't support or argue that everyone who likes Black Pete for tradition are racists - but that is a generally natural reaction from many people and we won't be able to stop that type of discourse. If you see someone make the claim calmly explain why it is counter-productive and give alternative solutions to them, etc.
Towards the end I used the method you seem to advocate, i.e. appealing to emotions
I don't think I was advocating to appeal to people's emotions. I'm saying don't react to people's venting, but try to find out what's really bothering them. These are usually two very different things. Anyone who's had his partner start shit with him for completely nonsensical reasons should be able to understand that :D
[/quote]

Well yes, this was what I meant re: logic and talking with them without judgment.

We are mostly on the same page here, but there are some odd contentions, mainly the bizarre ideas re: Easter, Falwty Towers, etc. I hope you realize that this is just a right-wing culture war talking point with little basis in facts - unless you think that individuals or organizations making such changes is somehow really bad(?). Regardless cheers, like I said we are mostly aligned. :cheers:

User avatar
St. Gloede
Moderator
Posts: 11227
Joined: May 06, 2011
Contact:

#17769

Post by St. Gloede » June 26th, 2020, 2:24 pm

Dolwphin wrote:
June 26th, 2020, 1:20 pm
St. Gloede wrote:
June 25th, 2020, 11:29 pm
Dolwphin wrote:
June 25th, 2020, 11:06 pm
There you go with your strange hyperbole again. Holding facilities for asylum seekers are not fascism. It Is not violence, but rather common sense. Everything Is fascism according to you hence my jokes In this thread.
Why are you lying?

I haven't even called ANYTHING fascism in this thread... I even started by dismissing the idea that Social conservatism, wanting strict immigration, etc. was fascism or Fascist-adjacent - highlighting clear, specific issues.

Yet you only lie and strawman.

What have been jokes? Your support/defense of concentration camps? Was Auschwitz ok the first few years? That is the serious implication if you are offended the term concentration camps are used to describe concentration camps despite, for you, bringing up the image of death camps.

Asylum centres are ok, concentration camps are not ... Give them case workers, process their applications, approve or decline. You keep defending inhumane practices...

I'm calling out your disturbing remarks, and if you are now claiming the "joking" defense... Great.

You never answered my question of why you only argued semantics instead of the real issues.

Is it, because, as you say above, it is common sense?

I hope you are trolling.
This "controversy" is about right-wing populism *really* inherently being *fascism*. Something you seem at least open to. Maybe you have not literally mentioned anything, however it is implied and implicit in your stance Imho, although did you not just mention "concentration camps" as a specific example? Such rhetoric won't convince anyone to reverse/soften actual authoritarian tendencies present within some self-described right-wing populists world view.

Yes I'm fine with more humane holding facilities. And common sense regarding uppehållstIllstånd, It Is somewhat amazing who get to stay and who gets deported sometimes.

I'm just disagreeing with NJR and his smearing of the great show RIsIng. And stating obvious facts: left/right-wing populism exists , over-lap exists between both strands of populism regarding economic policy, and there exist voters with leftist views on economics and (moderate) conservative social views on certain Issues

But you engage in hyperbole and/or concrete examples from the political arena which is not necessary. Voters / Politicians. Campaign rhetoric / Policy agenda.
No!

You are doing this bizarre thing where you read bizarre intents into everything again.

I have not engaged in any hyperbole - but you consistently did - and you still are.

You misrepresented the NJR argument - I clarified it - you never responded.

You got offended over the claim that there is a link between Fascists and Right-Wing Populists/Nationalists who engage in bothering, promote violence, strips people of their rights and send them to camps, etc. I asked why you were only interested in the Fascist semantics instead of the problematic policies - you dodged.

I asked why you dodged and seemed to defend/whitewash othering, violence, concentration camps, etc - you dodged.

And all that came back were strawmen and hyperbole.
I'm just disagreeing with NJR and his smearing of the great show RIsIng. And stating obvious facts: left/right-wing populism exists , over-lap exists between both strands of populism regarding economic policy, and there exist voters with leftist views on economics and (moderate) conservative social views on certain Issues
1. Left-wing populism exists. Right wing populism exists.
2. They do not have much in common economically, though national conservatives can be further left than liberals
3. Left wingers with social conservative views exist ... Yes ... What does this have to do with anything?

... Wait, is this stemming from you thinking right wing populism is left wing???! Left wingers with social conservative views are left wingers ...

