[ / / / / / / / / / / / / / ] [ dir / 1cc / asmr / ausneets / chicas / fur / islam / leftpol / wooo ][Options][ watchlist ]

/fur/ - Furry

all fur one and one fur all
You can now write text to your AI-generated image at https://aiproto.com It is currently free to use for Proto members.
Name
Email
Subject
Comment *
File
Select/drop/paste files here
* = required field[▶ Show post options & limits]
Confused? See the FAQ.
Expand all images

►►► Get Whitelisted | Rules | Catalog | Log ◄◄◄

| Find & Share | Art | Edit | Literature | Porn |

File (hide): 10f038be08c1453⋯.jpg (246.92 KB, 1430x1431, 1430:1431, 1490513386056.jpg) (h) (u)

[–]

 No.54867>>54893 >>54895 [Watch Thread][Show All Posts]

Newsweek released an article on the alt furries: "Neo-Nazi Furries are Trump's Latest and Most Puzzling Alt-Right Supporters"

http://www.newsweek.com/2017/12/01/neo-nazi-furries-trump-latest-alt-right-supporters-718113.html

 No.54868>>54878

Am I on /pol/ again?


 No.54875>>54878 >>54893

Also this:

https://medium.com/@DeoTasDevil/how-white-nationalism-courts-internet-nerd-culture-b4ebad07863d

http://www.theroot.com/nazi-furries-are-proof-that-white-people-have-officiall-1820686025

They're trying too hard to inject politics into this fandom. AltFurry and Furry Raiders are just small groups, the majority of Furries have never heard of them. Yet these leftists go around spreading paranoia like "There are Nazis everywhere, the fandom is doomed!!"


 No.54878>>54879 >>54893 >>55171

>>54868

It's all /pol/ around here. The BOs and mods of every single board are all /pol/-friendly. You know how they say that Jews control every single world leader and large company? It's exactly like that.

>>54875

There's really not a lot. A few retards and that one guy with the confederate-flag fursuit. Still, we shouldn't be tolerating any of them, lest their numbers start to grow. There's one guy in there who said he got blocked from joining a Nazi group because he was Asian, gay, and a furry. GOOD. He shouldn't feel welcome anywhere. Maybe once he gets his shit together and decides to stop being a massive asshole, he can come back to us. We don't judge unless you're a shitstain to begin with.


 No.54879>>54892

>>54878

>There's one guy in there who said he got blocked from joining a Nazi group because he was Asian, gay, and a furry.

Yeah, that was Foxler Nightfire, the leader of the Furry Raiders. I don't actually believe he's a Nazi, mostly because he has a black boyfriend.

They're not really "tolerated", it's more like nobody really cares about them. And their influence and reach is tremendously low, anyway. It's just that a bunch of SJWs on Twitter recognizes them too much and sees them as danger, which in turn just spreads fear and drama.


 No.54892>>54894 >>55040

>>54879

>I don't actually believe he's a Nazi, mostly because he has a black boyfriend.

Well, he clearly WANTS to be a Nazi. It's just fucking bizarre. What could he possibly want from a group that is dedicated to eliminating all races but their own, has a history of killing gays, and hates all forms of degeneracy because it gets in the way of pumping out as many white babies as possible? Even IF the Nazis had some kind of point, or legitimate complaint about being oppressed that wasn't /tinfoilhat/ nonsense or masked bigotry, it's still senseless. It would be like a white guy walking into a Black Panthers meeting and saying, "Hey, guys, I'm against police brutality, too! :D " and expecting them to just let him in on principle.


 No.54893>>54897

>>54867 (OP)

>>54875

Archiving all of those links for you.

>https://unv.is/http://www.newsweek.com/2017/12/01/neo-nazi-furries-trump-latest-alt-right-supporters-718113.html

>https://unv.is/http://medium.com/@DeoTasDevil/how-white-nationalism-courts-internet-nerd-culture-b4ebad07863d

>https://unv.is/http://www.theroot.com/nazi-furries-are-proof-that-white-people-have-officiall-1820686025

They just want to push the mene that WNs are losers, which is fine, but it won't do much to xhange.

>>54878

Mods aren't /pol/-friendly at all, they just don't care. If you want to turn this community into another Twitter/Tumblr, go back to where you came from.

Additionally, they don't state that Jews control everything. They state that wealthy left-leaning Jews in power (institutional or federal) work actively against right-wing causes, which is true. Jewish journalists admit to it as a "means of preventing Hitler" and George Soros is a living example. The issue isn't that they're wealthy or exert their power against their opposition, it's that they also elevate themselves among the majority and minority to be untouchable for committing wrongdoing. An example of it is the Israeli Anti-Boycott act where it's illegal to boycott against Israeli products in the US. No country has that privilege except for the country of Jewish people.

https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/senate-bill/720?q=%7B%22search%22%3A%5B%22Israel+Anti-Boycott+act%22%5D%7D&r=1

Call me anything if you want, but you won't find success if you force people to believe in a lie. It's like trying to make people believe that gravity doesn't exist.


