Total posts: 8,696
Posted in:
-->
@Lunatic
....and DP1 the only people who don't act like everybody is SCUM is SCUM. Why not treat you as SCUM? I have no reason to trust you. In fact, if Dani is assigning roles this game you are more likely to be SCUM than most.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Lunatic
You did this last game we played and the answer was two games ago so I guess the answer is now three games ago
Created:
Posted in:
Here's mafiawiki play advice for DEATH PROOF
If town-aligned, it is a good idea to claim this (or possibly fakeclaim it as Prince to draw a kill) when about to be eliminated, but not otherwise. (Note that you will probably be eliminated to test the claim, unless town would lose the game otherwise; but this is better than losing the game through fake-claiming.) If anti-town, claiming is also a good idea, because when a player survives an elimination, the other players will wonder what had happened, and if they figure it out, may wonder why you didn't claim. Either way, the game is probably very bastard, so expect shenanigans.
Created:
Posted in:
I think if somebody hammers Pie and the DP1 instantly ends, VIG or similar should kill Pie even without an investigation.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Lunatic
That was me openly admitting to being scum. Great detective work.
It wasn't that hard, you have a tell.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@SirAnonymous
It avoids lynching a dude who is suspiciously begging to be lynched
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@SirAnonymous
no it would be a death to confirm or deny Pie.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Lunatic
If pie is scam he has no incentive to hammer you.
exactly. IF he balks, we have him.
Also there's another reason why I want pie lynched so badly and id rather not say what it is.
I know. scum is shy that way.
Created:
Posted in:
What if we lynched me and made Pie do the hammer? That would test Pie's DEATHPROOF claim without lynch, avoiding a number of negative outcomes.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Vader
@oromagiI also refer to this lineNostalgic for days with none clipped in the nightThis could mean she is assigning roles based on events that have happened in the past potentially???
Well, was there a lot of skipped kills in that game? Which game is this?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Lunatic
Well then you are victim to your own qoute based on your prior inactivity lol
I was so pissed off by Greyparrot's dirty tricks that I had to take a breather before responding
Created:
Posted in:
Generally speaking, do people feel like their ROLE might reflect Danielle's perspective, like the ROLE was deliberately pointed towards you?
I don't have any reason to think Danielle thinks of me as a SUPER SAINT.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Intelligence_06
Judas
A Judas is originally a pro-town role, but when it should die (either by elimination or other kill) it stays alive and converts to the Mafia's side instead. The Town is told nothing except that the elimination failed.
Judas is, of course, pro-Town... at first. See also Saulus. Judas is generally considered a bastard role.\
Both roles are named after people from the New Testament of the Bible. The name 'Judas' derives from Judas Iscariot while 'Saulus' comes from the German for Saul of Tarsus a.k.a. Paul the Apostle. In Werewolf Online, this role is called "Cursed" and only turns into a werewolf if killed by wolves (if eliminated, shot, torched by the arsonist, etc., it dies).
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Lunatic
@oromagiAs Town, remember that there are consequences to attempts to eliminate you; the wasted day can be a real issue, so you don't really have license to play scummily or gambit (like you would with Innocent Child).If the day was wasted, you should have been more active earlier than. You think you can lead a better lynch in the time frame? Based on any real good reasoning? The argument for testing pie at worst case results in a no lynch, which is most likely to happen regardless.
That was cut & paste from mafiawiki. NOT commentary on your heedless zeal for quickfire lynch.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Vader
->@oromagiBecause Grey said his role "which he can't see" was directly aimed at him. Pie's role would be directly aimed at him based off ATLA Mafia (which idk if you know, but Pie got in a fight for not testing Lunatic's lynchproof claim early on)
Thanks for this. So you think our roles might be assigned editorially....She did advise that roles were assigned... interesting.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Vader
If Pie is town then Grey is probs town
why?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@SirAnonymous
-->@oromagiTOWN should find someone else to lynch and VIG Pie at the earliest opportunity.That assumes there's a vig.
which we can't assume but what do you think about the argument that hammering Pie is more likely to be bad news than good news?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@LikeMagic
LYNCHPROOF is an interesting possibility that TUF is failing to mention
Use & Balance
Scum Lynchproof are almost impossible to wipe out without the help of a Vigilante or the like. You'll need to include multiple, redundant killing roles (or some sort of mechanic for non-elimination-based kills) if you want to be able to fit a scum Prince player in the game.
