Rayvin

It's a total shambles. He'll be left with only members of his family.

For real? Thank fuck for that if so.

There aren't militant wings of straight people capitalising on the creation of LGBT groups to push far right agendas. I'm also pro-inclusivity generally. Having dialogue about difficult issues isn't the same as ostracising certain groups so they run over to the nazis. Let's not derail this though.

Fwiw Gloom, if the solution to this current wave of nazi resurgence was to literally shoot them all dead, I'd be fine with it. If that solved it.

I think it'd be well worth doing, especially in the current climate where gay players are starting to risk coming out in public. Twitter remains full of losers but I think we should take encouragement from the fact that the flag was flown. An LGBT group would be a good move for inclusiveness in the support base, which should always be encouraged.

Very droll.

The solution isn't an inclusive approach to nazis.

No solutions then. It is indeed powerful. Hopefully it resonates, although how many Jews voted for Trump in the first place? Surely they can't have been blind to the sort of person Bannon is? Israel seems to back Trump though.

Who the fuck knows man, I said maybe. You're sidestepping the overall thrust of my points here. I'm sure there are people out there who were once nazis and who now aren't fwiw. Bannon says the constant talk about racism by the left will keep giving him political capital to edge out the democrats, the Alt Right say the exact same things. Then we see that in 4 years, white working class America suddenly cares a lot more about their racial identity than they have done previously. The whole dialogue has become poisonous. It's a cancer and it's spreading. Eventually there is going to be a left wing climb down on this, culturally, or we're going to see a race war, hot or cold. The right wants a race war because they'll win it, they're not going to climb down. We do not have to be outmaneuvered here. We can absolutely peg them back. But we need an inclusive approach ffs.

From the Guardian: "Before the 2016 election, many white Americans felt marginalized – relegated in the country they once defined. Many, particularly those in post-industrial regions, had lost once stable jobs and their income has declined. Far worse for many, they felt like they had lost their sense of political clout and social status in American society. During three years of polling and fieldwork in white working-class communities leading up to Trump’s election, I found this marginality anchored by three key sentiments – that many white Americans feel outnumbered, excluded and discriminated against. In data from the nonpartisan, nationally representative American National Election Study (Anes) survey in 2016, white working-class people are more likely to deny the advantages that white people continue to possess, and express a sense that they are subject to unique disadvantages that reinforce their externality. A near majority of white working-class people – white people without university degrees – believed that being white made no difference to their fate in today’s society. Rather, white working-class people were more likely than others to believe their whiteness hurt them. The sample of people were asked: “How many disadvantages do white people have that minorities do not have in today’s society?” Compared with the rest of those surveyed, white working-class people were far less likely to say “none”. However, white working-class people reveal a greater sensitivity to discrimination in all forms – as it hinders their own pursuits, but also as it hinders other constituencies. Still, they perceived discrimination against blacks, Hispanics and women far less than non-whites, and perceived discrimination against whites and Christians more than all others. When compared with non-working-class white people, a greater share of white working-class people believed that losing jobs to minority candidates was “extremely” likely. They were also more likely to believe that “whites working together” is “extremely” important." https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/aug/18/donald-trump-fire-steve-bannon-white-house-nationalism

Well, at least we know what the deal is... And to be honest, if he's not willing or able to put any more money is, there's nothing else to be said, is there? The club is just going to have to spend what it can and hope for the best until we've cemented ourselves again. Or we go down.

The ones whose families were horrified and appalled that their sons had attended, and have subsequently disowned them. They are people who weren't brought up as nazis, who ended up there due to their own insecurity, and who could have been (maybe still could be) turned around. To assume otherwise is effectively to throw in the towel because it's easier to just hate people and draw a line under it. Fair enough if that's your view on it, but it isn't mine.

All I'm saying here, is that the media are becoming hysterical about these issues. White nationalists haven't suddenly appeared. They've been going for ages. Where was the 'no such thing as an overreaction' rhetoric when they were all dossing about online? As for the consensus, you know you're mischaracterizing my earlier points there. I've said repeatedly that there is no point in dialogue with out and out nazis. It's the one's they're trying to appeal to that we need to reach.

If you reacted to fascism by blowing up the planet, would that be an overreaction? FFS. The level of dialogue on this man

I like the term 'falling upwards', I'll have to remember that. But yeah, I guess that's one of the benefits to having a counter culture in this sort of scenario. Well, for this guy at least.