 No.54894>>54901 >>62141

>>54892

>What could he possibly want from a group that is dedicated to eliminating all races but their own, has a history of killing gays, and hates all forms of degeneracy because it gets in the way of pumping out as many white babies as possible?

He's not a National Socialist retard, that was a label that you placed him for his politically incorrect views and the way he dresses. He dresses to become provocative, not because he wants to gas Jews.


 No.54895>>54899 >>62839

>>54867 (OP)

Alt-Right, New Right...

because "Hipster Nazifags" is such a long word.


 No.54897>>54899

>>54893

>No country has that privilege except for the country of Jewish people.

Actually, it appears the bill also extends to countries "friendly to the US", but also specifies Israel in separate statements altogether.

The only differences I can find is that Israel isn't listed as a "friendly" country, which would imply the bill applies even if the US and Israel became enemies at some point.

It's also not listed as a possible "object of any form of boycott pursuant to United States law or regulation", but other friendly countries are. Which basically means the US can legally boycott whoever they want, except Israel. They can never be boycotted in any case.

Slick.

And then they wonder why I hate the fucking hook-nosed rats. I don't like being made fun of and manipulated by foreigners in my own country, I don't know about you.


 No.54899>>55029

>>54895

Journalists throw the "Nazi" pejorative at anyone with anti-immigration or right wing views and it should have been discredited when they called Polish marchers "nazis". It's a retarded comparison because Nazis didn't block their borders, they invaded territory like Poland and tried giving Jews an ethnostate akin to Israel. The kill word works because they know that people don't look at history.

>>54897

I don't blame Jews, people opposed to Jews, or the system that they are both on. I blame non-Jews who don't think for themselves while acting against the people opposed to unethical Jewish action.

Proof is in front of them; several articles, documented funds, and several bills made in favor of that particular ethnic group made by members of that ethnic group, with Jewish people admitting to it themselves several. Yet non-Jews rely on Wolfenstein and Inglorius Basterds for their historical and political knowledge.

A poison seller can't sell any poison if they don't have any customers, but they know that a lot of goyim buy it in bulk.


 No.54901>>54903

File (hide): 7881ec4ae39eb5b⋯.png (53.57 KB, 850x303, 850:303, 20170518_jokes.png) (h) (u)


 No.54903>>54906

>>54901

Your first claim was

>"Why would he is a Nazi if he is Asian and gay?"

People stated that

>"He doesn't act like one or identifies as one. He stated that he isn't a Nazi and doesn't identify with white identity politics because he is a gay asian. He just wears it to be provocative"

And you respond with,

>"He's a Nazi because he wears it to be insincere!"

You're pretty dumb.


 No.54906>>54907 >>54908

>>54903

That was my first post in the thread.


 No.54907

>>54906

Then read the preceding claims before it. I never said that it was unacceptable for you to take offense with the symbol, I stated he isn't a Nazi for using it.


 No.54908

>>54906

Futhermore if you unironically think that he wants to gas Jews and kill gays because he used that symbol to be an edgy attention whore, you're retarded.


 No.54922>>54927

File (hide): d1bbd5e433771f3⋯.png (166.75 KB, 601x421, 601:421, alt furry.png) (h) (u)


 No.54927>>55053

>>54922

It's kind of hilarious that you guys constantly alternate between:

>These people are harmless pathetic losers who will never make it, laugh at them!

>These people are a strong, scary, and dangerous, punch them to prevent another Hitler!

There's a good reason why you, your clique, and another journalists hold those contradictory viewpoints. It indicates that deep down inside, you believe that your claims are pure falsehood. Your consensus for evaluating truth isn't objective data or practical experience, it's emotional state and social media likes. Truth is always consistently objective, not incongruently subjective.


 No.54928>>54946

remember SamFarber from Lulz? The masturbating black guy who typed misspelled posts, wrote rap song parodies about masturbation and bragged about getting buttfucked a lot?

That's the alt-right movement. A bunch of degenerate sexual deviants of low intelligence who think they're all about the white race when most are, at minimum, mixed blood and have brown hair. Milo is practically Sam without the rap lyrics- sucks dick, pretends to be white, dates another race.


 No.54942

Is this the official cancer containment thread then?


 No.54946

>>54928

I don't mind if you think of them as a joke. The strange part is that you all pretend to treat them as a threat.


 No.55029>>55036

>>54899

>the average alt righter browses /fur/


 No.55036

>>55029

>twitter users complain about seeing offensive content on chan boards

You have to go back.


 No.55040>>55042 >>55058 >>55172

File (hide): 3da92b021738e69⋯.jpg (493.29 KB, 1477x1908, 1477:1908, 3da92b021738e6975f2aec2f43….jpg) (h) (u)

>>54892

>a group that is dedicated to eliminating all races but their own

yeah, no. Dont believe anything they teach you at school or tell you on the tv. Hitler hated the jews because of that they do, nobody can blame him for that. National socialism is to make your own nation great, not to eliminate all other nations. If you're really unbiased you could just listen to some of Hitler speeches, but i cant blame you for not doing that its hard to go against the brainwashing you get from start on in your life.