Scum Lynchproof are almost impossible to wipe out without the help of a Vigilante or the like. You'll need to include multiple, redundant killing roles (or some sort of mechanic for non-elimination-based kills) if you want to be able to fit a scum Prince player in the game.
A consequence of this is that a failure to eliminate a player tends to confirm them as town unless there's a strong setup-based or flavour-based reason to suspect otherwise. As such, the role can be compared to Innocent Child, another role which never realistically gets eliminated, but is much weaker because town will have to waste a day to confirm the elimination immunity.
Play Advice
As Town, remember that there are consequences to attempts to eliminate you; the wasted day can be a real issue, so you don't really have license to play scummily or gambit (like you would with Innocent Child). In fact, the role might even be harmful (for the same reason that Quitter can be useful); your lack of flip will deny the town information. That said, you may well end up obviously town based on setup speculation anyway.
(If you're actually scum, the same reasoning should give a huge head start to your attempts to analyse the setup.)
Created:
Posted in:
All right, well I'm going to out my role for TOWN's consideration.
I am SUPER SAINT. I kill whoever hammers me.
So I know of
one TOWN role that kills on hammer + Pie is begging to be hammered
Just thinking about game balance, the other hammer role is far more likely to be SCUM. Trouble.
TOWN should find someone else to lynch and VIG Pie at the earliest opportunity.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Vader
Is the thing that happens to you when you are dead beneficial to town? Would you advocate for us to lynch you?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Lunatic
This whole thing feels like your scum game.
If you think he is SCUM and he is obviously looking for a lynch, why do want to lynch him? I think he is obviously lying and obviously a PR (Bearman's Rule of Pie) but Pie is usually more risk adverse when playing scum. .
It's not about whether I think he is scum, my arguments thus far about about pointing out all the utility in testing his claim.
If he is saulas, or hunter, his motivations make sense as town. We still need to lynch him, if he is hunter he wants to use his role. If he is saulus, it helps to have him win with town early and a cop can potentially verify him. If he isn't lynched and is saulus he just will look guilty on a cop report and we made no progress and wasted an investigation.
- If we lynch a HUNTER DP1 then Pie is way, way more likely to kill TOWN than SCUM- doubling our losses
- If we lynch a SAULUS, we make a third (fouth?) SCUM. Maybe we have COP who might catch this but then we reveal the COP and maybe they have RB.
- If we lynch a JESTER we lose- but you don't seem to care too much about that.
I think we should be avoiding a lynch of Pie DP1. For some reason, Luna's urgency feels like a SCUM gambit.
Created:
Posted in:
OK, I know of THREE lynch activated roles. Are we in some bastard lynchrole game?
Created:
Posted in:
TOWN
11 Oromagi
01 Lunatic
07 HGBB NOROLE
08 DuhH
02 Speedrace
09 Misterchris
04 SirAnonymous
03 Supadudz
05 Intelligence
06 ILikePie5 DEATHPROOF
SCUM
Created:
Posted in:
does anybody else want to claim a lynch activated role?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Vader
didn't you say something about doubting Pie's claim all the more because of your role? Care to explain that? Is your role lynch specific?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Lunatic
Any of you able to talk some sense into these people about testing the lynch proof?I feel like I'm smashing my head into dry wall talking to them.
If you think he is SCUM and he is obviously looking for a lynch, why do want to lynch him? I think he is obviously lying and obviously a PR (Bearman's Rule of Pie) but Pie is usually more risk adverse when playing scum. .
