Is Boards.ie Extremely Right-Wing?

Saruhashi

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

They feed this Jewish lady three meals a day. She was not starving? If Nazis goal was to wipe out the Jewish people, why would they even feed her one meal a day?

Aaaaaand I really regret starting this thread now. FFS.

Saruhashi

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

When did i say i did not believe in a Holocust? The Nazis could have wiped out millions of Jews if all i know, but to not ask questions about it, that's dumb least to me. If we are to believe it, the Nazis starved every Jew there was, and beat them everyday mercilessly. There is just something just not right about the story when you see smiling, healthy, well feed kids, and mothers at Belsen.

Oh goddammit. Belsen was a CONCENTRATION CAMP.

It's not like mothers were queuing up with their children hoping for the opportunity to be let in.

Sure only 50,000 people died there but there were smiling women and children so it's not ALL bad, right?

The Nazis executed enough people that it greatly outweighs any kind of "skepticism" about how bad things really were.

I think you might also be confusing Boards with Stormfront.

begbysback

Wibbs wrote: »

Indeed, but B, that's how conversations work. They flow around a subject and go off on tangents. Personally speaking I could never quite understand the rigid "off topic" viewpoint/restriction on general subjects where such wanderings are likely to occur. In specialist topics sure. I mean a thread on say cycling that ended up talking about cats would be daft.

Absolutely agree, conversations digress, and the question of extremism was always going to end with Jews or Islam - my own personal view is that maybe AH should be a sanctuary from politics and religion. These seem to have their own space - I get it that some like to have such conversations regardless of habitat but lately these topics seem to have overflowed - maybe because the politics section is believed to be heavily moderated, or just a reflection of current times - anyways, I believe we should remove politics & religion from the world, unfortunately, as Yuval Noah Harari points out, these are the things which enable us to survive - so maybe we do need them, but just not in AH?

Wibbs

Saruhashi wrote: »

Haha. Yeah, I was starting to think the same over the past few pages.

Not really S. Yes there have been a tiny minority of posters that have come out with abject daftness and if someone wants to fixate on them, rather than the vast majority who call out that nonsense, then yeah said tweet makes sense. Well when I say the tweet makes sense... Only to an axe grinding hysteric.

I will say the good thing about Boards is you can read both sides of an argument, you can read some level headed opinions and you can read some rather worrying nonsense.

+1. Forums of this nature are far less of an echo chamber than reddit. Depending on the sub holocaust didn't happen would either be up voted to the top, or down voted to the bottom, reinforcing the correct think of whatever sub was involved. Though sadly such mixed environments like Boards/forums in general are getting rarer on the interwebs. It's more of them we need IMHO.

Wibbs

begbysback wrote: »

maybe because the politics section is believed to be heavily moderated, or just a reflection of current times

A little bit of both I'd reckon. Personally I avoid the Politics forums hereabouts. Mainly because the pool of posters is much smaller and you just know what you're gonna get by way of debate. This was the case with the older serious business Politics forum and continues with the Politics cafe. In AH you get a much wider spread of opinion.

ohnonotgmail

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

Can you provide me a source of another survivor of Belsen? I have hard time finding anyone online claiming the Nazis gassed Jews at Belsen or murdered them in the hundreds.

that is because nobody was gassed at belsen. it wasnt a death camp. Again your lack of basic knowledge on well researched subjects is shocking.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Wibbs

Depends on the cultural viewpoint too. I'd be "right wing" enough for an Irish person on the "left" side of the spectrum, whereas in America I'd be seen as damned near a communist.

For me we in Ireland need to stop this drift towards imported US political definitions and camps and attendant buzzwords and black and white thinking. This is not America. I personally cringe the hard one when I read/hear an Irish person using the word "cuck" or "SJW" and the like. About the worst I saw was someone posting MAGA. And they were from Waterford or wherever. This is not America. We have a quite different approach and culture and no amount of younger types saying "mom" or "store" is likely to change that anytime soon.

