Sign up and stay connected to your favorite communities.

sign uplog in
View
Sort
Coming soon
-8 points · 2 hours ago

They were allowed to participate in the government and eventually merge with the Nazi party or quietly retire in peace. Nazi Germany also supported right wing governments all over Europe, mostly famously in Spain.

Their cooperation with the "actual" right wing was simply pragmatism, and if we are to assume that the German fascist party was socialist and therefore left wing then so were the Italian and Spanish fascists.

Mind you, I don't personally think the NSDAP was socialist full stop, but I do think that they were at least significantly influenced by socialist ideology. Given the fact that the entire party emerged from the genuinely left wing German Workers' Party I don't think that should be controversial, plus the entire NSDAP platform was heavily focused on big government and social welfare, two concepts at serious odds with "traditional" right wing ideals of small government and individualism.

Or, to put it simply, most socialists find the allegation that the NSDAP was socialist ridiculous because they protected private property, and a lot of right wingers find the allegation that the NSDAP was anything but socialist ridiculous because they were for big government, welfare, planned economy, and abhorred individual rights.

see more

Very far left and very far right idealogies look very similar in action, but fascism has always been seen as far right because of the focus on nationalism.

That is why you can have left right idealogies, but there is also an axis of authoritarianism. The russians weren't true Marxian communists, because the ended up just recreating the elite within the party and economic wealth wasn't share with the poor. So even if they had left leaning ideals they fell fictim to authoritarianism.

Very far left and very far right idealogies look very similar in action, but fascism has always been seen as far right because of the focus on nationalism.

It can be seen as far right while acknowledging its socialist components, but nationalism isn't exclusive to the far right, see: the DPRK. If the NSDAP is to be considered far right it's probably more to do with their corporatism.

But while we're on the topic of two-axis representations... If we have an authoritarian-liberal axis, surely the other axis is collectivist-individualist, right? In which case all large socialists states (leaving aside whether they were "truly socialist" or not) and Nazi Germany are right there side by side in the authoritarian collectivist corner, no? Anarcho-capitalists would be the polar opposite, communists would be in the collectivist-liberal corner and... I don't know what would be in the authoritarian-individualist corner. Maybe something like feudalism? Dunno.

see more

I think authoritarian-individualist is probably closest to as you say feudalism or traditional monarchy or pure corporatism. Where wealth and free trade CAN be accumulated but everything is subject to the whims of the authority.

But I think you need to be careful with the use of Socialist. Because it has several different meanings, We take modern democratic socialism and projects specifically talking about the centralization of weath, versus the state government of socialism, versus Socialization of decision making which is what you are referring to with Nazis. Just because something is centralized does not make it socialist as aims/goals/value are still important beyond frame and function.

Which is to say that the reason why people would take offence is people who can not understand what you are trying to say structurally parrot similar things to say Democrats and Liberals are ACTUALLY the Nazis because Nazi's have a centralized state, when there is a genuine concern about the rise of authoritarian nationalist parties globally and it isn't coming from "the left"

So a giant corporation is paying to slant the audience reviews on a major critics aggregate site. Isn't this very shady and should be bigger news?

see more

Wait did you say giant corporation and mean Movie Pass? Because they are barely an organization.

It's true that a lot of people will listen to his music posthumously with an air of sentimentality, but I still think it's quite possible to appreciate the work earnestly regardless of the circumstances.

I didn't know the dude's music, just that his antics painted him as a huge ass and women abuser. I suppose he could have been all those things, which is not fucking cool, but this song shows talent, and I think his other work (albeit a small amount) that I've listened to shows a dude who was trying to make sense of the world and his emotions. That's more than a lot of artists.

So who knows, could be a "he rapes he saves" situation to quote Chappelle. I'd rather see him behind bars if the allegations are true than dead in a car. My friend used to always like him, and I can now see why. He was more talented than the controversial headlines would make you believe. And to those who welcomed his death, here's something to think about:

Deserves it! I daresay he does. Many that live deserve death. And some that die deserve life. Can you give it to them? Then do not be too eager to deal out death in judgement. For even the very wise cannot see all ends.

and i just realized this post is on r/hhh and I might be labeled a dweeb so yeah fam its lit

see more

This is from a purely devil's advocate standpoint. Personally I could never support the dude because there wasn't even real contrition for what he did to that girl.

I think there is a reason why a lot of good art comes from bad people, because they are able to express these really dark and sad parts of people authentically. For a lot of kids with fucked up lives, this guy was one of him. There is some positive externality to that.