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Vader
-->@oromagiBummer. I think the moderation has gotten a bit stricter
To be clear, moderation made no evaluation or determination in the matter. GreyParrot complained that he felt personally attacked by me and Ragnar asked me to voluntarily refrain from addressing GP's arguments in the forums. I did say that the ghost of George Orwell was kicking him the balls for daring to use his name while promoting government propaganda but I think that's a pretty obvious rhetorical flourish that GP is now dishonestly exploiting because he couldn't find a good counterargument on InfoWars to cut and paste.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@David
@Barney
@MisterChris
Danille has PM'd to say
"Greyparrot confirmed he has no problem with you talking to him in the game (he even said you can harass him in the game, though I would advise against it)."
I am willing to rejoin the game but I think moderation should carefully note how his willingness to engage here undermines GreyParrot's phony claim of cyberbullying when debating topics in the forums. After all, If Greyparrot's fear of abuse were in any way honest, he wouldn't care whether the context of the forum was gaming or debate. Greyparrot would be made uncomfortable by abuse in either context.
Greyparrot is pretending to be offended because I made his fake news seem foolish in another forum and it is now clear that he is lying to moderation about his feelings in an effort to curtail my counterarguments in future postings. Nor for the first time- GreyParrot pretended tobe offended by my use of third person grammar as his pretext for blocking me 6 months ago.
Ironically, GP was expressing much outage about censorship while actively seeking to censor dissenting opinion by false testimony.
In light of GreyParrot's deceptive tactics, I strongly recommend that moderation rescind their request that I modify my behavior and instead caution GreyParrot against manipulating the moderation system to gain rhetorical advantage in the forums.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Danielle
Folks-
Be advised that GreyParrot has reported me for cyberbullying him in his internet censorship forum and has asked that a SAFE SPACE be created for him on these forums immune from any correction or contradiction by certain select users, namely me.
I am not under a restraining order but I have been asked to voluntarily refrain from any interaction with GreyParrot on DART and I intend to respect that request to the extent that I am able.
Obviously, GreyParrot's request makes cooperative participation in a game like this impossible. I am constrained from interrogating GP, giving him an unequal advantage and making certain possible game configurations- such as GP and I being on the same scum team are obviously excluded, corrupting the equality of gameplay.
Therefore, I feel it is only fair play to withdraw from this game and notify all game mods that GreyParrot and I can't participate in the same Mafia games until GreyParrot rescinds his unreasonable demand.
/out
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
Unfortunately, GP reported those posts you admired as cyberbullying.
I am not on a restraining order but I've been asked by moderation to create a SAFE SPACE for GreyParrot and his fake news.
Ironically, GP blocked me six months back for not addressing him directly and now he has demanded that I not address him at all.
Also ironically, in a forum where GP insists that his opinion is being censored on social media, GP has demanded social media censorship of contradictory opinion to protect his false opinions from being disproved.
NOTIFICATION! Readers should be advised that Greyparrot has requested that a SAFE SPACE be created for his posts and opinions without challenge or contradiction from some select users of which I am one. Readers should understand that at least one post addressed to Greyparrot or addressing Greyparrot's opinion has been omitted here at the request of MODERATION.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
>@oromagiExcellent questions.
I thought so too.
Here I'll run them again just so GP and Pie don't forget them:
->@ILikePie5
This is what Guiliani is pushing? Is there even one mention of Burisma or China in any of this?
The driver's license, at least, is an obvious fake. In 2014, DC driver's licenses started saying "District of Columbia" in the upper left hand corner butthen residents complained because stupid bouncers and store clerks kept rejecting the IDs saying "we don't accept IDs from Colombia" so in 2017, the city changed back to Washington DC. The DL says it was issued in 2009 so it should say "Washington DC" rather than "District of Columbia" and it seems to be using a picture of Hunter from when he was in his 20's rather than his 40's.
Since the DL is obv fake, why shouldn't we assume other docs are also fake?
Why would anybody take a picture of their credit card and put it on their laptop for years and years?
Why would anybody scan a mailed letter advising that your access to a pornsite has been declined by the credit card company and then keep that on you laptop for years and years?
- Even if we give Guiliani and Carlson maximum credit what we are left with is some circumstantial evidence that Hunter Biden likes porn and has the telephone numbers of many politicians.