>has a history of killing gays

As literally any other nation at this time too. Gays were hated worldwide, USA didnt kill them as openly as germany did, but police ignoring the killing of gays and actually arresting people for beeing gay is not really better. Its just a more unopen way to do it. Gays got killed by the Che gevuara and Fidel Castro for beeing gay. So hating gays is not a thing of the right or left its just a kind of Zeitgeist. If its "in" again to hate gays trust me the left will hate them again.


 No.55042>>55043

>>55040

Americans learn something at school except salute and blame god?!

They killed fucking everyone. Including gays, handicapped people, old people, I bet autist people too, so there wouldn't be many nazifurs left if you know what I mean...


 No.55043>>55044

>>55042

Your rationality would be fine if you held the same standard to communists like Deo, but you don't despite them committing the same action with a higher kill count.

That's because you're aware that your piss poor "excuse" is fundamentally bullshit. If you were genuinely retarded to think that a gay asian LARPer was a genocidal national socialist, you would kill them, not ban them from cons and threaten to punch them on Twitter.

There's a very good reason why your dumb clique and sevetal other journalists haven't killed them yet, it's because courts would rightfully send your asses to prison for murdering a person because you saw offensive photos on your Twitter feed. You're lying to yourself and you're fully aware of it, stop doing it.


 No.55044>>55058 >>55064

>>55043

First: I'm not even reading that nazi shit.

Second: Sad that this is the top fucking thread on this board now. This board is dead.


 No.55053>>55065

>>54927

>Truth is always consistently objective, not incongruently subjective.

Truth is always blurred since reality often escapes arbitrary classification.

Similarly you could have

>furries are all pathetic virgins

>furries are all sex pests.

The answer isn't "both of these are true" or "neither of these are true", the fandom is just full of both.


 No.55058>>55062 >>55066

>>55040

>listen to some of Hitler speeches

Yes, yes of course. While you're at it, why don't you go listen to an insurance salesman's speeches, and believe EVERYTHING HE SAYS.

>It's okay to kill gay people because other people are doing it

It's nice to not have to lift a finger while people prove how fucked-up they are.

>>55044

This site is dead; this country is dead.


 No.55062

>>55058

Yours maybe, but somehow it drags all the others down with it.


 No.55064>>55136

>>55044

That's your ideology in a nutshell. Screech "Nazi" without ever looking or thinking. You are retarded.


 No.55065>>55067

>>55053

If both are true, then why not state both unedited statements at the same time?

Protip: You can't because it makes you look contradictory.

The fact that you dismiss accuracy as "arbitrary classification" when it comes to telling the truth means that you don't care about truth to begin with. Accuracy is never a bad thing unless if you're a liar, which in this case, you guys are.


 No.55066>>55070

>>55058

>Yes, yes of course. While you're at it, why don't you go listen to an insurance salesman's speeches, and believe EVERYTHING HE SAYS.

His speeches were about reversing the changes made in the Treaty of Versailles. They lost territory and power after WWI, falling into economic depression because of it. Learn history instead of your Twitter feed.

>It's nice to not have to lift a finger while people prove how fucked-up they are.

You saying that Nazism should be renounced for being anti-homosexual in a time when the Allies also were. It's like arguing that we shouldn't buy a Ford since it uses Petroleum when other car brands use Petroleum as well. Why single it out for that offense when several others break your rule? Alan Turing didn't die in Nazi Germany.

>This site is dead; this country is dead.

It's dead to people who are already dead inside.


 No.55067>>55079

>>55065

Very telling that you immediately jump to assuming that by explaining a general issue of classifying almost anything, I'm taking a side.

>If both are true, then why not state both unedited statements at the same time?

>Protip: You can't because it makes you look contradictory.

>The fact that you dismiss accuracy as "arbitrary classification" when it comes to telling the truth means that you don't care about truth to begin with

I'm always baffled by the ability of people on an imageboard to avoid disagreeing with the core point, then spinning it into bizarre inconsistent disagreement.

"Why not be accurate and state both? Obviously it's because you hate the truth. However, Truth and accuracy will make you look inconsistent. Haha."

(The actual arbitrary classification being referred to, strictly, is groupings like 'furry' or 'nazi' itself. Arbitrary shouldn't be read as 'bad', it's just the way we group things puts Wehrmacht soldiers in the same box as sex pests who like red and black. Then you shift the definition depending on context.)


 No.55070>>55076 >>62143

>>55066

>You saying that Nazism should be renounced for being anti-homosexual in a time when the Allies also were

YES! Finally you get it, you dumb motherfucker. Both sides were at fault, at the time, for being anti-homosexual. No shit. However, we're only talking about Nazis as they are right now. By mentioning anyone else, you're doing just what Trump does by attempting to deflect any criticism of himself by moaning, "B-but HILLARY'S E-MAILS!"

