The Epitome of Leftist Hypocrisy

[WestCanMan]

A former ESPN reporter, Chris Palmer, was on his twitter account, lustily cheering on the rioting & arson when a low-income housing building in his city was being burned down. 

Quote

Burn that shit down! Burn it all down!

He sung a different tune when the rioting got too close to his gated complex:

Quote

They just attacked our sister community down the street. It’s a gated community and they tried to climb the gates. They had to beat them back. Then destroyed a Starbucks and are now in front of my building. Get these animals TF out of my neighborhood. Go back to where you live.

So when they were destroying other people's businesses and homes it was AWESOME!!!!!! Then when they came within 100 yards they were "animals who didn't belong in his neighbourhood" lol. The little bitch called the cops. Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't that evil? Aren't police forces supposed to be defunded now? 

I can promise you that there's not a single person who posts on this forum who would support the destruction of their own home or business, but all of these little hypocrites were ok with it when it was happening 500 miles away. "It's just a part of the overall protests. There's a good reason for it." Ok Chris Palmer. 

[bush_cheney2004]

The leftist rioters in Minneapolis burned down a 190 unit affordable housing complex that was almost completed.   

Brilliant....

http://tcbmag.com/news/articles/2020/may/protest-violence-destroys-30m-affordable-housing-project

Edited June 6, 2020 by bush_cheney2004

[scribblet]

Sad.  Last I heard 15 people have been killed, I guess these lives don't matter. 

https://dailycaller.com/2020/06/05/15-people-died-protests-riots-george-floyd-death/

 

[WestCanMan]

43 minutes ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

The leftist rioters in Minneapolis burned down a 190 unit affordable housing complex that was almost completed.   

Brilliant....

http://tcbmag.com/news/articles/2020/may/protest-violence-destroys-30m-affordable-housing-project

The Dems/leftists do like a good homeless crisis, don't they?

Can't have no affordable housing here, nuh-uh.

[Rue]

The phenomena you discuss is not leftist or for that matter rightist political ideology its called contagion theory or crowd frenzy or mob or herd mentality.

You are choosing to use it now in political context to suggest its a leftist belief. Of course its not its no more a leftist belief than it is a rightist belief. Any humans in a mob can act this way.

Contagion theory would explain that a larger a group becomes the more it has a "hypnotic influence"  on those in the group. Chemicals in the brain are activated lowering inhibition. The effect of a crowd on your brain is similar to alcohol. It releases drugs that paralyze the frontal lobe lowering your inhibitions.

Another phenomena that probably also mixes with it is called convergence theory. This is where like-minded individuals already had their anger in them before they came together then the contagion phenomena causes the like-minded anger to trigger itself like a small spark of fire to a tank of gas.

Bottom line is mob frenzy is identically exhibited by rightist and leftist and all humans. 

Wes and those who have an agenda to turn it into a leftist phenomena do so because of their agenda. We could easily have leftists on this board saying the exact same things providing examples of rightists doing the same.

It misses the point of human behaviour and tries to project the biases of the anti leftist to change the actual phenomena's root causes to shared political beliefs.

Most people who riot have no specific identical ideology. What they have is anger.

What you see in the States is a combination of people physically contained for a long period backlashing against physical restraint from Covid 19 plus a common sense of anger over police brutality that never ends in their minds as shown to them in the media.

Interestingly those quick to call it leftist use the exact same anger reaction phenomena they look for each other and form common pools or gangs of thought to rationalization the expression of their anger.

Having worn a uniform and been spit on and having had to be part of work requiring we go into angry crowds to arrest people or arrest someone I can assure you the spit from either direction in a riot is no different.

 

 

[WestCanMan]

2 minutes ago, Rue said:

The phenomena you discuss is not leftist or for that matter rightist political ideology its called contagion theory or crowd frenzy or mob or herd mentality.

You are choosing to use it now in political context to suggest its a leftist belief. Of course its not its no more a leftist belief than it is a rightist belief. Any humans in a mob can act this way.

I didn't say that mob mentality is a leftist phenomenon, I just said that this rioting looting and arson was a leftist phenomenon.

Do you think any Republicans/Conservatives are happy about cop-killing, looting and arson?

Only leftists are cheering for the riots. Only CNN and the Dems are talking about defunding police like the subject has merit. 

https://www.straitstimes.com/world/united-states/obama-voices-support-for-young-us-protesters

Obama and CNN constantly praise protests and protestors and they outright refuse to speak critically of the BLM & Antifa, they ignore rioting and looting, the arson... It's all good to them.

I hardly ever heard about Obama for the last 3 years. As soon as the rioting happened he was all over the place pumping his fist. I think that piece of crap actually likes the fact that America is just the way he left it again. If he didn't like America burning, he didn't show it.

I saw right-wing protests, most notable in Michigan. They weren't pretty, they were actually scary because of the number of guns involved, but there was no rioting or looting. 

[Moonlight Graham]

I like the celebs who complain about Trump's wall idea, meanwhile they live in gated communities with big walls/fences/gates around their homes to keep unwanted people out.

[Rue]

20 hours ago, WestCanMan said:

I didn't say that mob mentality is a leftist phenomenon, I just said that this rioting looting and arson was a leftist phenomenon.

Do you think any Republicans/Conservatives are happy about cop-killing, looting and arson?

Only leftists are cheering for the riots. Only CNN and the Dems are talking about defunding police like the subject has merit. 

https://www.straitstimes.com/world/united-states/obama-voices-support-for-young-us-protesters

Obama and CNN constantly praise protests and protestors and they outright refuse to speak critically of the BLM & Antifa, they ignore rioting and looting, the arson... It's all good to them.

I hardly ever heard about Obama for the last 3 years. As soon as the rioting happened he was all over the place pumping his fist. I think that piece of crap actually likes the fact that America is just the way he left it again. If he didn't like America burning, he didn't show it.

I saw right-wing protests, most notable in Michigan. They weren't pretty, they were actually scary because of the number of guns involved, but there was no rioting or looting. 

Yes of  course you did and now repeat it but you add on right wingers too. 

We both agreed violence and burning things down is bull.  I just challenged the selectivity of how it was done to blame all people upset about Floyd protesting as being leftist.

 

Edited June 7, 2020 by Rue

[Infidel Dog]

21 hours ago, Rue said:

The phenomena you discuss is not leftist or for that matter rightist political ideology its called contagion theory or crowd frenzy or mob or herd mentality.

You are choosing to use it now in political context to suggest its a leftist belief. Of course its not its no more a leftist belief than it is a rightist belief. Any humans in a mob can act this way.

Contagion theory would explain that a larger a group becomes the more it has a "hypnotic influence"  on those in the group. Chemicals in the brain are activated lowering inhibition. The effect of a crowd on your brain is similar to alcohol. It releases drugs that paralyze the frontal lobe lowering your inhibitions.

Do you have a nifty little neologism for the progressive left's tendency to come up with a new label or redefine an old one when some phenomena becomes inconvenient to them?

There's a difference between an infraction and a policy. When the left counters somebody who dares notice a broad tendency of hypocrisy or outright stupidity and they point at some similar anomalous infraction of the rules of common sense from the other side what they're really saying is pay no attention to what's obvious to your lying eyes.

WestCan Man is correct. The tendency of the left to mob up and attack is immediately apparent. And it's increasing. Yes you can most likely find some case where the right does it too, but it's not the same thing. With this new phenomena of cancel culture, for example, sure you can point at examples of an anti-abortionist group or traditional values organization writing nasty letters objecting to something somebody or some group has done but the broad tendency to dox, and attack individuals en mass who dare to counter progressive orthodoxy is a leftist phenomena. And that's just something people notice. They'll continue to notice it for as long as it continues to exist and no new or redefined term will stop that.

Edited June 7, 2020 by Infidel Dog

[Rue]

59 minutes ago, Moonlight Graham said:

I like the celebs who complain about Trump's wall idea, meanwhile they live in gated communities with big walls/fences/gates around their homes to keep unwanted people out.

We all are fat while telling others to diet. It's called Oprah Winfrey syndrome. Wes however concedes the point which means I say thank you to him.   

 

[Rue]

4 hours ago, Infidel Dog said:

Do you have a nifty little neologism for the progressive left's tendency to come up with a new label or redefine an old one when some phenomena becomes inconvenient to them?