- Please explain why any newspaper should publish this?
- Where is any evidence of any crime (except that Guiliani is in possession of Hunter Biden's password info which does suggest a crime on the part of America's Mayor)
- Yes, we know that Trumpets would like to embarrass Hunter because he is related to a political enemy but why is any of this newsworthy?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
-->@oromagi"boo hoo! the lamestream media is censoring my circumstantial evidence that a relative of my political enemy likes porn! What has happened to society that I can't just talk any old shit about my enemies and see it treated as real news! Alas! boo hoo!"All jokes aside,Do you think facebook, twitter, google, and youtube should mass delete specific stories?I mean news organizations NOT running a story is fine of course, but platforms just wiping a story nearly out of existence?
What evidence is there that social media platforms have wiped the Hunter Biden story "nearly out of existence"? I don't do Facebook but I can read all kinds of Hunter Biden stuff, mostly pure fiction all over twitter, google, and youtube right now. If platforms are going to place toll roads between the American people and the Fourth Estate, then those platforms must share in the gatekeeping responsibilities of the Journalist. In essence, we have the head of state demanding that the Press publish his political narrative without editorial oversight because all the editors in the world called bullshit. That's not censorship, that is the Fourth Estate flexing its First Amendment protections.
Created:
Posted in:
That sound you hear is the ghost of George Orwell kicking Greyparrot in the balls for even trying to invoke his name in the promotion of government manufactured disinformation.
Created:
Posted in:
"boo hoo! the lamestream media is censoring my circumstantial evidence that a relative of my political enemy likes porn! What has happened to society that I can't just talk any old shit about my enemies and see it treated as real news! Alas! boo hoo!"
Created:
Posted in:
What do you think about the censorship of a book that warns about the regression of a society that censors and paints individuals with groupthink labels?
I think we should be sure to vote those censors- specifically, the religious right, out of power
we liberals don't have a problem with fornication in our literature
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ILikePie5
This is what Guiliani is pushing? Is there even one mention of Burisma or China in any of this?
The driver's license, at least, is an obvious fake. In 2014, DC driver's licenses started saying "District of Columbia" in the upper left hand corner butthen residents complained because stupid bouncers and store clerks kept rejecting the IDs saying "we don't accept IDs from Colombia" so in 2017, the city changed back to Washington DC. The DL says it was issued in 2009 so it should say "Washington DC" rather than "District of Columbia" and it seems to be using a picture of Hunter from when he was in his 20's rather than his 40's.
Since the DL is obv fake, why shouldn't we assume other docs are also fake?
Why would anybody take a picture of their credit card and put it on their laptop for years and years?
Why would anybody scan a mailed letter advising that your access to a pornsite has been declined by the credit card company and then keep that on you laptop for years and years?
- Even if we give Guiliani and Carlson maximum credit what we are left with is some circumstantial evidence that Hunter Biden likes porn and has the telephone numbers of many politicians.
- Please explain why any newspaper should publish this?
- Where is any evidence of any crime (except that Guiliani is in possession of Hunter Biden's password info which does suggest a crime on the part of America's Mayor)
- Yes, we know that Trumpets would like to embarrass Hunter because he is related to a political enemy but why is any of this newsworthy?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
@oromagiNoam Chomsky Gets "Canceled" For Signing Letter Alongside HypocritesNoam Chomsky on the Harper's Letter and Cancel CultureNoam Chomsky Gets Canceled for Being Against Cancel Culture
The first and third video don't provide a single example Chomsky getting actually cancelled. They are describing the criticism of Chomsky as cancellation but isn't that the opposite of cancellation--- just making your point and going away.
Chomsky himself relates two specific stories that I've looked into.
- In 1989, a Chomsky interview on NPR was cancelled at the last minute by an NPR exec. No reason was ever given and the interview was re-scheduled and broadcast a few days later.
- In 1973, Chomsky co-authored a book called "Counter-Revolutionary Violence: Bloodbaths in Fact & Propaganda" which the publisher, Warner Bros. refused to publish for explicitly political reasons.