Now for me personally, I think there is huge difference between the artist who was a huge dick and cheated on his wife and self-destructive and what this guy and Chris Brown did.

Eitherway this is why it is always better to appreciate the art and not idolize and worship artists, especially as paragons of good.

People overuse the word "savage". It was mildly funny.

see more

OMG you pointing out his exaggeration was so SAVAGE.

Hold on let me link this in best of reddit.

"/u/jordaniac89 absolutely DESTROYS over-excited redditor with SAVAGE observation"

Let this be the final nail in the coffin of "both sides are the same".

see more

That coffin has so many nails in it from the past 20 years there is little space for another one.

I was smart about and didn't let Pixar take my money. Movie Pass takes my money and get free movies for a month.

see more

Uhhh........if you saw the movie with MoviePass you gave Pixar money.

Nope. My money went to Overboard and Man of his word. Every movie I watch after that is on Movie Pass dime and free to me.

see more

Free to you but they still get money.

Godiva and Sees are to chocolate what in and out and Shake Shack are to burgers.

see more

Is that supposed to mean not that bad for mass produced stuff but way over hyped?

It is in my book!

Boy, the movie about how hard it is for black people because they're forced to act like white people to find success doesn't imply that white people are bad? If that's accurate that's really, really surprising.

see more

Most of dear white people is about the bad things black people do and what they do to each other and the hypocrisy that exists amongst activists.

So if there is more time shitting in black oriole tha. White people does that mean the message is all black people are bad.

Maybe you can choose to be offended and not see the nuance of a movie but sounds like your insecurity than a movie attacking you.

Yeah claiming that white college students dress up in blackface all around the country to make fun of black people isn't "about the bad things black people do to eachother"

see more

So in your mind is any character who does a bad thing allowed to be white?

Also you clearly haven't watched the movie you just read the movie description.

Your opinion on these opinions is immaterial. The caller was well behaved, and the host was childish, petulant, and rude.

That is what I was asking about. Is it some kind of tiny late night show no one cares about? Is that why he's allowed to act like that?

see more

Again well behaved? Maybe you are confused a British accent for politeness.

:10 - Immediately starts the call on to a persons OWN SHOW saying he is distorting the issue. Ignores the topic of the phone call and starts on a talking point of a mandate. Ignoring the host and the topic of the show is rude? Host responds politely to talk about the issue.

:30 seconds - Calls them traitors (words matter). I Host reminds them that they haven't done anything other than ask for the ability to vote if something is horrible for the country. Again calling someone a traitor is not lightly it has a specific meaning. Host responds by actually trying to explain the topic and ask him to break it down.

1:28 seconds - Caller distorts by assuming the scenario is bad. And said if we are driving a burning building. The guy LITERALLY SAYS IF IT RUINS THE COUNTRY THAT IS OKAY. Again not well behaved, that is the definition of childish and petulant.

3:00 - Host who is allowed to have his opinion since it is his talkshow which guess what is a major Daytime radio show by the way. Weighs out the cons and asks him what is the pros of sticking to a referendum (that again Caller LIED, another bad behavior, and said was a clear mandate which it wasn't). And Caller says that immigrants are the greatest threat, and that immigrants are the ENEMY WITHIN, and that they are turning it to 3rd World ghetto. Then the host starts to mock him as he rants about it.

4:15 - Man cites 20K Somalis and says the SE of England has turned to cesspits which he knows from his 98% white community. CESSPITS AGAIN ISN'T EXACTLY NICE AND WELL BEHAVED. Once again the caller is lying given that refugee status and Brexit imiigration have NOTHING TO DO WITH EACHOTHER. And the man is talking about European immigrants. The Host takes him seriously and asks him to cite evidence of specific examples since the host lives in London. Again the host gives the guy the chance to recant but the man cites Lambeth. And says the lack of white people is the reason why. Then guy mocks him because he is just starting to be racist.

6:15: And man cites "cohesion" and when the guy says it sounds like you mean only white people the guy points out that he is East Asian. THEN THE HOST POINTS OUT THAT SOME HOW HE ISN'T LIVING IN A GHETTO AND ISN'T THE ENEMY WITHIN. Completely destroying the guys logic and showing the absurdity of his racism. '

Again the dude, 1. Lied about facts on multiple occasions, 2. Accused treason on Conservatives, 3. Tried to ignore the topic of conversation, 4. Childishly said he would rather destroy the country than stay in the European Union 5. Then said immigrants are a threat and the enemy within 6. Said that Lambeth has turned into a cesspit because it is a lack of white people and said they choose to live in ghettos 7. Reveals hypocrisy when host points out that he is one of these people and he doesn't live in a ghetto.