>Germany lost power and territory because of a war they started

Bullies gonna bully, then whine when their victims fight back.


 No.55076>>55089

>>55070

>YES! Finally you get it, you dumb motherfucker. Both sides were at fault, at the time, for being anti-homosexual. No shit. However, we're only talking about Nazis as they are right now. By mentioning anyone else, you're doing just what Trump does by attempting to deflect any criticism of himself by moaning, "B-but HILLARY'S E-MAILS!"

It's not a deflection of criticism, it's just not a legitimate point to hold against them if you're given the full context of the setting. A legitimate point would be a unique violation that Nazi Germany committed. It would be like how they tried to illegally invade territory like Poland.

>Bullies gonna bully, then whine when their victims fight back.

The attack on Serbia was a response to an assassination on their ally's (Austria) prime minister. Then their enemy's allies hopped in despite Germany telling them not to intervene, and it became a huge mess with Germany losing.

Stop relying on your Twitter feed for historical knowledge, it's pretty embarrassing.


 No.55079>>55119

>>55067

You've missed the entire point of what I've said. An accurate statement with your example would be:

>"The fandom is filled with both virgins and sex-addicts."

Not

>"The fandom is consisted of all virgins. The fandom is consisted of all sex addicts."

The latter statement is contradictory because you first claimed that group A is entirely filled with B people, later claiming that group A is entirely filled with C people to imply that it's not entirely filled with B people. The former statement isn't contradictory because you claimed that group A is entirely filled with both B and C people.

I get that you can conclude implicitly that the latter statement means the former statement, but the difference is so minor that it puzzles me as to why you can't easily state it.

Regardless, we're hopping too much from the initial point. They get that "alt-furry" isn't threatening, they just want an excuse to hit people for seeing offensive content on twitter. Those people are retarded.


 No.55089>>55097

>>55076

>it's not a deflection of criticism if I just keep deflecting the criticism!

Okay, look. Just shut the fuck up about historical Nazis. Keeping your dumb ass on topic is trying to keep a five-year-old's attention on something, fuck.

We're talking about Nazis NOW, who want to emulate the old ways and CONTINUE being anti-semetic and murdering gays and whatnot, at a time where NOBODY ELSE is doing such things. That's it! There is nothing else to talk about, no excuse for their behavior! Get it through your fat nigger head!


 No.55097>>55112

>>55089

>Okay, look. Just shut the fuck up about historical Nazis. Keeping your dumb ass on topic is trying to keep a five-year-old's attention on something, fuck.

>NAZIS ARE BAD BECAUSE OF X

>Allies also did X. Since you don't consider allies bad yourself, why not explain Nazi Germany's unique violations?

>NO STOP CHANGING THE TOPIC FIVE YEAR OLD

If you can't articulate yourself properly or see why your logic is dumb, then don't bother arguing to begin.

>We're talking about Nazis NOW, who want to emulate the old ways and CONTINUE being anti-semetic and murdering gays and whatnot, at a time where NOBODY ELSE is doing such things. That's it! There is nothing else to talk about, no excuse for their behavior! Get it through your fat nigger head!

Gee, I never knew that the Nazi Party of 1930s Germany fully consisted of gay Asian con regulars who wore fursuits with pawstikas to trigger people on a social media platform that hasn't existed yet. Really?

Like I said, quit looking at your Twitter feed. It's making you and everyone obnoxiously dumber because of it's limited communication. It's gotten bad that none of you guys can interpret anything above 140 characters. There's nothing edifying in there that you can learn besides appeal to emotion. Read a book for once.


 No.55112>>55115 >>55116 >>55126

>>55097

>Read a book for once

Which one? Mein Kampf...?

If you're a Nazi, you're a bad person. It's objective fact. End of argument.


 No.55115

>>55112

>If you're a Nazi, you're a bad person. It's objective fact. End of argument.

sounds more like an ad-homenin than an 'objective fact'.

if you want to shut down dialogue because you don't like the people you're talking to, that's up to you, but don't pretend you've won just because you took the ball and went home.


 No.55116

>>55112

>If you're a Nazi, you're a bad person. It's objective fact. End of argument.

Did you have to go to college to learn to debate like this, or did you just go to a really good high school and watch a lot of TV?

(BTW there haven't been any actual nazis since 1945.)


 No.55118

File (hide): 11cc3452b3b1055⋯.jpg (24.27 KB, 960x422, 480:211, 1482246422200.jpg) (h) (u)

>mfw I click on someone's profile and they have the nazifur/antifafur icon on their page


 No.55119>>55129 >>55130

>>55079

Few people say "All nazis are violent", the statement "Nazis are violent" or "Furries are sex pests" can map onto all furries, or just a substantial sub-group.

There's very little sense in wanking around with BBC mandated balance irrelevant to the point you're making, especially in a market-driven world where 90% of people barely make it past the headline. ("Here's an exploration of furry orgies, but first let's talk to a furry virgin to show you both sides, even though you clicked this article to read about sex.")