- I think publishers should publish stuff that they personally disagree with but I don't think we can really call it censorship when they don't.
- Naturally, the tiny, academic book exploded in popularity, got bootlegged amoungst the academics and a French translation ended up making Chomsky way more money than if Warner Bros had simply published the forgettable book.
I am still fuzzy on the term, but when we talk about cancellation "culture" I am seeing a lot examples (like Trump above) calling for boycotts & protests but very little action. Actual censorship seems to be a very tiny subset of the behavior people are calling cancel culture.
Look, one way for Trumpets to know they aren't being censored by mainstream media as opposed to being disregarded as fake news is that the mainstream media is running many stories about how the Trumpets feel censored.
The NY TImes may refuse to publish Guiliani's fairly obvious bullshit but they've run 10 stories over the past 7 days about how Republicans are feeling censored and why responsible news outlet can't just publish government propaganda without those stories passing some basic background checks.
PRO TIP: If gatekeepers are publishing your complaints about how you're being censored, then you areprobably not being censored. Actual censorship denies the claims of censorship as well as the underlying claim.
Outlets like the NY TImes have done a very thorough job of documenting their Hunter Biden investigations and expalining why they are convinced that it all fake news. The Burden of Proof is on Guiliani to show that any of his documents aren't just Russian photoshops.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ILikePie5
Pie, GP-
- It's not polite to point.
- Use your words like big boys do.
The Daily Mail is a known supporter of the Conservatives. They are also one of the pro-Brexit tabloids and according to a Reuters article, the Daily Mail published a controversial headline in response to a Brexit Court ruling criticizing the judges, by branding them as ‘enemies of the people’. According to CNBC, the Daily Mail also has been criticized by Wikipedia founder Jimmy Wales for publishing fake news articles and “hyped up” headlines and “mastered the art of running stories that aren’t true’”. Further, CNBC reported that DMG media responded by saying “DailyMail.com is the very antithesis of click-bait and hype headlines. We just tell stories better than anyone else.”
In review, the Daily Mail tends to publish stories utilizing sensationalized headlines with emotionally loaded wordings such as “Woman, 63, ‘becomes PREGNANT in the mouth’ with baby squid after eating calamari”, which is a misleading headline. In 2017, Wikipedia banned the Daily Mail as an ‘unreliable’ source. When it comes to sourcing information they use minimal hyperlinked sourcing as well as sourcing to themselves. In general, most stories favor the right, however, the Daily Mail will report either side if the story is sensational enough.
When the Daily Mail tells you its true, you can be confident its bullshit
Created:
Posted in:
mega-dosing peanut butter cups in full LARP never ends well
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Danielle
you (shockingly!) say nothing about how conservatives are the absolute kings of Cancel Culture.
I agree. I don't think people should shout over Jordan Peterson but the point is he was not fired for speaking his mind and my sense is that Peterson rather enjoys provoking his little martyrdoms. But let a black quarterback criticize the government's lack of accountability when it comes to use of force and the guy is practically fired by the POTUS via tweet. NFL viewership declined 8% as a direct response to one man's simple, just use of free speech. How is Trump's destruction of the COVID task force for refuting his election year narrative not a more damning culture of cancellation than say, boycotting Ellen DeGeneres because she watched football with Bush Jr. ? How are this summer's Floyd riots not seen as an escalation of Kaepernick's as a direct result of ignoring Kaepernick?
August 2012: Trump says Black journalist Touré, then a co-host of the MSNBC show "The Cycle," should be "forced to resign" for comments in which Touré uttered a variant of the N-word while arguing that Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney was using racially coded language to try to make President Barack Obama seem frightening. (Touré had apologized before Trump's demand.)
November 2012: Trump suggests the firing of then-MSNBC host Chris Matthews for saying, on the night of Obama's victory, that he was "so glad" Hurricane Sandy had occurred, because of its political impact. (Matthews had apologized before Trump's suggestion.)
December 2012: Trump calls for the firing of Vanity Fair magazine Editor Graydon Carter, with whom he had feuded for years, over what he declares the magazine's "worst ever issue."
