Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

Kittenscute t1_j9kr521 wrote

>One recent attempted attack on the power grid came from the founder of a neo-Nazi group who emphasizes accelerating the collapse of the United States government to ferment a “race war.”

It's always the conservatives, eh?

78

XueShiLong t1_j9krgaq wrote

I've yet to read a headline saying stoners blew up a building LOL

39

SelectiveSanity t1_j9ksgsg wrote

I've heard this quote before and I want to attribute it to Terry Pratchett but I can't seem to find it but it goes something like;

"You never see Trekkies rioting after their team loses a football game."

33

puddingdemon t1_j9krhz5 wrote

Yep but sadly conservatives are too stupid to read so they will never know its them.

16

patienceisfun2018 t1_j9ktlpa wrote

Is it because they're poor?

−5

BridgetheDivide t1_j9kvk6z wrote

90% are poor.

10% are wealthy sociopaths who profit off the other 90%

21

bountygiver t1_j9lhpsu wrote

And the 90% are convinced they are part of the 10% so they also opposed anything that would actually benefit them.

11

torpedoguy t1_j9lmwke wrote

Or that they will be soon if they just work harder and help Dear Leader oppress some out-groups before somebody learns something.

4

torpedoguy t1_j9lknh0 wrote

Of course it is. Any group left of fascism gets the full force of the US government thrown at it if it so much as espouses human rights or desegregation.

But not fascists. You can't even advocate for women's rights without brutality and criminal records, but when conservatives commit terrorism (stochastic or otherwise) nothing is done about their leaders. America never arrests MTG like it did MLK. America staunchly refuses to even ADMIT Tucker or Donald are just like Ayman (al-Zawahiri) or Bin-Laden, and easily more dangerous.

In fact its only problem with the attacks by the latter two is that they weren't Requblican, and therefore were rivals to the existing otherwise-identical far-right structure. We always, always stopped short when the far-right attacks; from allowing the confederacy's leaders to remain after the war, to declaring it would "be too partisan" to end the far-right threat in congress due to all of them being the same party.

  • Even when they assault the capitol, all they got was "okay enough for now, you're going too fast" and let them remain in power. Try again next time!

The United States government has been so terminally infested by reactionaries that its agencies and military's only real problem with ISIL or the Taliban... is that our leaders don't want competition.

13

OneWingedA t1_j9lnwra wrote

When you only have racism every problem is the start of a race war

4

hoo_dawgy t1_j9mufu7 wrote

Alcoholic beverage called "race war" yummo

2

Shmoo_the_Parader t1_j9kslzo wrote

Couldn't get past this bit. If a writer doesn't know the difference between ferment and foment, I'm not going to waste my time.

−3

Kittenscute t1_j9l0tri wrote

https://www.vocabulary.com/articles/chooseyourwords/ferment-foment/

Seems like...it's okay?

> To ferment can also mean to stir up. When you ferment something, you agitate it, you work it up, and then it changes. You can ferment people, too! An inspiring leader might ferment a revolution! See the word in action:

Ferment can be either positive or negative, then foment is almost always negative.

4

Shmoo_the_Parader t1_j9n7uck wrote

The headline from that link:

"to ferment is to cause a chemical change to food or drink, like turning grapes into wine, but to foment is to stir up trouble, like turning a group of people into an angry mob."

Fermenting is a fancy word for rotting. Fomenting is arousing or inciting. Neither have necessarily positive or negative connotations. One could ferment a tasty ale or a noxious concoction. One could foment civil disobedience or civil war.

1

AtLeastThisIsntImgur t1_j9modjd wrote

You could be less of an elitist snob

2

Shmoo_the_Parader t1_j9mpybo wrote

Why on earth would I do that? I'm a busy man. I have from the time I sit down, to the time I wipe my ass, to absorb some news. I make quick decisions whether or not something is worth my time, and I'm willing to admit when I'm wrong. You could be less of judgemental twat. You ever think of that?

0

AtLeastThisIsntImgur t1_j9mqhtx wrote

I'm clearly not though. I made a fair and accurate assessment that you agreed with.
If a single typo stops you from ingesting information then your snobbery is counterproductive.

2

Shmoo_the_Parader t1_j9mznm6 wrote

"Clearly not," my tidy tucchus. My owning up to being a snob in no way precludes nor absolves you from being a judgemental prick. If my misinformed triage of the content I choose to digest is somehow negatively affecting you, that's a you problem. I made an ill-informed assessment, received a correction, said, "thank you," and went about my day.

Am I an elitist snob? I'd argue against the elitist part and completely cop to snobbery.

Did you needlessly decide to go out of your way to make a judgemental assessment of someone who hadn't said boo to you? Absofuckinglutely.

0

Shmoo_the_Parader t1_j9n3ivw wrote

From the article:

"to ferment is to cause a chemical change to food or drink, like turning grapes into wine, but to foment is to stir up trouble, like turning a group of people into an angry mob."

0