:10 - I understand the host brings people on to the show to disagree with him? At least for just a moment? Then it isn't bad behavior to bring his own opinion that the issue is distorted as his point of contention to the show. That is probably what he was selected for.

:30 - His opinion is that they are traitors. Having an opinion, even one that you do not like, is not bad behavior.

1:28 - Bringing your own viewpoint to a matter is not "distortion". In fact, the caller is conversationally very helpful in taking the host's words and agreeing with them. Clearly it's not about literally ruining the country, because no one would want to do that on purpose. Given this level-headed interpretation, it follows that the caller has a different view on how it's actually not certain doom for everyone.

Furthermore, you are again demonstrating an inability to discriminate between opinions and behavior. Merely holding an opinion you find offensive is not bad behavior; it could even be the foundation of an interesting conversation.

3:00 - The caller has not lied. He has told what he fully believes to be the truth. Or is there some contention you'd like to make about how this caller was actually duplicitous and hiding his real opinion?

And then you just list more of the caller's opinions. Yes, he has opinions that you don't like. No, it's not bad behavior to think differently than you.

Here, you even agree that the host is demonstrating bad behavior, since you yourself say

the host starts to mock him

4:15 - Describing something in a way you wouldn't isn't bad behavior. Again, learn to recognize when someone else simply has a different opinion than you.

And again, it's starting to sound very conspiracy-theory to say that the caller is lying. He is just working off a different interpretation of the facts than you. Probably 99% of people would agree that this caller isn't being duplicitous but is instead mostly talking about his genuinely held opinions.

And here you give another example of the host exhibiting bad behavior.

The guy mocks him

6:15 - The caller probably assumed that the host also believed you can't expect the behavior of the group to manifest in the individual, and you can't expect the behavior of the individual to manifest in the group. The caller's skin color, heritage, or origin do NOT have any effect on his logic.

But it seems like both you and the host expect all people from a race or ethnicity to only be capable of acting and being described in a single way--which is plainly not the case.

This whole time you've actually been agreeing with me on some points. We agree that the host exhibited bad behavior. All you need to do is watch the video again, but let go of your anger and hatred and whatever emotions you have towards the guy's opinions, and take note of the behavior of each participant in the conversation. You will see that the host was very rude and unfair.

Are you beginning to see how we are seeing two different videos playing from the same file? How you hear Laurel when I hear Yanny, when we listen to the same clip?

see more

See you just dismiss everything that demonstrates bad behavior as opinion. You say the guy doesn't literally mean what he says when he literally said "If it means driving off a cliff than so be it." Those are the literal words.

If a guy came on the air and politely said "I hate niggers" do you think that is good behavior or bad behavior?

Saying the host distorted the issue isn't the same as I have a different opinion than you FYI. You can disagree with someone and not accuse them of deception. So again not "good behavior"

And you decide what is an opinion vs lying. Fully believing that 51% is a clear mandate doesn't make it an opinion, it still means you are lying.

If someone calmly spouts lies and racist propaganda and your whole issue is that you think the host was nasty for talking to him then maybe you need to listen.

You call everything an opinion so you feel good about it just being two sides to everystory and why can't people be nice.

Also these aren't opinions these are statements of facts. Just because they are erroneous doesn't make them opinion.

If a guy says the earth is flat. That isn't an opinion, it is a lie. If a guy says a clear mandate is 51-49 is a lie. Especially considering that enough people have changed their mind that it is currently 51-49 in favor of staying. Calling it a clear mandate when 58% of the country says they should vote on it again when they know what a deal looks like when the caller says that we should ignore any calls to re-evaluate is a lie. Just because he genuinely believe it doesn't make it an opinion.

Again saying that Brexit should continue because of unwanted immigration (his opinion) and citing 20K Somali immigrants is a lie since they don't have anything to do with eachother. If someone said to you we need to continue to ban marijuana because they don't like pedophiles, you would question why they would be lying about the relationship between two unrelated projects.

"But it seems like both you and the host expect all people from a race or ethnicity to only be capable of acting and being described in a single way--which is plainly not the case."

The fact that you can not see the hypocrisy of this statement in relation to the exact video we are talking about is mindboggling to me.

Your inability to listen to the words and decide whether they are "political" versus "derisive" because someone isn't yelling belies your opinion.

176 points · 2 days ago

It's pretty easy to find good food from almost any other country in America, or at least here in California.

see more

Yeah really only in California, Chicago and NY is that true for EVERY type of food but America in general does have decent foreign food pockets everywhere.