December 2012: Trump says "Scots should boycott Glenfiddich garbage" because the whisky brand selected Michael Forbes, a farmer who refused to sell his land to make way for a Trump golf course, as "Top Scot" of the year.
March 2013: Trump says, "Everyone should cancel HBO until they fire low life dummy Bill Maher! Get going now and feel good about yourself!"
July 2013: Trump asks people to "boycott & cancel subscriptions" to Rolling Stone magazine because of a cover featuring Boston Marathon terrorist Dzhokhar Tsarnaev.
October 2013: Trump urges "everybody possible" to "cancel their subscription" to New York Magazine over an insulting tweet about Trump's marriage from Dan Amira, who was online editor at the time.
March 2014: After Trump is left off a CNBC list of the most influential business leaders, he says, "Stupid poll should be canceled—no credibility."
May 2014: Trump calls for the firing of, or at least an apology from, the person at The Oklahoman newspaper who wrote a headline calling then-Oklahoma City Thunder NBA star Kevin Durant "Mr. Unreliable." (The newspaper had already apologized.)
June 2014: Trump says people should "Boycott Mexico" until a Marine reservist who was jailed for crossing the border with loaded guns is released from prison. (He was released later in the year.)
April 2015: Trump suggests that conservative writer Jonah Goldberg, then a senior editor of National Review magazine, should be forced to resign for writing that Trump had been "tweeting like a 14-year-old girl" in response to another conservative writer calling Trump a clown. Trump also suggests Fox News anchor Bret Baier should stop having Goldberg on his show.
June 2015: When Spanish-language television network Univision severed its business relationship with Trump after his campaign launch speech, in which he labeled Mexican immigrants as criminals and rapists, Trump tweets, "Anyone who wants strong borders and good trade deals for the US should boycott @Univision."
July 2015: Trump calls for a boycott of Macy's after Macy's discontinued its business dealings with him over those same comments about people from Mexico. Trump also tweets "Great" when someone tells him that people are canceling their Macy's credit cards.
August 2015: Trump calls for the firing of the late conservative writer and Fox News commentator Charles Krauthammer, a regular Trump critic.
September 2015: After National Review editor Rich Lowry argued on Fox News that rival Republican candidate Carly Fiorina had "cut off (Trump's) balls with the precision of a surgeon" in a primary debate, Trump says: "Incompetent @RichLowry lost it tonight on @FoxNews. He should not be allowed on TV and the FCC should fine him!" (Lowry responds, "I love how Mr. Anti-PC now wants the FCC to fine me. #pathetic.")
December 2015: Trump calls for the firing of then-CBS News journalist Sopan Deb and NBC/MSNBC journalist Katy Tur over reporting he disputed about how he handled protesters during a rally speech.
February 2016: Trump says people should "boycott all Apple products" until the company stops fighting a government request to break into the cell phone of a deceased California terrorist.
February 2016: Trump says Fox News should fire Republican strategist and commentator Karl Rove for being insufficiently positive about his victory in the Nevada caucuses.
February 2016: Trump calls on the Wall Street Journal to fire its editorial board, which had criticized him, and its pollster, which showed results he didn't like.
March 2016: Trump proposes a boycott of Megyn Kelly's Fox News show, complaining that it is too negative toward him.
September 2016: After the Dallas Morning News and Arizona Republic newspapers endorse Hillary Clinton for president and USA Today declares Trump unfit for the office, Trump says, "The people are really smart in cancelling subscriptions to the Dallas & Arizona papers & now USA Today will lose readers! The people get it!"
September 2017: Trump tweets that NFL players and other athletes who don't stand for the National Anthem should be told, "YOU'RE FIRED." He says in another tweet, "Fire or suspend!" And at a rally, he says, "Wouldn't you love to see one of these NFL owners when somebody disrespects our flag to say, 'Get that son of a bitch off the field right now, out, he's fired, he's fired.' "
October 2017: Suggesting he could use the power of the state against media entities he dislikes, Trump muses about challenging the broadcast licenses of NBC and other networks over their news coverage. (He again broached the subject of reviewing NBC's license in September 2018.)
