Clarification on No Advocating Rightwing Politics

We are starting to have some commenters advocating rightwing politics. You can’t really do that on here, with some caveats.
One commenter attacked the “National Socialist Democratic welfare plantation” and said that welfare causes crime and welfare destroyed the Black family. He then called for the abolition of “welfare” whatever that means. I don’t agree with either of those notions, and you can’t say that. You’re also not allowed to call Democrats “National Socialists.” That’s Tea Party talk. You’re not allowed to call for the abolition of any social programs at all, including welfare.
Another commenter talked about “liberal social engineers” and their “soul destroying social programs.” You’re not allowed to call liberals social engineers. We support social engineering on this site, to the hilt. And you’re not allowed to falsely characterize social programs as soul-destroying, which is not true.
You’re also not allowed to bash the Democratic Party from a conservative POV by calling them national socialists, social engineers, etc.
Otherwise, of course, we don’t care where you are on the political spectrum as far as race, gender, sexual orientation, culture, etc. Hell, you can even advocate fascism, I don’t care.
Just no advocating conservative slash and eliminate the government/social spending.
Violations will result in a warning, then a ban.

Please follow and like us:
Tweet 20

0 thoughts on “Clarification on No Advocating Rightwing Politics”

  1. Let me get this straight, you’ll ban people for simply sprouting Republican propoganda but you’ll allow people to say obscene things. This is only providing legitimacy to the Republican claim that Democrats are the real racists and are responsible for the destruction of the black family and the popularization of Gangsta culture.
    *This is intended as constructive criticism so don’t ban me.

    1. @ GSG
      While I don’t presume to read Robert’s mind, I think he’s just gotten sick of fencing with Republican style ideologues, which is perfectly understandable.
      Anti-racist, white nationalist, conservative, etc, blogs aren’t exactly tolerant of opposing viewpoints.
      In spite of Robert’s recent censoring of certain viewpoints, his dedication to free speech is very admirable. You can say a lot of stuff here that you could NEVER say on most blogs.
      This is only providing legitimacy to the Republican claim that Democrats are the real racists and are responsible for the destruction of the black family and the popularization of Gangsta culture.

      And this is only proof that Republicans are doofuses who shouldn’t try to pander to blacks.
      James Edwards’s post on the “white wimp shuffle” comes to mind in this regard.

    2. Democrats did not destroy the Black family. The Democratic Party cares nothing about Gangsta culture and in fact they probably hate it.
      Yes, people can use obscenity on here. Sure. Why not?
      Almost all political sites censor. It’s really the only reasonable thing to do. Otherwise the threads are all littered with trolls from the other side.

  2. I must say Robert, you’re a very rare leftist.
    Most leftists would be the exact opposite of you. To them it’s okay to espouse conservative economics, neoliberal globalism, etc. But to criticize a black or gay person?! The horrors!
    Leftists have moved to the right on important issues like economics, and increasingly to the left on cultural issues. As I’ve said a million times, it’s a terrible combination.
    I believe in the exact opposite. Progressive economics, more right wing on cultural/lifestyle issues. That’s where countries like China and other parts of the world stand.

    1. I was thinking the same way. The modern left is nothing like this blog. they are Neoliberal globalist like Republicans but cultural marxist PC freaks. For a leftist I think Robert Lindsay has fairly rathional views opposing PC, anti-globalism, and race realism. I personally think we need to look into third positionist economic theorires such as distributinism.
      and producerism
      While I respsect Roberts right to run his blog as he wish I generally think its a good idea to welcome as many differant view points ass long as their not hostile. PC leftist are not going to hang around and the majority of race realist support some level of right wing economics. so that leaves a fairly narrow demographic who respects race realism is anti-pc and opposes right wing economics.

      1. I’ve had it up to here with rightwing economics, and I am sick and tired of arguing with them. Every time they post, I have to take apart all of their crap, which is all lies anyway, but I have to go through the trouble of researching why it’s all a big lie.
        This is progressive and socialist site. There are a million sites out there for people to spout their Republican Party talking points.
        I’d like to point out that almost all political sites censor, and those that don’t are wrecked by trolls littering up the comments. I don’t go to progressive sites to read the comments in order to read rightwingers channeling Glen Beck. That’s a waste of time for me.
        You’re correct that this site has a limited demographic, but it’s ok. If you like Republican Party shit, you can still post here, just keep quiet about that stuff. Some formerly banned commenters are doing just that.

  3. I’m all for freedom of speech. Let the Republicans, or Black nationalists, or Super jews deligitimize themselves.

      1. Super Jews suck big time. I was never really an anti-semite just critical of organized Jewry, Israel, and aspects of Jewish culture but dealing with these Super Jews wil turn any sane person into an anti-semite.

        1. The hypocrisy of super Jews is especially appalling.
          The ADL denounces Arizona’s law and promotes multiculturalism at home, while simultaneously defending Israel’s Gaza invasion.
          Jews support multiculturalism/egalitarianism in countries where they’re minorities (such as in the U.S. and European countries), but not where they’re the majority (ie. Israel).
          Not that it’s impractical for the Jews to do this. They’re cleverly pursuing their own self-interest.
          I just think that their fake moral posturing and hypocrisy needs to be noted, and people need to stop falling for the myth that Jews are enlightened and progressive.
          (or as Gilad Atzmon would say, “Jewish leftist” is a contradiction)

        2. Comparing Arizona to Gaza is like comparing apples to oranges.
          I have never been a fan of Gilad Atzmon. He claims to have rejected his jewish identity (I have no problem with that), yet his work is central to it. Israel and Jewishness are so central to his life that he cannot distance himself from it in his professional career. he has not moved on an still has a chip on his shoulder. Same with Weiss, Martillo. Jewishness and Israel are still an integral part of their lives and their work. When Weiss was writing for the Observer, he would frequently write jewish pieces from “an anti zionist jewish perspective,” which I consider to be highly unprofessional. If you want to be an objective journalist, you have to reject any identity If you want to reject your jewish identity, you should live true to your creed and shed it completely and get a new passion.

    1. The Black nationalists, Super Jews and all the rest of the idiots can talk all they want. But no advocating Republican Party right wing economics “slash the social programs” talking points.
      Almost all blogs censor, and most only allow speech that agrees with the politics of the blog. That’s a good idea, because otherwise you get overrun with trolls.

  4. Also search James Bacque + Other Losses.
    Bacque interviewed a former German POW, who credited Laporterie with saving his life. The POW went on to note that in just one month, 25 per cent of his comrades had died while in French captivity.
    This set Bacque on a new trail. The results of his careful investigation is the work under consideration here. The term “Other Losses” was used in the U.S. Army “Weekly Prisoner of War & Disarmed Enemy Forces Reports,” to cover deaths and escapes.
    U.S. Army officials have admitted that escapes accounted for less than 2 per cent of these “other” losses. The rest died. After sifting though U.S. Army files stored at the National Archives in Washington, D.C., where he was assisted by Col. Fisher, as well as relevant Canadian, British, and French records, Bacque has come to the conclusion that:
    … enormous numbers of men of all ages, plus some women and children, died of exposure, unsanitary conditions, disease and starvation in the American and French camps in Germany and France …
    The victims undoubtedly number over 800,000, almost certainly over 900,000 and quite likely over a million. Their deaths were knowingly caused by army officers who had sufficient resources to keep the prisoners alive.

    1. You’re a fascist dog. I hate fascists and I think they should be killed, but for some reason I’m going to let you live. Not only that, but I will let you post here all you want! How’s that for generosity?
      I think you are a National Bolshevik/Third Positionist type.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


Enjoy this blog? Please spread the word :)