User avatar
Onderhond
Posts: 4898
Joined: Dec 23, 2012
Contact:

#17770

Post by Onderhond » June 26th, 2020, 3:17 pm

St. Gloede wrote:
June 26th, 2020, 2:14 pm
but if say black people can not protest systematic abuse because certain white people can't handle it
Well, you call my examples not "real" but then you come with this? :D
Very, very few people had problems with black protesters. Many people had problems with looters and the extreme, aggressive anti-police rhetoric. And they got a lot of pushbacks for saying that (lack of empathy, racism and whatnot). Forced to choose between two extremes, they ended up being against (black) protesters.
St. Gloede wrote:
June 26th, 2020, 2:14 pm
I was referring more to supporting systematic racism, i.e. the common academic definition, but I understand "racism" is a loaded word that can seem to only refer to hatred and of course makes people uncomfortable.
Oh, that's all very much within the classic definition of the word for me. It's disinterest, apathy, small annoyances and the like that get categorized as "racism" which is really annoying.
St. Gloede wrote:
June 26th, 2020, 2:14 pm
Advertisers choosing to go a different route is not some abstract evil boogieman, nor is a TV channel taking down an episode or a show. You are talking about individual organizations, companies, people doing what they think is best - it is not this large left forcing this through and breaking up traditional culture.

I.e. these things are not "real".
There is no organized culture war, but I wouldn't say that means it isn't "real". It affects the experiences and lives of people directly, which makes it extremely real. And no, there are no laws against it, but they are strong signs of a changing morality compass. I mean, no person at the BBC wakes up one morning and decides "you know what, this Little Britain stuff, let's take it off". These are direct reactions to a changing narrative. And it's the left driving these narratives.

St. Gloede wrote:
June 26th, 2020, 2:14 pm
We are mostly on the same page here, but there are some odd contentions, mainly the bizarre ideas re: Easter, Falwty Towers, etc. I hope you realize that this is just a right-wing culture war talking point with little basis in facts - unless you think that individuals or organizations making such changes is somehow really bad(?).
Well, it's bad because they're not just random decisions by individuals. The arguments are blown up for sure (they always end up at the end of the slippery slope), but the facts are there and it would be nice if they could be addressed without words like "bizarre" (which they are not and which is bona fide hyperbole).

User avatar
Dolwphin
Posts: 4418
Joined: Jul 10, 2011
Location: Sweden
Contact:

#17771

Post by Dolwphin » June 26th, 2020, 3:20 pm

You are hopeless St. Gloede , you refuse to listen to what I'm saying.

1. Right-wing populism does not equal fascism
2. Populists have populism in common ; especially actual voters.
2b) Differences also exists; agreement sometimes arrived at through different reasoning
3. Social conservatism (moderate) + left economic policy is a combination that exists
4. Thus it is not morally reprehensible for co-op between left/right-wing populists

5. You don't think it is hyperbole do label your political opponents as fascists?
Top 250 | RYM | Letterboxd

Member of the Experimental Mafia | What's My Line? #1 Fan

User avatar
St. Gloede
Moderator
Posts: 11227
Joined: May 06, 2011
Contact:

#17772

Post by St. Gloede » June 26th, 2020, 7:34 pm

Dolwphin wrote:
June 26th, 2020, 3:20 pm
You are hopeless St. Gloede , you refuse to listen to what I'm saying.

1. Right-wing populism does not equal fascism
2. Populists have populism in common ; especially actual voters.
2b) Differences also exists; agreement sometimes arrived at through different reasoning
3. Social conservatism (moderate) + left economic policy is a combination that exists
4. Thus it is not morally reprehensible for co-op between left/right-wing populists

5. You don't think it is hyperbole do label your political opponents as fascists?
But... You are lying.

1. Correct... It does not. Never claimed it did. Lie 1

2. Populism is not one thing... (Not going to call this a lie, it could be, but I'll be kind here)

3. Yes, it does, I have repeatedly said so, including the post you are replying to. Lie 2.

4. Never claimed it was. Lie 3. (+how is that a thus, 2 out of 3 had nothing to do with this)

5. Never did. Lie 4.

So... 4 obvious lies, and one likely deception. Why are you just lying on repeat?

This is genuinely absurd and sad behavior... :facepalm:

Are you just bored and trolling for fun?

User avatar
Lakigigar
Posts: 1353
Joined: Oct 31, 2015
Location: Belgium
Contact:

#17773

Post by Lakigigar » June 26th, 2020, 7:40 pm

How did your opinion of Trump change during his presidency

On election night, i remember being ecstatic that he was elected president. Unfortunately, his presidency would highlight a lot of disappointments and failures. I had hope in him that he would turn out to be a good (socially) conservative working class president who would create a lot of jobs, and who would turn out to be a good president, and moderate his message and rhetoric. This all didn't happen. As incapable and populist he sounded throughout his campaign, that incapable he was during his presidency. Trump's cabinet will go into history as one of the most incapable and corrupt cabinets in the history of the United States for a long time. During periods of peace, he was a relatively okay-ish president, but when crisises did pop up, he failed to deal with them. His COVID-19 handling is an absolute disaster, and caused many lives, because he failed to implement effective lockdowns like we had in the USA and he failed to realize how serious COVID-19 would be. He failed to deal with the existent racism and gun violence in the United States, although I believe Trump's personal beliefs conflicted with what he said on gun violence, and he doesn't realize racism is a widespread problem in the USA. His worst year is clearly 2020, because before 2020 i always gave him the benefit of the doubt. Now i can't. I wasn't a fan of his climate policy or his tax policies, but i gave him the benefit of the doubt and failed to judge him. And things like tax policy are also influenced by party colour. What is bad to one person, is better for another. But he definitely didn't became the working class president we hoped for. We have a net loss in jobs, although part of it is to blame for the COVID-19, but where many world leaders saw a bump in their polls, mr. Trump's numbers only went down, and for a reason.