November 2017: Trump calls for a boycott of CNN.
August 2018: Trump tweets, "Many @harleydavidson owners plan to boycott the company if manufacturing moves overseas. Great! Most other companies are coming in our direction, including Harley competitors."
June 2019: Trump suggests people stop "using or subscribing" to AT&T to pressure the company to make changes at CNN, which it owns.
September 2019: Trump suggests that actress Debra Messing should be fired for calling on a news outlet to publish the names of people attending a Trump fundraiser and for a tweet promoting a church sign that said "a black vote for Trump is mental illness." (Messing had apologized for the tweet about the church sign.)
January 2020: Trump says The New York Times should fire columnist Paul Krugman, a winner of the Nobel Prize in economics, for having incorrectly predicted a global recession after Trump's victory in 2016.
May 2020: The day after Twitter appended a fact check link to dishonest Trump claims about mail-in voting, Trump threatens to shut down social media companies: "Republicans feel that Social Media Platforms totally silence conservatives voices. We will strongly regulate, or close them down, before we can ever allow this to happen."
May 2020: Trump seeks the firing of Chuck Todd, host of NBC's "Meet the Press," for the show playing a misleadingly shortened clip of comments by Attorney General William Barr. (Todd apologized, saying it was an inadvertent mistake.) Again broaching the power of the state, Trump tags the accounts of the Federal Communications Commission, which regulates television, and its chairman, Ajit Pai.
Created:
Posted in:
@3RU7ALCancel culture is disgusting, uncivilized, and undemocratic.
I'm pretty familiar with Jordan Peterson's complaints thanks to Coal's many posts. I was specifically looking for an instance of Noam Chomsky getting "cancelled." I guess I'll presume there are none.
Created:
Posted in:
The "fire" argument is what Chomsky says is abused by powerful political elites.
Yes, Trump and Giuliani in this particular
And He got cancelled for just stating the obvious.
I have read Chomsky on cancel culture but I'm not aware of any particular instance of Chomsky actually getting cancelled. Specifics?
Created:
Posted in:
So, if we are all in general agreement with Chomsky that Trump is the worst kind of criminal and a direct threat to American Democracy, why would any of us accept the word of that criminal's personal lawyer regarding unsubstantiated accusations against that criminal's rival on the last week of the election? Shouldn't we just start from the position that any such October surprise should be viewed with profound skepticism and we don't want to see such suspicious shit cloaked in the imprimatur of news until some kind of hard evidence is put forth?
Created:
Posted in:
NOAM CHOMSKY: It’s not discussed. You heard some comments about maybe Trump isn’t doing nice things on the climate. Did you hear anything about his being the worst criminal in human history?
The worst criminal in human history? That does say something.
NOAM CHOMSKY: It does. Is it true?
Well, you have Hitler; you have Stalin; you have Mao.
NOAM CHOMSKY: Stalin was a monster. Was he trying to destroy organized human life on earth?
Well, he was trying to destroy a lot of human lives.
NOAM CHOMKY: Yes, he was trying to destroy lots of lives but not organized human life on earth, nor was Adolf Hitler. He was an utter monster but not dedicating his efforts perfectly consciously to destroying the prospect for human life on earth.
Let’s take some of their publications. A couple of years ago, you may recall the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration published a several-hundred-page analysis. They concluded that, on our present course, we’re likely to reach four degrees Celsius, seven degrees Fahrenheit, above preindustrial levels by the end of the century. That’s an utter cataclysm. Any climate scientist will tell you that. And they drew a conclusion from it. We should not put restrictions on automotive and truck emissions. We should limit the restrictions. Can you find a counterpart to that in human history? Please tell me.
I—
NOAM CHOMSKY: Well, I can think of one thing that maybe comes close. The Wannsee declaration, in 1942, where the Nazi party put the finishing touches on the plans to wipe out all the Jews and kill tens of millions of Slavs. Pretty horrifying. Is it as bad as that publication I just mentioned?
