Political/Social movements and groups (1 Viewer)

[DaveXA]

I'm debating how to do this, but as discussed in the QAnon thread, I'd like to discuss the various groups and movements and the role they're playing in the political and social arenas. They're apparently driving (or so it seems) the trajectory of politics today. I'm not sure if we should do a repository of all groups here or a separate thread for each group.

Certainly some groups will warrant a lot of discussion while other maybe a cursory amount. I think there are a few things I'd like to cover. And listed below, feel free to suggest; add, combine or delete from this list:

- How/why group started
- Early mission
- Current mission
- Relevance today
- Where is it heading?
- Did it fail or achieve its goals?

I'm also listing the groups in no particular order:

- BLM
- Antifa
- Proud Boys
- KkK
- Boogaloo (sp?)
- QAnon
- Nation of Islam
- Black Panthers
- Zionists
- Not sure what would be a group worth discussing for Arab/Islam perspective, Hezbollah, ISIS or something else?

This isn't a thread to attack these groups. This is a thread to discuss what they are, why they came into existence and where they seem to be headed going forward. It might be too broad for a single thread though. I don't know, just wanting to kickstart a discussion that I think can be productive.

 

[brandon]

Really? " [Zionists] are definitely a political group with great influence and U.S. policy towards Israel is definitely not purely strategic" sounds to you "pretty close to typical anti-semitic conspiracy"?
I guess I forgot that Israel is holy. But not sorry.

@Dragon posted a link to ZOA. And they are not the only ones. Go do some reading.

Actually, I’m going to walk back my statement a bit. I thought you said that Israel’s motives were not purely strategic, not the US’s motives towards Israel. Combined with the implication that Zionists work in the shadows to influence the US government, it did come off as typical anti-Jewish propaganda.

But realizing you were talking about the US government’s position changes my interpretation of what you said somewhat.

 

[SystemShock]

Actually, I’m going to walk back my statement a bit. I thought you said that Israel’s motives were not purely strategic, not the US’s motives towards Israel. Combined with the implication that Zionists work in the shadows to influence the US government, it did come off as typical anti-Jewish propaganda.

But realizing you were talking about the US government’s position changes my interpretation of what you said somewhat.

I didn't say or imply they "worked in the shadows" either. I said "they don't work that way" in direct response to SBTB stating he doesn't remember ever seeing or hearing of a Zionist protest in the US. Unless of course you think special interests/PACs that work through lobbying and large donations "work in the shadows"...

But, if you want to feel offended, go ahead.

 

[Dragon]

Actually, I’m going to walk back my statement a bit. I thought you said that Israel’s motives were not purely strategic, not the US’s motives towards Israel. Combined with the implication that Zionists work in the shadows to influence the US government, it did come off as typical anti-Jewish propaganda.

But realizing you were talking about the US government’s position changes my interpretation of what you said somewhat.

Not quite as peacefull

Kornbluh said the reasons fueling the community’s defiance are difficult to untangle: There’s a history of government mistrust, a sense the pandemic has passed and a feeling that lawmakers should stay out of their religious activities.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2020/10/08/orthodox-jews-protest-covid-brooklyn/

 

[Saint by the Bay]

I guess I'm still struggling with if Zionists belong in this category.

All of these groups tend to be focused on social change of some type in America. Either maintaining status quo, social justice, or shifting/maintaining power in one social group.

I feel like groups trying to affect American foreign policy are different than political/social movements.

Maybe I'm just not really understanding the goal of the thread.

 

[DaveXA]

I guess I'm still struggling with if Zionists belong in this category.

All of these groups tend to be focused on social change of some type in America. Either maintaining status quo, social justice, or shifting/maintaining power in one social group.

I feel like groups trying to affect American foreign policy are different than political/social movements.

Maybe I'm just not really understanding the goal of the thread.

For me, I'd like to cover sociopolitical groups that deal primarily with domestic policies. Zionists are more concerned with our policies in relation to Israel, so for purposes of this thread, no they're not part of this discussion. For the sake of keeping the discussion a bit more focused, let's keep it on predominantly domestic groups. So, with that in mind, we should address the groups listed.

- BLM
- Code Pink
- LGBTQ
- NOW
- Planned Parenthood (should combine PP and NOW?)
- KKK
- Proud Boys and other white nationalist groups
- Boogaloo
- Tea Party (are they still relevant?)
- Trumpers (I think they will ultimately split from the R party...maybe?)
- Latino groups (I don't know who these groups would be, but the Latino vote is significant and I'm guessing they have both conservative and more liberal versions)

That's plenty, I would think.