 

 

To answer your question I have nothing for you. That would be illogical. You have already indicated you are not interested.

It is also again evident with your latest rhetorical question that you feel the need to keep proclaiming what you think  others must believe including me.

 You also  use the exercise of pronouncement  to try mock or patronize what you think are my challenges to your words with the reference to the term "nifty little neologisms"  which you use as a negative label to throw out and pass off as discussion because you have no idea ho wcto respond to the points I made to you.

You then ask me to stereotype others as you do demonstrating your inability to perceive or  conceive any thought you don't think comes from you.

This inability to see a difference between your own feelings and others I would suggest is repeating  a narcissistic trait I have noted in responses in tidentical syntax as yours. 

You should know by now names on forums mean little to me. Specific repeat responses, references, rhetorical posturing, for me reveals distinct repeat patterns indicative of the same personality profile using different names and when that dates I point it out. I do note all of them disappear quite quickly even the ones that play no it ain't so.  

 

 

 

 

 

Edited June 8, 2020 by Rue

[Infidel Dog]

2 hours ago, Rue said:

To answer your question I have nothing for you. That would be illogical. You have already indicated you are not interested.

In brain-training from a pseudo-intellectual? Yeah, no thanks.

But you like all these psych terms so much I imagine you're familiar with that one, 'projection.'  Now there's another one of the sort of I was talking about. If you look for it you can find exceptions where it would apply here or there to somebody on the right,  but as a guy who talks to a lot of Progressives I have to tell you, they don't seem to be able to go a paragraph without blowing out a good example of projection. They pretty much own it.

You, for example, need a mirror. Figuratively speaking, of course. 

[WestCanMan]

3 hours ago, Rue said:

Yes of  course you did and now repeat it but you add on right wingers too. 

We both agreed violence and burning things down is bull.  I just challenged the selectivity of how it was done to blame all people upset about Floyd protesting as being leftist.

No one is happy about Floyd's death, but the rioting and looting that happened under Obama's Presidency, and the rioting of the past couple weeks, is a Dem/Antifa/BLM phenomenon.

I'm not sure what part of that you disagree with.

Do you think that Conservatives (GOP) are endorsing the rioting and arson in any way? GOP are very outspoken against the rioting. They're not the ones who are acting like it's not happening very much, or that it's not out of place.

[Rue]

1 hour ago, WestCanMan said:

No one is happy about Floyd's death, but the rioting and looting that happened under Obama's Presidency, and the rioting of the past couple weeks, is a Dem/Antifa/BLM phenomenon.

I'm not sure what part of that you disagree with.

Do you think that Conservatives (GOP) are endorsing the rioting and arson in any way? GOP are very outspoken against the rioting. They're not the ones who are acting like it's not happening very much, or that it's not out of place.

I think saying Dems or Reps endorse violence is equally as problematic. You keep suggesting it's all part of a Dem conspiracy.  That to me is just as pointless as blaming it on Marxist professors or students.  It is just a subjective political label you throw on a mob. In fact Republicans have openly spoken out as Dems have against what happened. I am not aware of any Dem or Rep telling people to be violent and burn things down.  

Let me be precise. You assume the behaviour is because of Dems. To me that is scapegoating. You haven't a clue what political ideology the protesters are. You also  assume no Republican acted violently in t yg e Demos.

You see what you project. 

I see irrational people. You sed irrational people and assume they are Dems. That is the same shit that sees all blacks as no good or sees all cops as violent. You generalize based on subjective biases you project. 

Is it possible some violent protestors vote Dem, yes. However others may never vote or may be Rep.how would you know? I know former soldiers both Dem and Rep who have demonstrated and were in marchs and both were non violent and  you could be assuming they are violent Dems.

I leave American protests to Americans to define. It is their dialogue. 

Watching what happens on t.v. is not accurate.

Good people of all ideologies have been marching. Yes assholes are in the crowds. Are they leftist or Dems or commies?   Well they are assholes. Calling them assholes won't bring Floyd back nor does it  address what happened in a meaningful manner. 

Edited June 8, 2020 by Rue

[Michael Hardner]

14 minutes ago, Rue said:

To me that is scapegoating. You haven't a clue what political ideology the protesters are. You also  assume no Republican acted violently in t yg e Demos.