I don’t disagree about Trump’s badness. I’m not sure if he’s intending to destroy the planet so much as he’s intending to watch Fox News and is just following terrible policies out of some combination of laziness and nihilism, and being surrounded by crooks and nihilists.
NOAM CHOMSKY: I’m not talking about Trump the human being. I couldn’t care less about him. I’m talking about the policies. The policies are clear; the understanding is clear. There is nobody that’s not living under a rock that can’t comprehend that maximizing the use of fossil fuels and eliminating the restrictions is going to lead to disaster. The document I just mentioned assumes that we’re racing toward total disaster.
Created:
Posted in:
Trump seems to care about his own interests and his own survival, and you have talked about American foreign policy previously being driven by the interests of a whole ruling economic élite. I guess maybe that’s a distinction without a difference, because it’s economic élites who are supporting Trump and allowing him to do this, in some sense.
NOAM CHOMSKY: Not only are they supporting him, but he’s serving them slavishly. It’s hard to find an American President who has been more dedicated to enriching and empowering the ultra-rich and the corporate sector—which is, of course, why they’re happy to tolerate his antics. For example, the one real legislative achievement is the tax scam, which was just a giveaway to the very rich and the corporate sector. In fact, everything I’ve just mentioned is the same. When you reduce regulations, you’re putting more money in the pockets of the rich and harming the working class and the poor and everyone else. That’s extreme. When you refuse to fill the National Labor Relations Board with members so that employers can get away with anything they want, you’re serving the rich. We can go right down the list. He’s a very loyal servant of private power, private wealth, and the corporate sector—which is why they let him get away with the kind of antics you see.
It’s kind of striking when you see the great and powerful get together. Take a look at the last Davos conference, in January. There were three keynote speakers. The first, of course, was Trump. They don’t like him. They don’t like him at all because they like to put forward an image of humanism, civilized behavior, decency, “put your trust in us,” that sort of thing. But when he spoke, they gave him rousing applause. They couldn’t stand anything he was saying. There’s this braggart up there ranting about how wonderful he is. They were probably cringing in their seats, but they gave him rousing applause because there’s one line that he said that they understand, which is meaningful: I’m going to put plenty of money in your pockets, so therefore you better tolerate me. That’s the way he’s regarded by the powerful élites here. Yeah, we can’t stand him, he’s a disgusting creature, but he knows which side the bread is buttered: ours.
Created:
Posted in:
You mention a bunch of dictators that the United States has cozied up to—and not respecting arms-control treaties—but those are things you’ve written about in the past. I’m interested that you say that you think the Trump Administration is a break with the past. How do you think it’s different in some way?
NOAM CHOMSKY: Well, having an arms-control regime is different than not having one. That’s a break, and it’s a break on one of the two most significant issues in human history. We’ve been living for seventy-five years under the shadow of possible nuclear destruction. The arms-control regime that’s been slowly built up over the years—Eisenhower’s Open Skies proposal, the Reagan-Gorbachev I.N.F. treaty, and other pieces—has mitigated the dangers. Trump has been tearing every piece of it to shreds. The only thing that’s left is New start. It has to be ratified by next February. If Trump wins the election or refuses to leave office, it will be gone by February.
The other major threat to human survival in any recognizable form is environmental catastrophe, and, there, Trump is alone in the world. Most countries are doing at least something about it—not as much as they should be, but some of them rather significant, some less so. The United States has pulled out of the Paris Agreement; is refusing to do any of the actions that might help poorer countries deal with the problem; is racing toward maximizing the use of fossil fuels; and, at the same time, just opened the last major nature reserve in the United States for drilling. He has to make sure that we maximize the use of fossil fuels, race to the precipice as quickly as possible, and eliminate the regulations, which not only limit the dangerous effects but also protect Americans.
Step by step, eliminate everything that might protect Americans or that will preserve the possibility of overcoming the very serious threat of environmental catastrophe. There is nothing like this in history. It’s not breaking with the American tradition. Can you think of anyone in human history who has dedicated his efforts to undermining the prospects for survival of organized human life on earth? In fact, some of the productions of the Trump Administration are just mind-boggling.
Created: