Right Wing Grifters

20Cent

Deleted User wrote: »

Sustained criticism of religion, any religion, is considered as spreading hatred to you? That is interesting.

Are they (religion and nationality) the only two items that you feel that way about or can hatred have a wider scope?

I mean, I don't think that you wouldn't count criticism of gender, sexuality or ethnicity to be anything but hate either?

Play semantics with someone else.


Simple challenge:
Post up an left wing equivalence of Katie Hopkins or Alex Jones type grifters.

No one has managed to do so yet.

What you find when you scratch the surface of a lot on the left is that they're motivated by hatred..

Like, the setting up of this thread even, it not meant to make any particular point..it's sole purpose is to sneer and go "f*ck you" at posters with a divergent viewpoint and have an argument..

20Cent

Deleted User wrote: »

What you find when you scratch the surface of a lot on the left is that they're motivated by hatred..

Like, the setting up of this thread even, it not meant to make any particular point..it's sole purpose is to sneer and go "f*ck you" at posters with a divergent viewpoint and have an argument..

Hi CQD,

How about throwing up some examples of "the left" spreading hatred.
Should be easy.


Thanks

20Cent

20Cent wrote: »

Hi CQD,

How about throwing up some examples of "the left" spreading hatred.
Should be easy.


Thanks

You..

20Cent

Deleted User wrote: »

You..

Such an easy challenge yet no one can do it.

Rhetoric isn't your strong point, is it?..

20Cent

20Cent wrote: »

Play semantics with someone else.


Simple challenge:
Post up an left wing equivalence of Katie Hopkins or Alex Jones type grifters.

No one has managed to do so yet.

It's not semantics.

Simple challenge?

You are claiming that Katie Hopkins and plenty others are spreading hatred. You want left wing equivalences. If so, define "spreading hatred" so we can give you an equivalence.

Otherwise you are of course people can't play along with your "challenge". We obviously can't find people that said EXACTLY the same thing as Katie Hopkins, but in order to find someone equivalent, we need to know where your definition of spreading hatred lies.

"Katie Hopkins said immigrants were cockroaches and gunships should be used to stop them entering illegally"

ok, well here is an example of someone saying bad stuff about white people.

"No.... Katie Hopkins said cockroach and didn't say sorry. Find me a left winger that said exactly what Katie Hopkins did"

There are plenty of people on the left that spout misandry. Plenty that constantly tell white people that their opinion is not as valid as a "person of colour", plenty of people that promote positive discrimination, plenty that shut down others opinions if they are not progressive enough, there are people advocating for cancel culture, they are labelling people racist unfairly, they are harassing people for having a different political opinion, there is an almost endless list of ****ty behaviour by celebrities, commentators, analysts and journalists on the left who are "grifting" a career by peddling lies.

The difference is, because Katie Hopkins said some ****ty things (which most of the right disagree with by the way) you can wave it away that your "side" wins because in comparison to Katie Hopkins, your side do no wrong.

Well that's bull****. I don't like the woman and I don't agree with the majority of what she says, but at least I know where she stands.

The same can't be said for you.

When asked to define what you considered hatred, you mentioned sustained criticism of CERTAIN religions and nationalities. You realised that, in a rare show of honesty, you had backed yourself into a corner so you pretended to misunderstand the question.

You have proven yourself to be a hypocrite and intellectually dishonest.

20Cent

Deleted User wrote: »

It's not semantics.

Simple challenge?

You are claiming that Katie Hopkins and plenty others are spreading hatred. You want left wing equivalences. If so, define "spreading hatred" so we can give you an equivalence.

Otherwise you are of course people can't play along with your "challenge". We obviously can't find people that said EXACTLY the same thing as Katie Hopkins, but in order to find someone equivalent, we need to know where your definition of spreading hatred lies.

"Katie Hopkins said immigrants were cockroaches and gunships should be used to stop them entering illegally"

ok, well here is an example of someone saying bad stuff about white people.