Really only I'm California? Lol I guess you've never been to Texas

see more

Only from 1992-2010.

I don't think Texans understand the density and HISTORY of some of these other places.

I am saying this as someone who has lived in Texas for 20 years and California for 10 years.

But it's much better now but the huge influx is a recent thing for Texas (beyond Chinese and Indian food).

All I am talking about is the type to get the literal every type of genre of food and get good quality of it.

"more realistic" is a stretch. Its a more comical TNG. Some of the technology has been toned down but the big difference between it and TNG is the amount and type of comedy.

see more

It took me a couple of seasons of Star Trek to realize how garbage the science / tech is in Star Trek. It is more a show about space diplomacy than any sort of hard sci fi.

It is hard sci fi.

see more

I count hard sci-fi about stuff that is the realm of the real and based in real science and often focuses on the implications of that technology.

Star Trek (speaking about TNG specifically since I haven't watched DS9) it really isn't about the technology. The show is about the moral problems or some mystery and the technology stuff usually is just a plot device out of magic convenience and not central to the actual story.

While they had scientific advisors on the show, often times the "science" part of the fiction is just jibber-jabber.

She's probably not racist. Just really fucking bad judgement to post something like that in 2018.

see more

She might not be a cross-burining bigot, but sorry you use it like that you are a racist. Plenty of racists can be productive members of society.

It's more the fact that Duke managed to produce both Richard Spencer and Stephen Miller

see more

Yeah but that's like saying Harvard produced George W Bush and Ted Cruz.

11 points · 2 days ago

George W went to Yale. Just FYI.

see more

HBS

Dan Harmon

see more

That Chloe dykstra dated long term is probably the other part.

345 points · 3 days ago · edited 1 day ago

How is it okay to not air the show because of allegations from an essay that doesn’t even name him? Why would that be standard procedure? Anybody can make accusations against someone to slander their name with a policy like that. Everyone has right to fair trial and I don’t see how it’s fair to make preemptive decisions about people’s careers without even so much as an arrest

Edit: yikes to everybody

see more

Random people do make accusations all the time but they aren't ever reported on or heard from because they don't even make sense logistically.

We used to have a woman who would claim she was raped by brad Pitt. But since she was a 60 year old who never met him it didn't become news.

Someone's ex putting themselves on the line makes it credible enough to take a pause.

Dude likely still gets paid on the stuff already active so it only ruins his future life if the investigation fails.

As a red voter, i can tell you most of us couldn't care less what gay people do in their spare time...have at it! Be happy with whomever you want :-).

Edit - i'm not gay, so i don't have a dog in that race, nor do i have an opinion on it, so i wont be voting on it either way when it comes up.

see more

Thank you for your openness. Last year was in fact the first year that Republicans accepting gays was over 50% (54%). Unfortunately they are still behind in gay marriage despite it being constitutional at 40%.

So not quite most republicans yet. But since most of the party is dying that will change and eventually the Republican Party will either become more liberal or risk being irrelevant.

how is that arrogant? you're trying something new and it might be good to you it might not, you could rate it with your friends but you will make a rating for yourself regardless.

see more

I don't know why that guy is getting so angry. They are just rating their taste. Is he literally advocating for having no opinions of your own? Especially with food people have to take time and find familiar entry points when it comes to new textures and flavors. Especially if you don't come from a place where there is constant food variety.

3 points · 3 days ago

Alaska is free from sin. Also Hawaii.

see more

Well Hawaii is DEFINITELY free from sin.

While most of American is the history of killing and relocation Native Americans and building our infrastructure off the backs of poor whites, ensalves blacks, and indentured Chinese.

Hawaii is an example of us going out of our way to overthrow an established government because a bunch of Americans moved their after missionaries established a base so they could do trading and didn't want to deal with Hawaiians.

Really fucked up

114 points · 3 days ago

i actually don't understand why teams put midlaners on adcs to funnel gold instead of just moving their marksman mid , and midlaner bot.

I'm willing to bet that caps has more karma/vlad/heimer/ziggz/whatever the fuck they want to pick bot - then rekkless has , while also having less marksman games then he does

see more

I would think it's just bot/sup familiarity but I would think it would be better to have Rekkles on the adc mid too.

lol that shit doesn't even make sense. He is the fucking president. Should no one ever think about him?

see more

"yEAH YALL libtards just salty, why is he living in your head rent free. We definitely didn't spend 10 years talking about Obama and a secretary of state who wasn't even in office for lots of them like every single day"

/s

Look how triggered you are over a hashtag, fucking hell

see more

Yeah me so triggered. What a snow flake. Keep whining.