I thought for a long time Hillary Clinton would be a worse president than Trump, but I think I might be wrong. She would have dealt better with the 2020 problems, and I think her term would be less disastreous than Trump's one, although we would never know for sure, and I still prefer Trump's foreign policy over Hillary Clinton's assumed one. Foreign policy is what causes Trump to not go into history as one of the worst presidents in history, while others even ed up more on domestic policy (like the presidents before the ACW). Would Romney be a better president than Trump, probably. Was Bush a better president than Trump? No. But what became very clear during Trump's presidency, is how lucky we were to had Barack Obama, and while i'm ideologically not that similar to Obama, i cannot deny the influence and the charisma Obama had to change to world, and that's what I admire about Obama. He was a respectable and charismatic president who was the president of all Americans, and while definitely not perfect, i think it will take a long time before we will see a better president than Obama again. It will require a Democratic trifecta and an ambitious president who is ready to change things, and make a leap forward into the dawn of a new age, and is able to convince a majority of the Americans of the benefits of a Scandinavian social democratic system, who is able to clearly point to the dangers of climate change, and who is able to legalize marijuana and stop racial profiling of the police. Do I think Joe Biden is that man? Not really. But I have high expectations of him regardless, and I would if i was an American vote for Joe Biden. Not enthusiastically but i feel pretty confident I would, while it took a long time to warm up for Joe Biden however. Until 2019, i preferred Trump over Biden, but it changed.

User avatar
Lakigigar
Posts: 1353
Joined: Oct 31, 2015
Location: Belgium
Contact:

#17774

Post by Lakigigar » June 26th, 2020, 7:46 pm

On 8 nov we will see people spamming on twitter: "you're fired" lol.

User avatar
St. Gloede
Moderator
Posts: 11227
Joined: May 06, 2011
Contact:

#17775

Post by St. Gloede » June 26th, 2020, 7:55 pm

Onderhond wrote:
June 26th, 2020, 3:17 pm
St. Gloede wrote:
June 26th, 2020, 2:14 pm
but if say black people can not protest systematic abuse because certain white people can't handle it
Well, you call my examples not "real" but then you come with this? :D
Very, very few people had problems with black protesters. Many people had problems with looters and the extreme, aggressive anti-police rhetoric. And they got a lot of pushbacks for saying that (lack of empathy, racism and whatnot). Forced to choose between two extremes, they ended up being against (black) protesters.
If this is your reply I am confused. You talked about the majority being so uncomfortable by minor grievances that they would support people you yourself described as leaning towards fascism.

I brought up a case where it is far more than a grievance and there is anti-cop rhetoric and indeed looting and you brush it off as not real when stating that it is in the same sentence? Maybe I was unclear, but this is what I was pointing out in terms of the reaction of people from marginalised communities to violence - and also where I challenged your concern. Why is the person spouting a anti-cop narrative bad as a result of seeing cop violence not in the same category of concern as a person in the majority spouting an anti-black narrative because they saw black people being aggressive or violent?
St. Gloede wrote:
June 26th, 2020, 2:14 pm
Advertisers choosing to go a different route is not some abstract evil boogieman, nor is a TV channel taking down an episode or a show. You are talking about individual organizations, companies, people doing what they think is best - it is not this large left forcing this through and breaking up traditional culture.

I.e. these things are not "real".
There is no organized culture war, but I wouldn't say that means it isn't "real". It affects the experiences and lives of people directly, which makes it extremely real. And no, there are no laws against it, but they are strong signs of a changing morality compass. I mean, no person at the BBC wakes up one morning and decides "you know what, this Little Britain stuff, let's take it off". These are direct reactions to a changing narrative. And it's the left driving these narratives.
St. Gloede wrote:
June 26th, 2020, 2:14 pm
We are mostly on the same page here, but there are some odd contentions, mainly the bizarre ideas re: Easter, Falwty Towers, etc. I hope you realize that this is just a right-wing culture war talking point with little basis in facts - unless you think that individuals or organizations making such changes is somehow really bad(?).
Well, it's bad because they're not just random decisions by individuals. The arguments are blown up for sure (they always end up at the end of the slippery slope), but the facts are there and it would be nice if they could be addressed without words like "bizarre" (which they are not and which is bona fide hyperbole).
Again, there might be a misunderstanding, I'm not saying you can't discuss "it". Hell, we all saw saw the left in the UK tearing into the BBC for the Falwty Towers episode - you can obviously look at each events and all the events in context, what was and is bizarre to me is the framing you placed on it. No one is coming for Christmas, Easter, etc. Culture is changing sure, some things becomes tolerated, sure, some things change branding, sure, this has always been the case. There is no major threat to Christmas, Easter, etc. Everyone can still enjoy Little Britain and Fawlty Towers.