"No.... Katie Hopkins said cockroach and didn't say sorry. Find me a left winger that said exactly what Katie Hopkins did"

There are plenty of people on the left that spout misandry. Plenty that constantly tell white people that their opinion is not as valid as a "person of colour", plenty of people that promote positive discrimination, plenty that shut down others opinions if they are not progressive enough, there are people advocating for cancel culture, they are labelling people racist unfairly, they are harassing people for having a different political opinion, there is an almost endless list of ****ty behaviour by celebrities, commentators, analysts and journalists on the left who are "grifting" a career by peddling lies.

The difference is, because Katie Hopkins said some ****ty things (which most of the right disagree with by the way) you can wave it away that your "side" wins because in comparison to Katie Hopkins, your side do no wrong.

Well that's bull****. I don't like the woman and I don't agree with the majority of what she says, but at least I know where she stands.

The same can't be said for you.

When asked to define what you considered hatred, you mentioned sustained criticism of CERTAIN religions and nationalities. You realised that, in a rare show of honesty, you had backed yourself into a corner so you pretended to misunderstand the question.

You have proven yourself to be a hypocrite and intellectually dishonest.

Grab a straw to hang onto.

Shut me up and post up some evidence of an equivalent Katie Hopkins type grifter on the left.

Easy you say there are loads of them.

20Cent

20Cent wrote: »

Grab a straw to hang onto.

Shut me up and post up some evidence of an equivalent Katie Hopkins type grifter on the left.

Easy you say there are loads of them.

Your reading comprehension is either atrocious or you just don't get it.

When you define specifically what your definition of hatred is, I can give you examples of the lefty grifter.

If you can't define what hatred is, then your question is pointless.

You might as well ask us to pick a number between one and 100 and then tell us we are wrong when we didn't pick the number you want.

[Deleted User]

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Your reading comprehension is either atrocious or you just don't get it.

He's not trying to get anything.. he's trying to wind you up, or win some pointless internet argument..

20Cent

Deleted User wrote: »

Your reading comprehension is either atrocious or you just don't get it.

When you define specifically what your definition of hatred is, I can give you examples of the lefty grifter.

If you can't define what hatred is, then your question is pointless.

You might as well ask us to pick a number between one and 100 and then tell us we are wrong when we didn't pick the number you want.

Spill the beans name some names:
There are plenty of people on the left that spout misandry. Plenty that constantly tell white people that their opinion is not as valid as a "person of colour", plenty of people that promote positive discrimination, plenty that shut down others opinions if they are not progressive enough, there are people advocating for cancel culture, they are labelling people racist unfairly, they are harassing people for having a different political opinion, there is an almost endless list of ****ty behaviour by celebrities, commentators, analysts and journalists on the left who are "grifting" a career by peddling lies.

Junkyard Tom

Junkyard Tom wrote: »

Yeah I think we know why you're backing away from this - because it's the type of shit these 'right wing grifters' come out with for their followers.

Ahh well, now we're back to labeling people who don't agree with you as "right wing grifters", or the followers of "right wing grifters". Lovely. :rolleyes: And posters wonder why those on the left aren't loved. The moment you don't get what you want, you place people in a little box and put a nasty name on them.

Nope, I didn't want to discuss it for the reason I stated. You took something out of context, from a discussion you weren't part of, and sought to make an issue of it, once the overall thread had moved on.

It's the 'cultural marxism' conspiracy crap isn't it Klaz? Or is it pound-shop intellectual Jordan Peterson's 'Postmodern neo-Marxism' rotting West Civilisation from within, which itself is the 21st Century version of Kulturbolschewismus? (google it)

Nope. It isn't. I lose interest in Peterson very quickly once he goes beyond gender related issues.