>They get that "alt-furry" isn't threatening, they just want an excuse to hit people for seeing offensive content on twitter

I mean, this still seems in certain cases to assume malice where stupidity would make a fine substitute. (i.e. if you're a relative-normalfag, seeing people draw art threatening to throw "you" out of a helicopter or run you down with a truck does give a violent impression. Some dwelling on it would make you consider that maybe the person paying tens of dollars for such autism is laughably impotent in real life and needs an outlet, but why would anyone with a comparatively normal mindset bother?)

I'll make a tangential but relevant point here as well: If you're a furry, I'm going to assume you're a pervert of sorts. I don't mean that negatively (We are of course on the furry board, which says much about me), but if you say you're "just in it for the art" I'm not going to believe you. I know what you masturbate to the moment you say "I'm a furry", and nothing short of medical evidence that your genitalia have been surgically removed will convince me otherwise. (Even then I'll probably just estimate you have a nullo fetish.)

Similarly, even though you might not be violent in real life it says much about you if you choose to keep the company of Nazis or people who LARP as nazis. Now, in my case I make it a judgement of taste. (i.e. you're an idiot to do so in a publicly identifiable fashion.) But it's not entirely unreasonable to draw implications like "you will support violence against certain groups" even if you don't engage in it yourself. If you don't want people to make such inferences, maybe you shouldn't associate openly with such groups.

You broadened this well beyond Twitter retards by including journalists. It's still not healthy to assign the same motivations to broadly divergent groups without a coherent justification.


 No.55126>>55139 >>55275

>>55112

>Which one? Mein Kampf...?

I told you to read a history book relating to WWII, and yet you got that? What? The funny thing is that you would still be proven wrong if you cross referenced the autobiography of a national socialist with Foxler's Twitter feed. In fact, any WWII history book would prove you wrong.

Like I said, none of you Twitter users can't interpret any statement properly beyond 140 characters. It's as if your mind goes blank after seeing the first two sentences. It's making you dumber.

>If you're a Nazi, you're a bad person. It's objective fact. End of argument.

I'm not saying that you can't have a negative opinion of them and Foxler. I'm saying that you're hilariously delusional if you think that Foxler has the same motives as a 1930s National Socialist.

This is why told you to crack up a history book of any kind to see how ridiculous you are for making the dumbest link out there. Even if you didn't use a history book, I told you why they weren't comparable at all.


 No.55129>>55134

>>55119

>Few people say "All nazis are violent", the statement "Nazis are violent" or "Furries are sex pests" can map onto all furries, or just a substantial sub-group. There's very little sense in wanking around with BBC mandated balance irrelevant to the point you're making, especially in a market-driven world where 90% of people barely make it past the headline. ("Here's an exploration of furry orgies, but first let's talk to a furry virgin to show you both sides, even though you clicked this article to read about sex.")

All I got is that you care more about the number of hits in your article than you telling the truth. It's the fundamental issue with the majority of publications today and why I'm always doubting their credibility. You're correct that a lot of people don't read past the headline, but you're aware that those exact people act on the information given to them in the headline. That's why being fully honest is important.

I get why you primarily target the niche western right, it's an easy article for you guys to write about. The most you get from not fact-checking them are angry tweets that temporarily fill up your notifications instead of multi-million dollar lawsuits or MS-13 executions.

>I mean, this still seems in certain cases to assume malice where stupidity would make a fine substitute. (i.e. if you're a relative-normalfag, seeing people draw art threatening to throw "you" out of a helicopter or run you down with a truck does give a violent impression. Some dwelling on it would make you consider that maybe the person paying tens of dollars for such autism is laughably impotent in real life and needs an outlet, but why would anyone with a comparatively normal mindset bother?)

They didn't create those violent images spontaneously of out of malice, it was done in response to their opposition creating violent images of them. I notice that there's a tendency with journalists to state the effect while omitting the cause, probably to give the intention of it being outrageous. I don't blame you, a lot of morons fall for it.

Not saying that two wrongs make a right, but the reason why all of you guys neglect mention the prior event that caused it is because you know that you were at fault for starting the fire. You definitely are aware that they wouldn't make violent images of you being thrown out of helicopters if you didn't commission images of them being punched in the first place.


 No.55130>>55134

>>55119

contd.

>Similarly, even though you might not be violent in real life it says much about you if you choose to keep the company of Nazis or people who LARP as nazis. Now, in my case I make it a judgement of taste. (i.e. you're an idiot to do so in a publicly identifiable fashion.) But it's not entirely unreasonable to draw implications like "you will support violence against certain groups" even if you don't engage in it yourself. If you don't want people to make such inferences, maybe you shouldn't associate openly with such groups.

You're fine to have that negative view about them since they offend you. What I disagree with is that notion to treat them as a threat. Despite what you say, you don't believe that they're a deadly threat either. It doesn't matter what implications and assumptions mean to you. Whenever you see a deadly active threat like a robber breaking into your home, you wouldn't:

1. Commission numerous artwork of them being punched.

2. Make several articles about them with your name on it.

3. Diss them on Twitter frequently to obtain several likes and RTs on Twitter.

Whenever we encounter any violent threat, it's common sense that no one would take methods that would give their threat an advantage. They would not give additional information about their livelihood, they would not provoke their threat into meeting them, and they would certainly not spend their money on luxuries.