If you want to talk about oversensitivity or corporate branding, I'm all with you. If you want to point out how oversensitivity can be bad/dangerous, I'm with you - but from where I'm standing thevoversensitivity seems to be coming from the right - and the framing you added is essentially the same scary story they use to rally people to protect their culture - while it again has little basis in fact. It is just outrage culture. There is ridiculous oversensitivity and outrage culture from essentially all sides, but the right has been working hard to build an outrage machine around the idea that critique, observations and individual, organizational, etc. choices are attack/outrage in itself and that is just false.

User avatar
Onderhond
Posts: 4898
Joined: Dec 23, 2012
Contact:

#17776

Post by Onderhond » June 26th, 2020, 8:50 pm

St. Gloede wrote:
June 26th, 2020, 7:55 pm
Maybe I was unclear, but this is what I was pointing out in terms of the reaction of people from marginalised communities to violence - and also where I challenged your concern. Why is the person spouting a anti-cop narrative bad as a result of seeing cop violence not in the same category of concern as a person in the majority spouting an anti-black narrative because they saw black people being aggressive or violent?
I would say they're both equally right/wrong, but there's a priority there and if you want to really (seriously) take on racism, it'll never happen with a polarized right there to outrage over every step you take. So the primary concern would be to bring them back to moderate positions, where they inherently are already. And to me, that's a responsibility of the left.

St. Gloede wrote:
June 26th, 2020, 7:55 pm
There is no major threat to Christmas, Easter, etc. Everyone can still enjoy Little Britain and Fawlty Towers.
Might be my age, but I remember this exact rhetoric, only saying that nothing would change. And then little things did change, mostly for no good reason and without any result. Again, I do agree that there is no targeted culture war, but collectively small things are being chipped away, which is exactly what those people were feeling in the first place. If the left calls out a slippery slope fallacy and then things do start to slip further, well ...

St. Gloede wrote:
June 26th, 2020, 7:55 pm
but from where I'm standing the oversensitivity seems to be coming from the right
Yeah, I think we covered before that we seem to be standing in different places when it comes to this point. Although I will agree that the right is very good at weaponizing the techniques of the left (which is a bit worrisome, especially when you see something like the recent K-Pop stuff playing out). But the right seems mostly reactionary to me, and mostly just acts when provoked.

User avatar
St. Gloede
Moderator
Posts: 11227
Joined: May 06, 2011
Contact:

#17777

Post by St. Gloede » June 27th, 2020, 2:15 pm

Onderhond wrote:
June 26th, 2020, 8:50 pm
St. Gloede wrote:
June 26th, 2020, 7:55 pm
Maybe I was unclear, but this is what I was pointing out in terms of the reaction of people from marginalised communities to violence - and also where I challenged your concern. Why is the person spouting a anti-cop narrative bad as a result of seeing cop violence not in the same category of concern as a person in the majority spouting an anti-black narrative because they saw black people being aggressive or violent?
I would say they're both equally right/wrong, but there's a priority there and if you want to really (seriously) take on racism, it'll never happen with a polarized right there to outrage over every step you take. So the primary concern would be to bring them back to moderate positions, where they inherently are already. And to me, that's a responsibility of the left.
I'm afraid I don't see how this is possible or reasonable.

The position essentially becomes every single person who could be perceived to be left wing has to use their platform with neutral or moderate language. It is just not possible.

More importantly:

Essentially all major figures on the left that I'm aware of does exactly what you are asking them to already.

I realize "the left" is different across the world, but the main political forces considered left are usually extremely moderate on the social agenda and will be doing next to nothing to egg on the opposition in such a way. You don't see Sanders or AOC, for instance, yelling ACAB. Sanders generally appeals to many Trump voters. He focuses on shared needs anduses moderate, inclusive language that does not push socially conservative voters away - and this is common across the board.

That is why the right wing goes out of their way to not weaponized actual leading figures but university students, and random people who are often unlikely to even be left wing.

I know it is a few years ago now, but remember that in the '16 primaries it was hard right Liberal politicians like Hillary Clinton that pushed this kind of opposing rhetoric and focusing on minor trifles you have a problem with. This is really common for socially progressive right-wingers. They get people onboard and often hide away economic policy with this type of language. I realize of course that this is further warped by the fact that in the US the Democrats (a hard right to right-wing extremist party on the world stage) is considered left - and that everything is mixed into one thing.

And this is also the issue when you say "the left". The left is not one thing, depending on where you are the label can even include Liberals - and even if you break it down into Social Democrats on the centre-left and Socialist on the centre-right there are just too many different ideologies and viewpoints that don't go well together. You have plenty of Socially conservative leftists, and you have peaceful, violent, reformist, revolutionary, etc. ideologies, that just can't get along - same on the right. Try getting Islamist Fundamentalists, Christian Fundamentalists, Progressives/Social Liberals, Fascists, Liberals and Right-Libertarians/Anarcho-Capitalists to get along. It doesn't really work. And you can't just throw them into one bag.