It's odd though. You say civility came to an end. I see a driver who is being incredibly patient and professional. He keeps saying to just leave and leave it at that. But the two girls are instigating and antagonizing. Now if it was a peck on the cheek then they have the RIGHT to be pissed. But what I see here is one guy doing what's right professionally, and two entitled brats with ZERO evidence he had any bias against them. So if you are to judge, how do you not lean more towards him and not them.

see more

How about you don't lean toward anyone here, because you have ZERO evidence for your perspective that they are entitled brats. Maybe they are pissed because they are right to be pissed, so you have evidence of that, that most people just don't make up things on the fly. It would be extremely unprofessional to just abruptly end a car ride and insist of them leaving int he middle of nowhere.

You can just leave it with nuance that you (and the rest of us on reddit) don't know the truth and shouldn't be invested either way when there isn't evidence either way. Save your anger for situations like when an unarmed black guy gets executed by a police office and we have it on tape OR when someone claims they were raped, but turns out they were lying.

And if you are a sane person with empathy, and not one that is driven by a constant agenda, you will get pissed at both situations.

Because the lesbians posted it and are upset by it and probably think that’s why. Just like any time there is a confrontation with a majority vs a minority, everyone speculated racism/sexism/homophobia/islamophobia every single time. Even when there is no proof of it.

see more

Sometimes when you are a minority in a largely largely white area you can't tell if someone is racist, just an asshole, or doesn't like you when interacting. Which is why you can't always take people at their word when they claim discrimination, but the issue is that people are often purely prejudiced every day. So it is kind of hard not to have the psychological burden.

Sureee. If that was the case surely they would break 1 window then open both doors.

see more

Can't/wont waste time trying to open the doors, also wastes time if the doors are infront of the regulator since they would have to bend around it anyway.

The only real argument is....

Gobots vs Transformers.

see more

It isn't even an argument. Gobots made Transformers look like high art.

The laziness of the toys and the character names of Gobots compared to transformers is almost mind-bogglingly bad.

The Tank was named Tank, the Helicopter was named Cop-Tur, the Bulldozer was named Dozer, the Dump truck was named Dumper.

It was like half the names were just whatever came out of people's mouths first.

Also the world of Gobots is terrifying. In Transformers they are sentient metal beings created by "a god" to keep order in the universe, they have a genetic matrix that has the power to create life.

In Gobots they are human-like aliens who are trapped in Robot shells and they turned themselves in to war machines to wage battle on their fellow aliens. Meaning not only are they horrific living coffins, it means they chose to CHANGE their organic names to match their monstrous shell.

The graduation ceremony was held at the Dallas Cowboys practice facility, the Star, in Frisco, TX. Much of the facility was paid for using funds from the Frisco ISD, with an agreement that Frisco schools would be allowed to use the facility. The best part is Frisco ISD is now cash-strapped and tried to raise property taxes in Frisco. (Property taxes pay for the public schools in Texas) That was overwhelmingly voted down. So they now have brand new schools sitting vacant because they can’t afford to actually run them. But, hey, the Cowboys are here.

Why Plano is using the facility, I couldn’t tell you.

Yes, I realize everything I just said sounds ridiculous. I wish I could say I was making it up.

see more

Probably out of convenience for the school / money for Frisco. That large of highschool is going to need a large venue, and Frisco probably has the ability to use it more than they need it so they can get money from others.

That’s a no from me, dawg.

see more

That is a nein from me, hound

487 points · 4 days ago

I mean, he helped start the Spanish-American War, but yeah, that weed thing...

see more

Like 20-30 k died during that war. Much more have died because of the drug war.

24 points · 6 days ago

I've seen it mentioned that Fox's Marvel properties can't transfer to a second party and will revert back to Marvel/Disney if Fox tries to sell those rights. I don't know how true that is, though.

see more

Its likely because most of the Xmen rights are on a rolling rights/use it or lose it scenario like Sony with Spiderman. Where if they are not making the films every now and then it reverts back.

However it is really impossible to know as I have seen it written both ways for rights (no ability to subsell vs infinite transfer) and there is a third possibility that it is written in a technically vague way where it isn't really clear and they would have to litigate it.

u/Reasonable-redditor
Karma
79,236
Cake day
July 25, 2012

Trophy Case (1)

Five-Year Club

Cookies help us deliver our Services. By using our Services or clicking I agree, you agree to our use of cookies. Learn More.