It's related to the aggressive and insulting behavior by so many in the Left. It's to do with the promotion of collective guilt for certain groups while dismissing any similar responsibility for minorities. It's the pushing for identity politics and encouraging divisions within society. It's the lack of responsibility for their approach to economics over the last two decades. I could go on, but there's no fcuking point. You don't care to listen to anyone because you're hellbent on throwing shit at anyone who disagrees with you.

I asked you previously to reel in the aggression within your posts, and you haven't even attempted to do so. So, no, I'm not terribly interested in conversing with someone like you, who has so little respect for other people.

Blind Eagle

20Cent wrote: »

Spill the beans name some names:
There are plenty of people on the left that spout misandry. Plenty that constantly tell white people that their opinion is not as valid as a "person of colour", plenty of people that promote positive discrimination, plenty that shut down others opinions if they are not progressive enough, there are people advocating for cancel culture, they are labelling people racist unfairly, they are harassing people for having a different political opinion, there is an almost endless list of ****ty behaviour by celebrities, commentators, analysts and journalists on the left who are "grifting" a career by peddling lies.

Sarah Jeong.

20Cent

20Cent wrote: »

Spill the beans name some names:
There are plenty of people on the left that spout misandry. Plenty that constantly tell white people that their opinion is not as valid as a "person of colour", plenty of people that promote positive discrimination, plenty that shut down others opinions if they are not progressive enough, there are people advocating for cancel culture, they are labelling people racist unfairly, they are harassing people for having a different political opinion, there is an almost endless list of ****ty behaviour by celebrities, commentators, analysts and journalists on the left who are "grifting" a career by peddling lies.

Will do.

Just as soon as I know what the parameter of what you consider to be hatred is.

20Cent

Deleted User wrote: »

Will do.

Just as soon as I know what the parameter of what you consider to be hatred is.

A left wing version of Katie Hopkins.

Should be easy if you say there are loads of them.

Even someone who spreads hatred whatever definition of it you like.

Blind Eagle

Blind Eagle wrote: »

Sarah Jeong.

Nope. Apparently not "hatred" because she said that she was only being racist to show how racist the racists are.

Junkyard Tom

20Cent wrote: »

Post up an left wing equivalence of Katie Hopkins or Alex Jones type grifters.

Those types appeal to people's emotions, their 'lizard brain', which is difficult (impossible?) to replicate on 'the left'.

'Take control of the means of production' or 'a system of socialised healthcare, free at the point of access, for all' doesn't have the same emotional punch as 'they want to take your guns', 'they're indoctrinating your children', 'the Muslims will outbreed us' and so on.

20Cent

20Cent wrote: »

A left wing version of Katie Hopkins.

Should be easy if you say there are loads of them.

Even someone who spreads hatred whatever definition of it you like.

Well if you refuse to define hatred, how about Jessica Yaniv then?

I would say she is pretty much on the left.

Junkyard Tom

Deleted User wrote: »

Nope, I didn't want to discuss it for the reason I stated. You took something out of context, from a discussion you weren't part of, and sought to make an issue of it, once the overall thread had moved on.

Please forgive me for my invective. Good Sir, I implore thee, please elucidate us on your postulations.



Kindly,

JYT.

20Cent

Deleted User wrote: »

Well if you refuse to define hatred, how about Jessica Yaniv then?

I would say she is pretty much on the left.

Why would you say she is pretty much of the left?

20Cent

20Cent wrote: »

Why would you say she is pretty much of the left?

A progressive type. Espouses beliefs not normally congruent with right ideologies.

It typically involves a concern for those in society whom its adherents perceive as disadvantaged relative to others as well as a belief that there are unjustified inequalities that need to be reduced or abolished. (Taken from Wikipedia)

Do you not agree?

20Cent

Deleted User wrote: »

A progressive type. Espouses beliefs not normally congruent with right ideologies.

It typically involves a concern for those in society whom its adherents perceive as disadvantaged relative to others as well as a belief that there are unjustified inequalities that need to be reduced or abolished. (Taken from Wikipedia)

Do you not agree?