And putting the onus on "the left" to make sure that people don't get offended into hurting others - and that the onus is on the left to be nice so that people don't do bad things... especially with such an extreme standard as you seem to put in place - I don't see how it is possible.

And this also takes us back to people's reaction.

If I understand you correctly people who are offended by ACAP and as such support police violence are caused by the left - but I don't see a similar look at what causes people, especially black people in the US to say ACAB (or do actually bad things). You simply say the reaction is equally bad. I disagree, I think the latter is a lot more justified - but the point I am trying to get through is that people will react when they feel attacked - and the feeling of attack and the reality of attack seems more real for black people facing police brutality and white people being scandalized by a minority of protestors looting and committing violence. There is a major difference there.

[
St. Gloede wrote:
June 26th, 2020, 7:55 pm
There is no major threat to Christmas, Easter, etc. Everyone can still enjoy Little Britain and Fawlty Towers.
Might be my age, but I remember this exact rhetoric, only saying that nothing would change. And then little things did change, mostly for no good reason and without any result. Again, I do agree that there is no targeted culture war, but collectively small things are being chipped away, which is exactly what those people were feeling in the first place. If the left calls out a slippery slope fallacy and then things do start to slip further, well ...
I don't understand this paragraph I'm afraid. What does the reference to people claiming things won't change mean? Society always changes. Go 50 years back and you'd be horrified, send those people 50 years back they'd be horrified. Society always evolves, morals change, that's just how it is. Small things will be chipped away. Big things will be chipped away. Depending who you are that can be fantastic, terrible or inconsequential, but it always happens. In terms of the slippery slope of change there are always good things and bad things depending on who you are, it doesn't say very much.

If you mean in terms of "appeasement" and what is often labeled "PC culture", sure, there are major issues there - but plenty in the left stand up against this too - but there are also so many ideas jumbled together here. I think BBC taking down the Falwty Towers episode is ridiculous, but clearly it is inconsequential if it was legally banned on the other hand that would be a major issue on free speech. Is that the kind of slippery slope you refer to? In that case I would be more worried about the right than the left - though people advocating legal censorship of art will find proponents on all sides (and ironically, there is a double meaning here, i.e. socially conservative left-winger and right-wingers and socially progressive left/right-wingers who promote censorship can form alliances on what they want banned).
St. Gloede wrote:
June 26th, 2020, 7:55 pm
but from where I'm standing the oversensitivity seems to be coming from the right
Yeah, I think we covered before that we seem to be standing in different places when it comes to this point. Although I will agree that the right is very good at weaponizing the techniques of the left (which is a bit worrisome, especially when you see something like the recent K-Pop stuff playing out). But the right seems mostly reactionary to me, and mostly just acts when provoked.
Yes, that is a disagreement I don't think we'll resolve as it is based on perception and what we see - and likely also what we think is an overreaction, etc. Just to repeat what I said earlier though re: "techniques of the left" which is that often they are just random people or major right-wing corporations like Disney or Liberals playing Liberal identity politics - and labelling any of that as "techniques of the left" is just odd to me.

User avatar
Dolwphin
Posts: 4418
Joined: Jul 10, 2011
Location: Sweden
Contact:

#17778

Post by Dolwphin » June 27th, 2020, 4:16 pm

St. Gloede wrote:
June 26th, 2020, 7:34 pm
Dolwphin wrote:
June 26th, 2020, 3:20 pm
You are hopeless St. Gloede , you refuse to listen to what I'm saying.

1. Right-wing populism does not equal fascism
2. Populists have populism in common ; especially actual voters.
2b) Differences also exists; agreement sometimes arrived at through different reasoning
3. Social conservatism (moderate) + left economic policy is a combination that exists
4. Thus it is not morally reprehensible for co-op between left/right-wing populists

5. You don't think it is hyperbole do label your political opponents as fascists?
But... You are lying.

1. Correct... It does not. Never claimed it did. Lie 1

2. Populism is not one thing... (Not going to call this a lie, it could be, but I'll be kind here)

3. Yes, it does, I have repeatedly said so, including the post you are replying to. Lie 2.

4. Never claimed it was. Lie 3. (+how is that a thus, 2 out of 3 had nothing to do with this)

5. Never did. Lie 4.

So... 4 obvious lies, and one likely deception. Why are you just lying on repeat?

This is genuinely absurd and sad behavior... :facepalm:

Are you just bored and trolling for fun?
I give up, go ahead with your talk about fascism and concentration camps if you think it is so funny to troll and appear cool for a tiny sub-group on the left. World peace. :hug:
Top 250 | RYM | Letterboxd

Member of the Experimental Mafia | What's My Line? #1 Fan



User avatar
St. Gloede
Moderator
Posts: 11227
Joined: May 06, 2011
Contact:

#17781

Post by St. Gloede » June 27th, 2020, 4:51 pm

Dolwphin wrote:
June 27th, 2020, 4:16 pm
St. Gloede wrote:
June 26th, 2020, 7:34 pm
Dolwphin wrote:
June 26th, 2020, 3:20 pm
You are hopeless St. Gloede , you refuse to listen to what I'm saying.