They've digitally castrated his career if that counts? Although i daresay he'll land on his feet as a critic of the SJWs and will end up earning more than he did at Google, given the perverse way these things work.

I checked wikipedia to no avail... what did the guy do?

I get it, but I don't think staying away to send a message to club hierarchy that the club should be better and more ambitious makes you a plastic fan. I agree it makes you a conditional supporter though.

Being a plastic fan would be if you stayed away when the team went down or something. It's not the same as staying away through point of principle because of the running of the club. Obviously it does mean that you don't unconditionally support the club though. Therefore, being a true fan does not equal being an unconditional fan.

Is Wolfy saying he will unconditionally support the club, and that this makes him a true supporter? You shouldn't unconditionally support anything.

I referenced him purely to use the opportunity to make myself distinct from him

Not sure this scans... I don't think the fascists want open and compassionate dialogue They have outright said they're delighted with how 'the left' is currently handling everything. Largely because it's driving people over to the nazi side. I'm saying that as liberals, we should want open and compassionate dialogue with the people that the left is pushing away.

Right but not everyone who voted for Trump did so for these reasons. Some people really fucking didn't like Clinton. I get the point though, identity groupings exist because it's far easier to tackle things if you consider groups of people as one uniform bloc. But the answer to the bigger problem is for the left to reach out to the white working class and to stop alienating them. I've said this about Corbyn as well - in fact, it's the key reason I wanted him in. I know many people (Sargon) don't think he has a message for the white working class, but that's only because he's not actively talking about them as a demographic. And that's fucking good. He's talking about the working class, working people, policies to support families in poverty, etc - and that really is the answer. That's really all it fucking takes. We don't need to turn around and say 'white people are hard done by'. We just need to stop talking about race/gender and work towards getting everyone onto a level footing as best we can. Sure, we help women from working class backgrounds up more than men from the same background. Fine. But we don't assume that women from middle class backgrounds need a leg up as much as working class men - because they probably don't. Surely we're capable of coming up with metrics to assess people's needs, without resorting to racial groupings? How about level of schooling? How about family wealth growing up? If we do that, we can eliminate structural problems that disadvantage people of certain ethnicities (things like family wealth or level of schooling), and not at the same time create a growing nazi backlash.

It will indeed be human nature. We need to rise above it if we ever want to actually solve these problems though. Until we do, they're just going to continue. To me, it seems perfectly logical in the current framework for humanity, that if you get one group blaming all their problems on another group, the latter will become defensive and potentially aggressive. That some of us are able to press down this defensive response is encouraging, but some of those same people then let themselves down by turning on those who can't. It becomes a 'holier than thou' style of rhetoric, and further alienation occurs. I think privilege checking should be done on an individual basis. I think it's absolutely fair to ask an individual person to acknowledge specific advantages they've had. I'm not so sure it's fair to do so to a group. Who on earth knows what kind of experiences individuals in a group may or may not have had that should be considered when determining how 'privileged' a specific person is. Moreover, if you consider privilege in a group level, and thus determine that white men are highly privileged - white men at the bottom of society are naturally going to resist that. Irrespective of how true it is. Because you're effectively telling them that they had all of these life advantages innately present, and despite these, despite being white, straight men, they're still at the bottom of the fucking pile. That's a lot to expect someone to swallow. Given how readily humankind is prepared to self delude, I don't think it surprising at all that there is so much push back against these notions. Calling people racists and misogynists is cathartic but not even close to being remotely helpful in actually dealing with any of these problems. It's nothing more than an attempt to shame people into silence - and what we're seeing now, horrifyingly, is people owning these labels so that they can continue to speak about how they feel. They don't care anymore. Say what you want, they don't care. And it's because we're not listening to them. I was a trustee in a counselling charity for some time, and I remember the (female) CEO of the charity telling me that she'd been to a panel amidst domestic violence charities and shelters. Many of the informed people made the case that the best way to protect women would actually be to counsel the abusers. To look at why they're doing what they are, and work them through it and out the other end. Yes, you take the women out of danger and you lock up the abuser, but you don't just abandon him. You try to turn him around. You listen. And they had demonstrable proof that this strategy significantly reduced repeat offending. The problem is, politically, no one is going to want to spend money on these people. Even though it's for the benefit of their future partners. Even though it would help fight the problem. It all sounds very familiar.