You see what you project. 

I see irrational people. You sed irrational people and assume they are Dems. That is the same shit that sees all blacks as no good or sees all cops as violent. You generalize based on subjective biases you project. 

Calling the Democrats 'leftists' is itself hyperbolic.  They are, by many measures, in the same league as Canadian Conservatives.

Really, the answer would be to issue a license that would allow you to discuss politics.  Of course, that would leave about 6 of us on here, the ones I don't have blocked.  

[Rue]

15 hours ago, Infidel Dog said:

In brain-training from a pseudo-intellectual? Yeah, no thanks.

But you like all these psych terms so much I imagine you're familiar with that one, 'projection.'  Now there's another one of the sort of I was talking about. If you look for it you can find exceptions where it would apply here or there to somebody on the right,  but as a guy who talks to a lot of Progressives I have to tell you, they don't seem to be able to go a paragraph without blowing out a good example of projection. They pretty much own it.

You, for example, need a mirror. Figuratively speaking, of course. 

What does brain training mean?  

In regards to the allegation of pseudo-intellectual can you explain what verification process you used to decipher I pretended to say what I did or pretended to have  scholarly expertise?

Does that also mean you are one as well since you clearly have  provided no scholarly sources or met anyone in Minnesota?

What exceptions are you talking about and how did you determine they only apply to people on the right some of the time?

What do you mean by right? Fascists, white supremacists,  people who agree with you...who exactly?

What do you mean by left? Communists? Socialists? Democrats? People you disagree with?

What is if you mean when you call someone a progressive and  how does a Progressive "blowout"a projection ? 

When you analyzed these  "blowout projections" what method of frequency measurement did you use?

Lol I  know you can't answer.

 Your syntax, codification, attempts at anological referencing suggests you are trying to process a response to me  from another language using  a translator to provide verbatim translation but are unable to properly understand the variation and change  of meanings you need on identical words  when their contextual reference changes. 

Vy sdelali.

I prefer Latin script.  

 

 

 

Edited June 8, 2020 by Rue

[New World Disorder]

On 6/6/2020 at 7:13 PM, WestCanMan said:

I didn't say that mob mentality is a leftist phenomenon, I just said that this rioting looting and arson was a leftist phenomenon.

The elites just looted the people to the tune of trillions. 

 

[Rue]

7 hours ago, New World Disorder said:

The elites just looted the people to the tune of trillions. 

 

I still would really love to know who these elitists are because I am convinced many who we think they are,  are not, and others we see as oppressed are actually elitists.

Some people claim the Rothchilds, Rockefeller, Liz Windsor,  the Vanderbilts, Bush, Satanist Mason Shapeshifter Draco Zionist white privileged men  are these elitists. 

I tend to think elitists in one sense are  anyone who coerces another for personal benefit which means every person on the  planet and then on another level  is actually constantly changing alliances of mutual interest groups. 

Either way it's too vague for me. I want names and addresses.

I suspect already Greg the Moderator. 

Edited June 8, 2020 by Rue

[Shady]

This is a perfect example of the domestic chicken hawks I was talking about last week.  There are several in this forum.  They support and encourage the destruction of property, without being at risk of it happening to them.  These keyboard warriors sit comfortably at home, advocating for other people to risk their lives and their futures.  But they’d be the first to call the police if something similar happened to them.  Notice how they’re not advocating for the defunding of the police in their communities, but the communities of others.  It’s white liberal guilt/hypocrisy at its worst.

These particular people are as bad as it gets.

[Infidel Dog]

14 hours ago, Rue said:

What does brain training mean?  

I can explain it to you but you won't listen so I'm not sure why I should bother.

You seem to just assume you have a superior understanding of what you believe others believe so you just ignore them and zip off in your mind to Rueville for further instructions.

I'll give you an example. Somebody mentioned Cultural Marxism. I posted an old video of an ex-KGB agent explaining Soviet style societal degradation techniques that are in the wild of western society even now.

You got on your soap box and rather than try to understand concepts you obviously don't, you lectured us about how we were simply talking "Marxist indoctrination." If you had understood you would know cultural Marxism is not real Marxism it's almost a rejection of it.