 

[brandon]

I didn't say or imply they "worked in the shadows" either. I said "they don't work that way" in direct response to SBTB stating he doesn't remember ever seeing or hearing of a Zionist protest in the US. Unless of course you think special interests/PACs that work through lobbying and large donations "work in the shadows"...

But, if you want to feel offended, go ahead.

I just said I was walking back my statement because I misread what you originally said. I’m not offended.

 

[SystemShock]

I just said I was walking back my statement because I misread what you originally said. I’m not offended.

You said "changes my interpretation of what you said somewhat."

And if you read what I posted and your conclusion is " pretty close to typical anti-semitic conspiracy", well...

 

[brandon]

You said "changes my interpretation of what you said somewhat."

And if you read what I posted and your conclusion is " pretty close to typical anti-semitic conspiracy", well...

Jesus man, I don't know how else to say that I misread your post and my misinterpretation was based on that misreading. On a more clear reading, I don't believe your post was anti-semitic.

 

[RobF]

I guess I'm still struggling with if Zionists belong in this category.

All of these groups tend to be focused on social change of some type in America. Either maintaining status quo, social justice, or shifting/maintaining power in one social group.

I feel like groups trying to affect American foreign policy are different than political/social movements.

Maybe I'm just not really understanding the goal of the thread.

There's an argument that the group that does belong in this category is Evangelicals, and Zionists become indirectly relevant through their interests in supporting that group (e.g. https://www.washingtonpost.com/outl...israel-means-letting-it-do-whatever-it-wants/).

But I think it should be framed in that context. If a group is trying to affect American foreign policy and doing so in part through support of a domestic group, while that does naturally amount to affecting domestic policy as well in as much as that domestic group is trying to do so, it's not the driving force. So it's a) potentially relevant to the discussion, but b) should not be taken out of context.

 

[DaveXA]

There's an argument that the group that does belong in this category is Evangelicals, and Zionists become indirectly relevant through their interests in supporting that group (e.g. https://www.washingtonpost.com/outl...israel-means-letting-it-do-whatever-it-wants/).

But I think it should be framed in that context. If a group is trying to affect American foreign policy and doing so in part through support of a domestic group, while that does naturally amount to affecting domestic policy as well in as much as that domestic group is trying to do so, it's not the driving force. So it's a) potentially relevant to the discussion, but b) should not be taken out of context.

Evangelicals probably should be included because they've tried to influence domestic policy over the years. They are a pretty diverse and fractured group though. I lot of so-called Evangelical churches don't agree on policy, let alone faith issues. Some avoid politics outside of their church, while others like the church I pastored avoided politics entirely. There's no centralized leadership and they often get defined by public perception.

A few Evangelicals support Zionism. Most support Israel more than Zionism though.

 

[Saint by the Bay]

Evangelicals probably should be included because they've tried to influence domestic policy over the years. They are a pretty diverse and fractured group though. I lot of so-called Evangelical churches don't agree on policy, let alone faith issues. Some avoid politics outside of their church, while others like the church I pastored avoided politics entirely. There's no centralized leadership and they often get defined by public perception.

A few Evangelicals support Zionism. Most support Israel more than Zionism though.

This is why I thought we should include the Million Moms organization. There may be some other evangelical organizations that actively work to drive policy and culture. Promise Keepers maybe? The Fellowship? I guess we can just roll them all up into a single Evangelical bucket.

 

[DaveXA]

This is why I thought we should include the Million Moms organization. There may be some other evangelical organizations that actively work to drive policy and culture. Promise Keepers maybe? The Fellowship? I guess we can just roll them all up into a single Evangelical bucket.

We could do that, although most of the groups within the bucket have their own competing agendas.

 

[Saint by the Bay]

I'd love to see folks more knowledgeable than me about some of these groups do the kind of write-up I did for BLM. When it comes to some groups like the Proud Boys, for instance, I really don't know much about them.

 

[GMRfellowtraveller]

For me, I'd like to cover sociopolitical groups that deal primarily with domestic policies. Zionists are more concerned with our policies in relation to Israel, so for purposes of this thread, no they're not part of this discussion. For the sake of keeping the discussion a bit more focused, let's keep it on predominantly domestic groups. So, with that in mind, we should address the groups listed.