1. Right-wing populism does not equal fascism
2. Populists have populism in common ; especially actual voters.
2b) Differences also exists; agreement sometimes arrived at through different reasoning
3. Social conservatism (moderate) + left economic policy is a combination that exists
4. Thus it is not morally reprehensible for co-op between left/right-wing populists

5. You don't think it is hyperbole do label your political opponents as fascists?
But... You are lying.

1. Correct... It does not. Never claimed it did. Lie 1

2. Populism is not one thing... (Not going to call this a lie, it could be, but I'll be kind here)

3. Yes, it does, I have repeatedly said so, including the post you are replying to. Lie 2.

4. Never claimed it was. Lie 3. (+how is that a thus, 2 out of 3 had nothing to do with this)

5. Never did. Lie 4.

So... 4 obvious lies, and one likely deception. Why are you just lying on repeat?

This is genuinely absurd and sad behavior... :facepalm:

Are you just bored and trolling for fun?
I give up, go ahead with your talk about fascism and concentration camps if you think it is so funny to troll and appear cool for a tiny sub-group on the left. World peace. :hug:
Every claim you made was a lie, I called you on it and you are unphased and continue with more absurdity ... This proves that you have been trolling. I'm not sure what is causing you act this way, but I hope you are ok and that this pattern of trolling changes.

User avatar
Dolwphin
Posts: 4418
Joined: Jul 10, 2011
Location: Sweden
Contact:

#17782

Post by Dolwphin » June 27th, 2020, 6:41 pm

St. Gloede wrote:
June 27th, 2020, 4:51 pm
Dolwphin wrote:
June 27th, 2020, 4:16 pm
St. Gloede wrote:
June 26th, 2020, 7:34 pm


But... You are lying.

1. Correct... It does not. Never claimed it did. Lie 1

2. Populism is not one thing... (Not going to call this a lie, it could be, but I'll be kind here)

3. Yes, it does, I have repeatedly said so, including the post you are replying to. Lie 2.

4. Never claimed it was. Lie 3. (+how is that a thus, 2 out of 3 had nothing to do with this)

5. Never did. Lie 4.

So... 4 obvious lies, and one likely deception. Why are you just lying on repeat?

This is genuinely absurd and sad behavior... :facepalm:

Are you just bored and trolling for fun?
I give up, go ahead with your talk about fascism and concentration camps if you think it is so funny to troll and appear cool for a tiny sub-group on the left. World peace. :hug:
Every claim you made was a lie, I called you on it and you are unphased and continue with more absurdity ... This proves that you have been trolling. I'm not sure what is causing you act this way, but I hope you are ok and that this pattern of trolling changes.
Thanks for labeling my opinions as "lies", sorry for wrong think! :$
Top 250 | RYM | Letterboxd

Member of the Experimental Mafia | What's My Line? #1 Fan

User avatar
St. Gloede
Moderator
Posts: 11227
Joined: May 06, 2011
Contact:

#17783

Post by St. Gloede » June 27th, 2020, 7:46 pm

Dolwphin wrote:
June 27th, 2020, 6:41 pm
St. Gloede wrote:
June 27th, 2020, 4:51 pm
Dolwphin wrote:
June 27th, 2020, 4:16 pm


I give up, go ahead with your talk about fascism and concentration camps if you think it is so funny to troll and appear cool for a tiny sub-group on the left. World peace. :hug:
Every claim you made was a lie, I called you on it and you are unphased and continue with more absurdity ... This proves that you have been trolling. I'm not sure what is causing you act this way, but I hope you are ok and that this pattern of trolling changes.
Thanks for labeling my opinions as "lies", sorry for wrong think! :$
If there is any confusion the lies refer to the 4 lies concerning my positions quoted above.

However, it is impossible that you did not realize this, making your post another clear example of trolling.

This is against forum policy.

User avatar
Knaldskalle
Moderator
Posts: 9936
Joined: May 09, 2011
Location: New Mexico, Trumpistan
Contact:

#17784

Post by Knaldskalle » June 27th, 2020, 9:22 pm

Pretentious Hipster wrote:
June 27th, 2020, 4:49 pm
*Equality unlocked*

Phew, we can go back to our quarantines now.
ImageImageImageImage

Please don't hurt yourself, talk to someone.

User avatar
Onderhond
Posts: 4898
Joined: Dec 23, 2012
Contact:

#17785

Post by Onderhond » June 27th, 2020, 9:25 pm

Pretentious Hipster wrote:
June 27th, 2020, 4:49 pm
Start by unarming people.