It leads me to believe that they're lying to themselves, pretending that they're angry about low-hanging fruit for fun. So there's no shame in me having the company of nazi-larpers. If you were in their company, then you would realize that they're just honest liberals who don't believe in the lies that everyone else pretends to believe in with the fear of losing friends.

>You broadened this well beyond Twitter retards by including journalists. It's still not healthy to assign the same motivations to broadly divergent groups without a coherent justification.

I still maintain my negative position on Twitter users. However, I was reminded of what journalists come from now. I forgot your motives since 2014, so I thank you for reminding me of it. I don't think that you're dumb, just apathetic and self-serving. I could do the same actions that you guys are doing, but my morality prevents me to because I know the outcome what I'm doing. Be grateful to God that you currently have an opposition that barks, not bites. It's not going to last forever though. A lot of countries like China, Nigeria, Philippines, and Mexico drew the line for you guys because you don't know how to make one yourself. I was puzzled as to why countries would suddenly treat reporters in a cruel manner, but it seems that they have a lower tolerance for inaccurate information. What I admire the most about their cultures is that they don't weasel-word and hold back like whites do, they can immediately determine actions for what they are and act on it until the issue is eradicated. No one likes people who lead others astray through misinformation after all.


 No.55134>>55163

File (hide): 0bf9342619f35da⋯.png (458.66 KB, 679x768, 679:768, 58LTH5S4NrGpPp9xpm_JMRzcf9….png) (h) (u)

>>55129

>All I got is that you care more about the number of hits in your article than you telling the truth. It's the fundamental issue with the majority of publications today and why I'm always doubting their credibility. You're correct that a lot of people don't read past the headline, but you're aware that those exact people act on the information given to them in the headline. That's why being fully honest is important.

I'm going to offer a point for reflection: How often do you use the word 'leftist' in the very fashion you decry here?

("leftists want to ban statues" versus "american liberals want to ban statues, but actually there are chinese communists who don't give a shit either way...")

>I get why you primarily target the niche western right, it's an easy article for you guys to write about.

Cut this 'you' shit out. I'm British, would have voted Trump if I was a yank, and hate most US Liberals.

>They didn't create those violent images spontaneously of out of malice, it was done in response to their opposition creating violent images of them.

If you want to spiral this back to cavemen, feel free. ("Antifa only started drawing images of punching nazis, because nazis punched them, because non-antifa students punched nazis in the 60s, because nazis invaded Europe in the 1930s, because the allies defeated Germany in 1918, because there was a geopolitical clusterfuck in 1914, because...")

>>55130

Partially as a cop out so I can get back to my movie for the next half hour, I'm not replying to a single word of this post until you rephrase it to remove each inappropriate use of 'you' to conflate me with Zoe Quinn loving gaming journalists and weird #ImFurHer types.


 No.55136>>55143

>>55064

This.

Whenever i try to talk with lefties, i speak very slow and carefully so that i dont accidently insult them or something like that. I never try to push my ideoligy to hard i just present facts while remaining as friendly as possible. But as soon as they realise that i actually know what im talking about they try to bait me into insulting them by hardly raging and throwing threats and insults at me. This is the point where i usually know that i have won the argument, since there is nothing but going in circles from there on, i usually leave since they ingore every single sentence from there on. But that just shows me that there is no peacefull way to approche them. How would i as a politician for example try to convince those people that another way is needed, when theyre so hateful and voilent that there is no way for conversation? The answer is the current situation. The right will get more voilent by the day cause they're sick of the left. The problematic thing about this is i have somehow the feeling that behaviour is wanted by certain people that dont want the cultures to settle down. Some people that benefit from constant war. The only reason i didnt go full neo nazi yet is because it feels like the ones who control the left want me to fight them and want us to kill each other. Right winger just seem to be harder to brainwash.


 No.55139>>55162

>>55126

Why the fuck are you so hung up on Twitter that you have to mention it every time you post? Is this the latest /pol/ meme along with calling things they don't like "tumblr" and men that aren't edgy conservatives like they are "soyboy"?

It honestly destroys any semblance of an argument that you might have had, because it makes you look like a complete raving lunatic.

>Neo-Nazis aren't the same as historical Nazis

Then they should form a new group with a different name. Why associate so closely with something you don't want to be anything like? Either they're lying about their motivation, or they're unbelievably stupid people.


 No.55143>>55148

>>55136

Have you ever considered that your selection of facts says much more about you than your tone?

You have a selection of inflation statistics. I have a selection of unemployment statistics. Let's argue.

Except Immediately, merely from the fact you're showing your concern about inflation, [1.] I know that we disagree (I'm a fiscal dove, i.e. more concerned about unemployment and real terms wages.) and [2.] know that since this is the internet, you're going to throw some crazy shit at me. (Probably including the "if you spend more to cut unemployment now, you'll kickstart an inflationary spiral" meme.)