Captain Obvious

Wibbs wrote: »

Depends on the cultural viewpoint too. I'd be "right wing" enough for an Irish person on the "left" side of the spectrum, whereas in America I'd be seen as damned near a communist.

For me we in Ireland need to stop this drift towards imported US political definitions and camps and attendant buzzwords and black and white thinking. This is not America. I personally cringe the hard one when I read/hear an Irish person using the word "cuck" or "SJW" and the like. About the worst I saw was someone posting MAGA. And they were from Waterford or wherever. This is not America. We have a quite different approach and culture and no amount of younger types saying "mom" or "store" is likely to change that anytime soon.

That's crazy. "MEGA" is clearly a far superior acronym and much more relevant and accurate.

While it is very possible to get the lines between right and left wing confused. The comparison made in the op was to Stormfront so I think it's pretty safe to say they were referring the more negative aspects associated to the right.

angiogoir

I presume you're trolling? No major online forum is significantly right wing.

Wibbs

Captain Obvious wrote: »

The comparison made in the op was to Stormfront so I think it's pretty safe to say they were referring the more negative aspects associated to the right.

It's fine to point out that a group can have a tiny minority of [insert extreme view here], but beyond retarded to then claim that this is representative. Never mind that extreme views of pretty much any stripe around here are jumped on by the majority and ripped to shreds. Claiming Boards is anything like Stormfront is the wittering of someone finding what they already want to find. Eff all to do with reality.

Dantian

It's depressing how many right wing nutters are on here, but the fact that so many here acknowledge right wingers as nut jobs gives me hope.



So I'll say this:
1) No such thing as alt-right just facists and nazis
2) The Irish have more in common with Afro-Caribean people than WASP's so white confederate supporters are idiots
3) Irish Brexit is a stupid idea
4) Ireland needs to stop aligning itself with ****ed up US foreign policy.

Spider Web

Wibbs wrote: »

Depends on the cultural viewpoint too. I'd be "right wing" enough for an Irish person on the "left" side of the spectrum, whereas in America I'd be seen as damned near a communist.

For me we in Ireland need to stop this drift towards imported US political definitions and camps and attendant buzzwords and black and white thinking. This is not America. I personally cringe the hard one when I read/hear an Irish person using the word "cuck" or "SJW" and the like. About the worst I saw was someone posting MAGA. And they were from Waterford or wherever. This is not America. We have a quite different approach and culture and no amount of younger types saying "mom" or "store" is likely to change that anytime soon.

"SJW" - while I know the type of annoying, perpetually offended person it refers to - grates on me. Social justice is hardly a bad thing, and the stuff they rail about isn't social justice anyway. For instance, trying to stop child sex trafficking is social justice - and it's irritating the way it's now misrepresented.

- starts reading first 2 pages of discussion about whether boards.ie is extremely right-wing or not -
- skips to the last page-
- users now discussing about the holocaust and the jews -

... Seems about right.

Spider Web

Deleted User wrote: »

- starts reading first 2 pages of discussion about whether boards.ie is extremely right-wing or not -
- skips to the last page-
- users now discussing about the holocaust and the jews -

... Seems about right.

Does discussion mean rightwing? One member posted comments implying suspicion around the holocaust and numerous people challenged them.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Spider Web

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

I don't disagree with you as to the type of people "SJW" refers too - I just dislike the term, as it implies social justice only means the inane nonsense they get into a flap over. It denigrates the meaning of something important.

As I said, the term social justice should be referring to things like stopping child trafficking - not people whining about their gender being assumed.

Grayson

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

Apparently everything to the right of me.

Dantian

Deleted User wrote: »

- starts reading first 2 pages of discussion about whether boards.ie is extremely right-wing or not -
- skips to the last page-
- users now discussing about the holocaust and the jews -

... Seems about right.

something...something....Godwins Law

osarusan

The problem with the term SJW is that it seems to refer to the perpetually outraged victims of a particular persuasion only, whereas we can see from AH itself that there is no shortage of perpetually outraged victims on all sides.

If those waffling on about, say, gender neutral clothing, or indulging in an absurd victimhood fantasy about how the world is anti-white male, are not SJW, then what are they?

Spider Web

Spider Web wrote: »

Does discussion mean rightwing? One member posted comments implying suspicion around the holocaust and numerous people challenged them.

Oh, I'm not saying anything about discussion being right-wing. Just how when I started reading the first few posts it was people discussing the topic. And then I skip to the end, it's now people talking about jews and the holocaust.

It's standard for quite a few threads on boards - how it starts as one thing, but then becomes something entirely different. Often with people shouting, "right-wing!" and others shouting "liberal left".

Wibbs

Deleted User wrote: »

It's standard for quite a few threads on boards - how it starts as one thing, but then becomes something entirely different.

TBH B I bloody love that. I love when mad connections are made and a conversation ends up in areas you'd be unlikely to foresee. Then again I could hardly be described as a linear thinker.

Dantian

while I agree that there are anti-male women out there, just as there are anti-women men.

The only people on the internet I see with a victimhood fantasy are white christian men who dont like the idea of having to share the play pen and who throw hissy fits when they have to hear about other groups getting equal treatment and consider it an attack on thier power. they tend to be the same people who claim BLM are a terrorist group, or call feminists feminazi's.

Now there are extremes of course! But that being said,

Non-whites, non-christians, non-hetero, and non-males, have been disadvantaged and SJW's shout about privledge because it's a thing - you dont appreciate it because as a white christan hetero man you dont notice it. It's not something to be blamed for, but those groups who shout about privledge are aware of it and are just trying to make people aware of the advantages they have by virtue of their race, their sex, their sexuality, their religion etc, and to use the power for good.

There are extremes of gendering, like I wouldn't give my kid a gender neutral name, but would support them if they decided they wanted to transition. However, if you dont think gendering has an impact on kids, watch the Oxford experiment where they switched kids clothes and people treated them differently, in a way that had adults removing 'science' toys from the little girl who was actually a boy and giving him dolls to play with, and forcing the little girl who was dressed as a boy to play with a tractor and play spatial reasoning games that they had removed from the 'girl'. Thats the sort of gendering that needs to be addressed, to let kids pick what role they want to play in life and not pidgeon hole girls as nurses and boys as doctors, and not to imply that there is something 'wrong' with men who teach young kinds, or want to be take on caring roles. So while yes there are nutty extreme gendering* affects kids and how they see themselves, and all science supports this.




*there is a difference between gender and sex which needs to be considered here.

ThisRegard

Wibbs wrote: »

TBH B I bloody love that. I love when mad connections are made and a conversation ends up in areas you'd be unlikely to foresee. Then again I could hardly be described as a linear thinker.

You always get people complaining about the segues though, or some mods closing the thread because it diverged from the first post. Always hate when they do that.

Yeah, some forums are most suited than others to remain strictly on topic. But when conversing with people in real life you don't tell them that's the end of the conversation when they mention something else that's off topic.

Wibbs

Dantian wrote: »

Non-whites, non-christians, non-hetero, and non-males, have been disadvantaged and SJW's shout about privledge because it's a thing - you dont appreciate it because as a white christan hetero man you dont notice it.

Which is fine, but this notion can founder on the rocks of reality on a few fronts. Take western men and western women. Women are less privileged is the given? Slight problem with that. If you're an average Irish woman you will live longer, be better educated, get paid more(until kids come along and even that's debatable), have more social and societal support and will suffer far less from suicide, addiction, homelessness, physical violence. These are facts, not conjecture. So tell Irish men how "privileged" they are again? At this point I have little doubt that many "feminists" are sticking their fingers in their ears. As for christians(which outside of say the US, few enough would be close to practicing), what privilege do they have in Asia, the ME? Which kind of christian? Catholics have historically and not so historically gotten the pooey end of the stick in a few places, in other places Protestants did.

This is the inconsistency that is consistent problem with the modern "liberal" worldview. You would lump together a working class Catholic man with a middle class Protestant man and claim they share a privilege, just by dint of their cock and balls and lack of melanoma. Who is more "privileged" in Ireland today? A welfare class white male from a sink estate, or a middle class Nigerian female doctor?

topper75

In all the years hanging around this site, one thing I don't ever recall is a mod picking up on a post because it was too left wing.

Conclude what you will from that.

Wibbs

topper75 wrote: »

In all the years hanging around this site, one thing I don't ever recall is a mod picking up on a post because it was too left wing.

Conclude what you will from that.

Well it could be argued T that an extreme left wing view may come across as mind bogglingly daft, an extreme right wing view is more likely to go down the road of actual racism, sexism and a few other isms(though too often the ism is levelled as an accusation and way to shut down debate. QV immigration). One is to be more laughed at, the other more to be concerned about as it were. That would be my take anyway?

VinLieger

Wibbs wrote: »

Well it could be argued T that an extreme left wing view may come across as mind bogglingly daft, an extreme right wing view is more likely to go down the road of actual racism, sexism and a few other isms(though too often the ism is levelled as an accusation and way to shut down debate. QV immigration). One is to be more laughed at, the other more to be concerned about as it were. That would be my take anyway?

Shhhhhh your being far too logical, the only reasonable thing to do is to paint the entirety of boards as right wing, bigotted, sexist and racist because a minute percentage of all the threads and posters may sometimes verge into extreme right wing territory.

Grayson

Wibbs wrote: »

Which is fine, but this notion can founder on the rocks of reality on a few fronts. Take western men and western women. Women are less privileged is the given? Slight problem with that. If you're an average Irish woman you will live longer, be better educated, get paid more(until kids come along and even that's debatable), have more social and societal support and will suffer far less from suicide, addiction, homelessness, physical violence. These are facts, not conjecture. So tell Irish men how "privileged" they are again? At this point I have little doubt that many "feminists" are sticking their fingers in their ears. As for christians(which outside of say the US, few enough would be close to practicing), what privilege do they have in Asia, the ME? Which kind of christian? Catholics have historically and not so historically gotten the pooey end of the stick in a few places, in other places Protestants did.

This is the inconsistency that is consistent problem with the modern "liberal" worldview. You would lump together a working class Catholic man with a middle class Protestant man and claim they share a privilege, just by dint of their cock and balls and lack of melanoma. Who is more "privileged" in Ireland today? A welfare class white male from a sink estate, or a middle class Nigerian female doctor?

That's why intersectionality exists. You can pick a middle class woman and show that they better off than a working class man but that proves nothing. It doesn't prove that women have it better than men. The idea is that each trait increases the chance of a negative impact on a persons life. So in the US for example it can be stated that in general working class women have it worse than men. In general working class minority women have it worse than working class white women.

All these are generalities and you can find exception. You'll probably find quite a few. The idea though is that in the majority of cases this is true. And of course it's different around the world. For example because of the way race/gender is perceived in different countries you will find it being a positive or negative depending on where you are. That doesn't mean that it isn't a negative in particular place.

And yes, you mentioned some benefits that women have. However women aren't provided with better education. You said that women are less likely to be the victims of violence. That's only true if you look at particular types of violence. Overall women are far more likely to be victims of violence and are far more likely to be the recipients of gender based violence. They are also far more likely to be sexually assaulted and that's not even mentioning harassment.

Rather than making it a Them Vs Us thing (which sounds like that monty python sketch. "I worked 14 days down mine each week"), I prefer to recognise that each gender has it's negatives and try to work to make it better. I'm quite capable of seeing that men are more less likely to get help for depression and advocate better mental health education. I'm also able to march against the 8th amendment because I believe women are being let down by the standard of care they're given in hospitals.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.