User avatar
Dolwphin
Posts: 4418
Joined: Jul 10, 2011
Location: Sweden
Contact:

#17786

Post by Dolwphin » June 27th, 2020, 10:30 pm

St. Gloede wrote:
June 27th, 2020, 7:46 pm
Dolwphin wrote:
June 27th, 2020, 6:41 pm
St. Gloede wrote:
June 27th, 2020, 4:51 pm


Every claim you made was a lie, I called you on it and you are unphased and continue with more absurdity ... This proves that you have been trolling. I'm not sure what is causing you act this way, but I hope you are ok and that this pattern of trolling changes.
Thanks for labeling my opinions as "lies", sorry for wrong think! :$
If there is any confusion the lies refer to the 4 lies concerning my positions quoted above.

However, it is impossible that you did not realize this, making your post another clear example of trolling.

This is against forum policy.
I see you, I hear you, now it is time for me to listen and adjust my thoughts to be in alignment with the authorities. Yes, that Saagar is very bad Nazi actually and Krystall a privileged white woman white-washing fascism-adjacent thought. There was this sneaky RUSSIAN bot that manipulated me into thinking for myself. SORRY! It won't ever happen agaIn. (l)
Top 250 | RYM | Letterboxd

Member of the Experimental Mafia | What's My Line? #1 Fan

User avatar
Onderhond
Posts: 4898
Joined: Dec 23, 2012
Contact:

#17787

Post by Onderhond » June 28th, 2020, 11:54 am

I'm going to reply in brief, because it's Sunday and I don't feel like wrapping my head around politics all day, so sorry for that :lol:
I also agree that we're just discussing relatively minor differences in stances here, so it's probably not worth it spending another day of back and forth.

St. Gloede wrote:
June 27th, 2020, 2:15 pm
And this is also the issue when you say "the left". The left is not one thing,
Neither is the right, depending on what level you want to discuss them. When you talk detailed politics, I agree there's a lot of nuance. When you talk 80% of the voters, there's really just one clear left, one clear right and some centrists everybody seems to hate (because they won't pick sides). Just wander on Twitter, or through some comment sections of newspapers for a while, and you'll quickly get a feel for how polarized people's opinions are. Those are the definitions of left/right that matter to me though (and which I refer to), because these are the majority of the people casting a vote.

St. Gloede wrote:
June 27th, 2020, 2:15 pm
If I understand you correctly people who are offended by ACAP and as such support police violence are caused by the left - but I don't see a similar look at what causes people, especially black people in the US to say ACAB (or do actually bad things). You simply say the reaction is equally bad. I disagree, I think the latter is a lot more justified - but the point I am trying to get through is that people will react when they feel attacked - and the feeling of attack and the reality of attack seems more real for black people facing police brutality and white people being scandalized by a minority of protestors looting and committing violence.
Do I find the anger of colored people more justified than the reactions of white people? Absolutely. Do I think anger justifies crude, stupid reactions? No. Do I think it's even helpful to map people's anger on an absolute scale? No, because that's not how happiness works for people. Ultimately you want to find a good solution, and because you're dealing with people, fairness and justness don't necessarily mean that much.

St. Gloede wrote:
June 26th, 2020, 7:55 pm
Society always changes. Go 50 years back and you'd be horrified, send those people 50 years back they'd be horrified. Society always evolves, morals change, that's just how it is. Small things will be chipped away. Big things will be chipped away. Depending who you are that can be fantastic, terrible or inconsequential, but it always happens. In terms of the slippery slope of change there are always good things and bad things depending on who you are, it doesn't say very much.
Things change, but how that change comes about matters. I as a person have changed too. Simple things like how I dress for example. Used to wear lots of track suits, now I wear mostly jeans. It happened because I felt it suited me better. But you know what I wouldn't stand for? Some guy coming up to me and telling me I needed different pants because he was offended by the ones I'm wearing.

Societies are harder of course, it's not just 1 person but an entire hivemind of many different people. Many of these clashes in the past have been generational in nature (and they were just as ugly), now they're also becoming more racial and cultural, which makes it even tougher to deal with for (older) people.

User avatar
St. Gloede
Moderator
Posts: 11227
Joined: May 06, 2011
Contact:

#17788

Post by St. Gloede » June 28th, 2020, 12:43 pm

I don't think I have any disagreements with the above. :cheers:

(The only potential slight difference being the last two paragraph, as I do see validity in talking about things that could be harmful, hurtful, etc. While informing people that X behavior/tradition is seen as hurtful or even could be argued to have a damaging social effect to X group can and does lead to heightened emotion, offense on all sides and anger it can also a healthy and neccesary discussion to have. Unfortunately many people tend to act in destructive, unhelpful ways, that can't be helped, but the main conversation can be made productive)



User avatar
GruesomeTwosome
Donator
Posts: 3109
Joined: Feb 03, 2017
Location: Industrial Wasteland, USA
Contact:

#17791

Post by GruesomeTwosome » June 28th, 2020, 11:18 pm

As if he hadn’t made his racial views clear enough, the President of the United States retweeted a video (and later deleted it) praising these Trump supporters, which included a guy repeatedly yelling “white power”:
Image


And here is the video:
I’m to remember every man I've seen fall into a plate of spaghetti???

My IMDB profile
ICM
Letterboxd

User avatar
Kublai Khan
Posts: 1155
Joined: Nov 09, 2014
Location: Sarasota, FL
Contact:

#17792

Post by Kublai Khan » June 29th, 2020, 4:25 am

I'm enjoying the Thai's media sass.

https://www.thaienquirer.com/13861/fore ... sh-colony/
The protests began in the small province of Minnesota, located in the agrarian ‘Middle West,’ over the killing of an ethnic minority by state security forces.
Owner of three platinums:
  • FilmTotaal top 100
  • IMDb's 1980s Top 50
  • IMDb's Animation Top 50


User avatar
Knaldskalle
Moderator
Posts: 9936
Joined: May 09, 2011
Location: New Mexico, Trumpistan
Contact:

#17794

Post by Knaldskalle » June 29th, 2020, 3:54 pm

Kublai Khan wrote:
June 29th, 2020, 4:25 am
I'm enjoying the Thai's media sass.

https://www.thaienquirer.com/13861/fore ... sh-colony/
The protests began in the small province of Minnesota, located in the agrarian ‘Middle West,’ over the killing of an ethnic minority by state security forces.
Thank you for this! Really liking their new story on Russia offering bounties on US soldiers in Afghanistan, correctly pointing out that the US did the exact same thing in the '80s when the occupier was the Soviet Union.
ImageImageImageImage

Please don't hurt yourself, talk to someone.

User avatar
Knaldskalle
Moderator
Posts: 9936
Joined: May 09, 2011
Location: New Mexico, Trumpistan
Contact:

#17795

Post by Knaldskalle » June 29th, 2020, 3:57 pm

I just had a flash of a future scenario in my mind. Trump after his term ends can't travel abroad because other countries actually take the Interpol arrest warrant seriously, yet he can't stay in the US because prosecutors are after him... :whistling:
ImageImageImageImage

Please don't hurt yourself, talk to someone.

User avatar
GruesomeTwosome
Donator
Posts: 3109
Joined: Feb 03, 2017
Location: Industrial Wasteland, USA
Contact:

#17796

Post by GruesomeTwosome » June 29th, 2020, 4:23 pm

Knaldskalle wrote:
June 29th, 2020, 3:57 pm
I just had a flash of a future scenario in my mind. Trump after his term ends can't travel abroad because other countries actually take the Interpol arrest warrant seriously, yet he can't stay in the US because prosecutors are after him... :whistling:
Upcoming Trump biopic directed by Roman Polanski, perhaps?
I’m to remember every man I've seen fall into a plate of spaghetti???

My IMDB profile
ICM
Letterboxd

User avatar
Knaldskalle
Moderator
Posts: 9936
Joined: May 09, 2011
Location: New Mexico, Trumpistan
Contact:

#17797

Post by Knaldskalle » June 29th, 2020, 5:58 pm

GruesomeTwosome wrote:
June 29th, 2020, 4:23 pm
Knaldskalle wrote:
June 29th, 2020, 3:57 pm
I just had a flash of a future scenario in my mind. Trump after his term ends can't travel abroad because other countries actually take the Interpol arrest warrant seriously, yet he can't stay in the US because prosecutors are after him... :whistling:
Upcoming Trump biopic directed by Roman Polanski, perhaps?
:poshclap:
ImageImageImageImage

Please don't hurt yourself, talk to someone.

User avatar
Pretentious Hipster
Donator
Posts: 20439
Joined: Oct 24, 2011
Contact:

#17798

Post by Pretentious Hipster » June 29th, 2020, 6:15 pm

My source of news and memes just got banned from Reddit :( gonna be less active

User avatar
Armoreska
Posts: 12141
Joined: Nov 01, 2012
Location: Ukraine, former Free Territory
Contact:

#17799

Post by Armoreska » June 29th, 2020, 7:53 pm

Pretentious Hipster wrote:
June 29th, 2020, 6:15 pm
My source of news and memes just got banned from Reddit :( gonna be less active
More info on that?
Image
currently working towards a vegan/free world + thru such film lists (besides TV): ANARCHISTS, 2010s bests, RW Fassbinder, Yasujiro Ozu, Eric Rohmer, Visual Effects nominees, kid-related stuff, great animes (mini-serie or feature), very 80s movies, 17+ sci-fi lists on watchlist, ENVIRO, remarkable Silent Films and Pre-Code (exploring 1925 atm) and every shorts and docu list I'm aware of and
viewtopic.php?f=1&t=1434
and "Gordon" Liu Chia-Hui/Liu Chia-Liang and Yuen Woo-ping and "Sammo" Hung Kam-bo

User avatar
Pretentious Hipster
Donator
Posts: 20439
Joined: Oct 24, 2011
Contact:

#17800

Post by Pretentious Hipster » June 29th, 2020, 8:50 pm

Armoreska wrote:
June 29th, 2020, 7:53 pm
Pretentious Hipster wrote:
June 29th, 2020, 6:15 pm
My source of news and memes just got banned from Reddit :( gonna be less active
More info on that?
https://www.theverge.com/2020/6/29/2130 ... licy-rules

Post Reply