Note my deft selection of an unspeakably dry example (the person I'm imagining I'm arguing with who's spouting nonsense isn't you, but former Prime Minister of the UK James Callaghan, who gave that view to his party conference during the 1970s. In actuality, until the 1970s the 'unemployment > inflation > more unemployment > more inflation' spiral simply did not occur. It was empirically false to state it.) which in itself says a lot about me


 No.55148

>>55143

>fiscal dove

monetary dove.

very tired.


 No.55162>>55165 >>55206

>>55139

>Why the fuck are you so hung up on Twitter that you have to mention it every time you post? Is this the latest /pol/ meme along with calling things they don't like "tumblr" and men that aren't edgy conservatives like they are "soyboy"? It honestly destroys any semblance of an argument that you might have had, because it makes you look like a complete raving lunatic.

Because your arguments are emotionally laden and illogical like theirs. Like them, you don't do your research, you throw a lot of pejoratives like "Nazi", and you pull a lot of incorrect assumptions to prove a point. Sorry, but I don't have patience for it.

>Then they should form a new group with a different name. Why associate so closely with something you don't want to be anything like? Either they're lying about their motivation, or they're unbelievably stupid people.

They did exactly that by calling themselves the "Furry Raiders" which is a Fallout reference. They even said that they didn't identify themselves as Nazis. However this didn't prevent the press from playing a game of telephone by calling them "alt-furry", finally labeling them as "Nazis" for clicks. It's ridiculous to place them at fault for a label that the opposition placed on them.


 No.55163

>>55134

You know what? I'll drop it for you, have fun with your movie.


 No.55165

>>55162

>Because your arguments are emotionally laden and illogical like theirs.

lol so what of it, if the memey fedora hipster lords want to wear swastikas and sieg heil for a while this doesn't make it ok for the actual zyklon shitsquads to not get laughed at.


 No.55171

>>54878

Most of it is internet shitlords who don't really give a fuck about /pol/, though. Only reason it seems leftist stuff gets banned more is due to it being a lot more vitriolic around here.

This is more due to the culture of the chans. Where /pol/'s "Fuck niggers" can be scoffed and walked past, the left's"U SUPPORT TRUMP U R HITLER VIDEO GANES R SEXIST MUH COMMUNISM" hits home for more people. It catches more replies than /pol/'s sub par bait.

Least, this had been my experience. I've not gone to all the boards, and each is run by someone different.


 No.55172

>>55040

I can blame him for that. He hated an entire race because of the shit actions of some of them. That's why collectivism is inherently cancer.


 No.55206>>55252

>>55162

Okay, now you've steered the topic from "real Nazis" to "Neo Nazis", and fully back to "wannabe-Nazi furries" just because it supports your argument. Last time I saw someone move the goalposts this far, it was because the soccer field was relocated across town. Ironically, this is where the topic should have stayed, but YOU were the one who altered it initially, to crow about how the original Nazis dindu nuffin. So what if the "furry raiders" aren't calling themselves Nazis? They're still fucking assholes and deserve to be called out for that.

You talk about how everyone on Twitter isn't smart enough to debate with you because it's easy. You're taking the lazy way out by just handwaving the entire world as inferior to you for no reason. But in order to have gained this bias, you must have spent time on Twitter, too. Which means that YOUR arguments must by definition be just as emotionally laden and illogical as their's. Funny how that works. You're a meaningless retard ant like the rest of them.


 No.55252>>55268

>>55206

Keep in mind that there is a difference between "calling someone out" and calling them the faggots they are, and trying to get them banned or censored.

I may well think all collectivist identitarians are complete scum, historically responsive for the worst atrocities of mankind, left or right, but I sure as all fuck so not think they should be censored, banned, or otherwise limited in what they can say or believe.


 No.55255>>55266

This thread is funny as fuck in more ways than you furverts realize


 No.55266

>>55255

Starting with the fact that a group of homosexual perverts defend a type of political direction that wants to fursecute them?


 No.55268

>>55252

I'm torn. On one hand I recognize that "hate speech" is logically flawed, and political correctness has gotten way out of hand, true. But on the other hand, the firm hand of the government through the power of law is literally the only thing keeping certain groups of people from just going out and killing smaller groups that they don't like.

I don't think anyone would be against banning, say, NAMBLA from furcons. So where does the slippery slope end on who we should censor, and who we should not?


 No.55275

>>55126

Stop make fun of Foxler, he God's gift to fandom! Death to all who haters on him!


 No.55277

Everyone wants to delineate acceptable criteria for censorship in a rigid fashion. It seems quite bizarre.

We all want to say "Well rationally we can predict that letting paedos post will attract more of them, so we ban that. But then with Nazis/Communists, we need to uphold political free speech" where a more rational approach is to ask: Is this an annoying Nazi or not? Is this a smart communist who adds something to the discussion, or just a LARPer who likes listening to the Red Army Choir? If we've got a 12 year old Hillary supporter, are they amusingly stupid or just mind numbing?