- BLM
- Code Pink
- LGBTQ
- NOW
- Planned Parenthood (should combine PP and NOW?)
- KKK
- Proud Boys and other white nationalist groups
- Boogaloo
- Tea Party (are they still relevant?)
- Trumpers (I think they will ultimately split from the R party...maybe?)
- Latino groups (I don't know who these groups would be, but the Latino vote is significant and I'm guessing they have both conservative and more liberal versions)

That's plenty, I would think.

the issue i have with the parsing is that it misses the feedback loop
so Zionists not included but it's local money/propaganda influencing foreign policy
whereas as (mostly) right wing organizations have PUHlenty of foreign funding influencing local concerns to say nothing of Murdoch and other 'legit' foreign news connections promoting global 'new' that has huge local impact

also
here's a quick episode about La Raza changing its name to UnidosUS

 

[DaveXA]

the issue i have with the parsing is that it misses the feedback loop
so Zionists not included but it's local money/propaganda influencing foreign policy
whereas as (mostly) right wing organizations have PUHlenty of foreign funding influencing local concerns to say nothing of Murdoch and other 'legit' foreign news connections promoting global 'new' that has huge local impact

also
here's a quick episode about La Raza changing its name to UnidosUS

Yeah, all I'm suggesting is keeping it narrow enough that we don’t get too far into the weeds on foeriegn policy. Not that it isn't important or relevant, but more who are the primarily domestic influences and agitators in domestic public and social policy. That's really all I'm getting at.

 

[CoolBrees]

I am only doing this because on of my favorite posters requested this. I will have to clean my self and my search engine when I am done. I have a lot of experience with the Proud Boys as I have been in the streets with them since 2018. Just in the other side of the street. In short, they are what’s wrong with America.

The Proud Boys were founded as a chauvinist drinking club by Gavin McGinnis. He is best known as the co-founder of Vice magazine and Vice online. He was forcibly removed from their Board when his disdain for women and minorities became mainstream knowledge. He was born in England and raised in Canada, so his American legion schtick is ironic to say the least. Their name comes from the Aladdin movie song Proud of your Boy believe it or not.

McGinnis used his abilities as a promoter and writer and his access to the airwaves to spin nothing stories in a manner than low intelligence individuals could not see the nuance and how it didn’t match reality. Or the difference between anecdote and actual statistics.

Slowly at first his group gained notoriety as just a drinking club for dudes. Then some members started causing problems at gay parades, etc. McGinnis always disavowed their actions tacitly so his minions knew he was actually approving.

It wasn’t until he was caught on tape at a meeting discussing violence and how to get away with it that they were outed as more than just a drinking club. McGinnis distanced himself from the group due to disagreements within the group in how to deal with their new found fame. He wanted to lie low and continue to try to work under the guise of a club. Then Unite the Right happened and there was no going back so McGinnis officially “quit” though that is still up for debate.

The other leaders- most notably a mental midget named Enrique Tario took over the group and made no bones about their ideals. Western chauvinism they called it. Another leader is a caveman named Kyle Chapman formed/ organized the militant arm of the Proud Boys, more on them in a moment. Recently they have fought over the path of their group. Chapman wants a whites only neofascist org while Tarrio wants to stick with the “just have to be a dude and not masterbate more than once a month rule. Yeah. Judging by recent events, Chapman is winning this argument.

They have a few subgroups - namely FOAK (Fraternal order of Alt Knights) started by the cro-magnon Chapman. These are the clowns that really like to kick up dust. They are the ones that beat up people in street fights where they outnumber the victim like 5:1.

The other is Patriot Prayer, a group that portends to be just Pro-Trump and anti left but they always seem to be together. Their leader is Joey Gibson. He is tiny in stature and small in intellect. But really really small in height.

Their funding comes from their online presence and from quiet donors to fuel their activism. One of the more famous persons to support them financially is our Sec of Education Betsy DeVoss. She maintains she didn’t know who she was giving support to but I will let you decide if you believe her.

Their main media mouthpiece is a piece himself - Andy Ngo. Mr Ngo writes officially for the Post Millenial, a Canadian Far right mag with close ties to the Proud Boys. He is famous for getting “milkshaked” here in Portland. That is where someone throws a “milkshake” but instead of ice cream, it’s filled with Portland cement. Sounds horrible doesn’t it. Only problem is it didn’t happen. He staged the whole thing and was caught on video prepping the injury to look like it had happened. Since then he has continually released edited videos and fake news. In short he sucks.

They are listed by every major extremist watch group as a threat to the US and it’s citizens. They are lowlifes that cosplay tough guys. But they are increasingly dangerous and with the “president” giving them credence to “stand down and stand by” they will only garner more support and will more than likely move from alt right meatheads to full on neofascist militants over the Biden presidency.


I need a shower now.

 

[Saint by the Bay]

I'm sorry you had to do that, but for what it's worth I appreciate it and I learned a lot. As soon as this thing is over I'm flying out there to see my grandson. We should grab a beer.

 

[CoolBrees]

@Saint by the Bay -

When you come I have a 1br mother-in law suite with a separate entrance that is all yours. Full sized kitchen and everything.

I have extended the offer to a few folks but really that goes for anyone on this board. And I mean anyone. We are human by birth and Saints Fans by choice and that alone makes you good in my book.