Transexuals getting their balls waced or visiting gynecologists aren't really big concerns of the left. Really struggling to find an example of a left wing Katie Hopkins.

Blind Eagle

20Cent wrote: »

Transexuals getting their balls waced or visiting gynecologists aren't really big concerns of the left. Really struggling to find an example of a left wing Katie Hopkins.

I've given you one. Sarah Jeong. She's a racist, so is Katie Hopkins.

20Cent

Blind Eagle wrote: »

I've given you one. Sarah Jeong. She's a racist, so is Katie Hopkins.

Hi throw up some content of Sara Jeong being racist to make money.

Got nothing

Thought so.

20Cent

20Cent wrote: »

Transexuals getting their balls waced or visiting gynecologists aren't really big concerns of the left. Really struggling to find an example of a left wing Katie Hopkins.

Jessica yaniv is transgender, not transexual. And to be fair, it is only the progressive left types like your good self that defend "Jessica" and her beliefs.

Apart from that, their views align with your own don't they?

It's almost as if Katie Hopkins and her views don't align to mine yet I consider myself right wing. But you wish to tarnish anyone right wing by the standard of Hopkins.

So are you saying that people on the extreme fringes don't represent the majority or they do?

I wholeheartedly disavow Katie Hopkins assertion that immigrants are cockroaches. Do you disavow Yaniv and their assertion that "she" should be treated exactly like a woman should be?

Blind Eagle

20Cent wrote: »

Hi throw up some content of Sara Jeong being racist to make money.

Got nothing

Thought so.

She has recently written a book about (ironically) online harassment, harassment that she herself engaged in by tweeting exceptionally racist things about white people. When taken up on this she proclaimed she was joking, and was only doing it because she herself was being victimised, which she has now written about to make money. Just like Katy Hopkins does.

Look man, you are in the unenviable position of admitting that there are left leaning people who are in a position of influence who are as bad as right leaning people who both spout ****e.

Your whole premise is that the right are worse than the left. That's not true. The extremes are both **** and most right leaning people admit that. You won't.

Nobody defended Katie Hopkins. She is your bogeyman. Not many people like her. Granted, she makes a living and has her fans. So do Nickelback. They are not representative of music.

So either bow out, disavow people like Jessica yaniv and admit you were wrong and regain some semblance of pride, or keep bull****ting and fight in the name of Jessica Yaniv and her ilk.

Or secret option number 3, claim Jessica yaniv doesn't represent you and therefore admit that Katie Hopkins doesn't represent us so your whole arguement is flawed.

20Cent

Deleted User wrote: »

Jessica yaniv is transgender, not transexual. And to be fair, it is only the progressive left types like your good self that defend "Jessica" and her beliefs.

Apart from that, their views align with your own don't they?

It's almost as if Katie Hopkins and her views don't align to mine yet I consider myself right wing. But you wish to tarnish anyone right wing by the standard of Hopkins.

So are you saying that people on the extreme fringes don't represent the majority or they do?

I wholeheartedly disavow Katie Hopkins assertion that immigrants are cockroaches. Do you disavow Yaniv and their assertion that "she" should be treated exactly like a woman should be?

Fair play very brave disavowing massacring innocent people.
Have said several times that trans issues isn't something I know or care much about. Yaniv can't go to a gynecologist or force someone to wax her balls no.

Both issues seem equivalent to you for some reason.:rolleyes:

Blind Eagle

20Cent wrote: »

Fair play very brave disavowing massacring innocent people.
Have said several times that trans issues isn't something I know or care much about. Yaniv can't go to a gynecologist or force someone to wax her balls no.

Both issues seem equivalent to you for some reason.:rolleyes:

Don't care about trans-issues? Transphobic are you?

20Cent

Blind Eagle wrote: »

Don't care about trans-issues? Transphobic are you?

No problem with trans people.
Only come up in this thread because right wing grifters are making it out to be a big issue for "the left". Don't think gender is political at all, dunno why the Dunne keeps bringing it up.