Obviously on normal forums it's asking far too much to expect furries to censor on the basis of post quality rather than post content, but in a sort of Platonic Aristocracy sense it's something to strive for.

(It should also be noted that "quality" has a particular definition here: A well sourced borderline academic paper on the economic impacts of Trump's tax cuts can still be a shitty post if it's boring and not fun to read, while a schizo rant on "lening and the kike" can be left alone on the basis that it's hilarious.)


 No.55298>>55334

Let's get to the meat of the issue:

Eugenics.

Evolution is a teleonomic process (it is a complex process that seems to have a purpose, but does not) so I don't think there is a true master race. There is no end goal of evolution. What survives, is good according to evolution. Being white does not necessarily mean you are better genetically. Some traits that seem bad, like autism, may be good is certain circumstances. Let's take cuteness. Cuteness won't help you in war, but humans are less likely to kill cute animals. You're cuteness helped you survive.


 No.55334

>>55298

>The thread finally, FINALLY gets bumplocked the MOMENT someone posts something actually worthy of discussion.

Fucking mods can't do anything right.

The "white race" has nothing to do with evolution. They may use it as a talking point, or to "prove" that they are superior to the Negro (or the Jew, or whoever else), as they pull out their infographics of statistics regarding things like IQ and crime rates and all sorts of other things. They use these statistics in an attempt to legitimize themselves to others, as if eliminating all but the "white race" (or at the least, preserving it at all costs) will serve to better their country or the world or humanity, somehow.

But that is not really why they do it. They do it because it allows them to preserve an inborn, automatic superiority they have over other races. It allows them to be a "winner" without actually having to accomplish anything, without having any real skills or importance. Because the statistics prove that the "white race" is superior to negros by a few IQ points or whatever, being white means you'll always be better, even if you're an obese, jobless asshole on welfare, with a heroin addiction and a car that's more rust than steel.

This is the real reason why Trump was elected. Because it allowed the white Republican voters to confirm this to themselves. If a NEGRO can become President, then it means ANY white man can become President, even one who is a complete fucking idiot with no qualifications for the job. Why? Because ANY white man is automatically superior to EVERY black man. The statistics prove it!

But that's the issue, see. They're using the data wrong. Statistics give you information about a GROUP, not INDIVIDUALS within the group. Just because the statistics say that black men have bigger dicks than Chinese men doesn't mean that every single pair you compare will show this same result. This means that just because (in particular studies of dubious legitimacy) the numbers say that white people are smarter than black people, not every white man is smarter than every black man. If you're a high-school dropout who works at McDonalds and struggles with counting change, you are NOT smarter than a black man who has a PhD and is a neurosurgeon. That's simple reality! I'm sorry to break it to you.

It's the EXACT same kind of delusion that leads to every single fat, lazy keyboard-warrior honestly believing that they could beat up any female boxer or MMA fighter, just because "statistics prove!" men are stronger than women.

They don't want to believe that, though. They want to believe, despite being such a complete loser in their own life, that every single person in certain groups is inferior to them. All the Negros are inferior; all the women are inferior; all the liberals are inferior; all the Jews are inferior; all the gays are inferior. Despite all evidence and even just a child's logic pointing to these statements not being fact, they retreat to their fascist circlejerks and cute little infographics to comfort themselves.

And so it is with furries, as well. That's why so many of them make a career out of kink-shaming; that's why FA banned cub. Because so long as they have SOME group to believe they are superior to, whether it's those into cub, or scat, or vore, or ferals, or whatever the fuck else, they can believe that they aren't actually horrible losers who are looked down upon by the rest of the world. The CEO of a big business abuses his directors, the directors abuse the managers, the managers abuse the office workers, the office workers abuse the janitor, and then the janitor goes home and kicks his dog because he has nobody left who is lower on the "totem pole" than he is.


 No.62141

>>54894

He's a furry. Gassing is a degenerate fetish.

I can almost certainly guarantee you that he'd be enthusiastic about Gassing jews.


 No.62143


 No.62839

>>54895

alt-right =/= new right

as far as I'm concerned, both are cucks but for different reasons.

alt-right is mostly just disenfranchised white lefties who desperately want to win the race war the mainstream left has veen pushing.

Idk what you mean by new right,, but the alt-right really don't have much to do with the right. If you mean neo-cons, they pretty much just say they're conservative but will actually shill for big government and their own self-interests whenever possible.


 No.64895

I know this thread is going to die within the next few minutes when a new thread takes over this bump locked one, and I just want to say, if anyone is looking at this in the future archive.

Fuck you, that's all :)




[Return][Go to top][Catalog][Screencap][Nerve Center][Cancer][Update] ( Scroll to new posts) ( Auto) 5
69 replies | 5 images | Page ?
[Post a Reply]
[ / / / / / / / / / / / / / ] [ dir / 1cc / asmr / ausneets / chicas / fur / islam / leftpol / wooo ][ watchlist ]