But you're not interested in learning something you don't know. You're only interested in conforming with what I'll call "the Progressive Agenda" and "brain training" others into conforming along with you. The problem is you don't know what I'm talking about. However if you follow your usual MO you're going to assume you are the expert because you yourself are "brain trained" to believe you have the superior understanding of what I believe.

You don't though so I don't know how I can talk to you. Tell you what though. If you're ever interested in learning what I and others are actually talking about I'll post you a video that explains it:

(Watch for the term "Passive Regressive." It refers to something you, in particular, should know about.)  

 

Edited June 8, 2020 by Infidel Dog

[WestCanMan]

15 hours ago, Rue said:

I think saying Dems or Reps endorse violence is equally as problematic. You keep suggesting it's all part of a Dem conspiracy.  That to me is just as pointless as blaming it on Marxist professors or students. 

I just said that the rioting/looting/arson is a Dem/CNN phenomenon, and it absolutely is. I did not say that it had anything to do with Marxism. That's a totally separate topic and you're putting words in my mouth Rue. The two may or may not be linked, I doubt it's a useful topic for discussion, and I didn't  say it.

 

Regarding the arson, looting and rioting: if you listen to the president and their media, (let's do away with pretending that Fox isn't GOP, and CNN isn't Dem) you'll get the clear picture that rioters and looters are criminal scum and the mayors/governors need to employ the full force of the law, whatever it takes, to stop it. Their rallying cry, is stop the riots.

If you listen to the Dems, Obama, and their media, the protests are great and mostly peaceful and there's no need for more protection even the morning after riots. They're not showing video of blacks and immigrants whose businesses have been destroyed, they just pour on more hatred and division every minute of the day. Their rallying cry, is get out on the streets, it's normal for a bit of damage to occur.

After the Ferguson shooting CNN refused to show M Brown's violence. They kept propagating the FALSE gentle Giant narrative, which was incorrect and incediary. Obama and CNN almost never talked about an end to the rioting and looting. Their talk-time was mainly dedicated to pumping up the legitimacy of the protests. Obama was not on a crusade to stop the riots. He wasn't upset by anthem-kneeling, which was against the NFL's policies at the time, hence it constituted lawful reason for firing. Obama was making it American's highest calling to "protest". 

 

Just in case I wasn't clear, I'll say it again - the rioting, looting and arson is almost exclusively a Dem/CNN phenomenon. Support within the Dem base is moderate-to-high, as a "normal side effect of a worthwhile cause". In the GOP circles, support of rioting is close to 0%, regardless of anything else. I will hazard a guess that Obama, CNN and the Dems would be really upset if there wasn't any rioting but I don't expect any of them would admit to it. 

[WestCanMan]

15 hours ago, Rue said:

I see irrational people. You sed irrational people and assume they are Dems. That is the same shit that sees all blacks as no good or sees all cops as violent. You generalize based on subjective biases you project. 

I see CNN and the Dems/Obama portraying the rioting and looting as an expression of anger towards injustice. That is a choice they make, and I'm saying what the consequences of their narrative are. I'm not generalizing, I'm telling you what the Dem leadership is asking of their supporters. Rage. Anger. Get out on the streets, be full of rage. 

When the "protests" turn violent, it's not considered "a heinous crime inflicted on businesses who had nothing to do with Floyd's death", it's talked about as "a normal side effect of so much rage at blatant systemic racism that is killing blacks".

They get exactly what they ask for. They devote their programming to it. They love a divided America. 

[Michael Hardner]

Divided America... brought to you by... checks notes... uh... Colin Powell, Mitt Romney, several jailed and unjailed former associates and secretaries of the current administration who describe the leader as 'immature'.... 

That's some reach the Democrats have, though.  

[eyeball]

51 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

That's some reach the Democrats have, though.  

 

[Hal 9000]

18 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

Calling the Democrats 'leftists' is itself hyperbolic.  They are, by many measures, in the same league as Canadian Conservatives.

Really, the answer would be to issue a license that would allow you to discuss politics.  Of course, that would leave about 6 of us on here, the ones I don't have blocked.  

Yeah, and us 6 would really miss you.