Glinner Bullseye comment on X

[Thatcatsaflippingnightmare]

Always trying to explain Glinner to DH, today he showed me on X JD Vance defending murder of the woman by ICE. Glinner had replied something like 'bullseye', as in agreement. I tried to comprehend with "satire?" but he said no he's on Liz truss show these days. I said well he's always been about protecting women and children, he's not suddenly supporting femicide, but the post convinced DH otherwise. Any insights? I'm not on social media

@JamieCannister One might similarly Say "the US population voted for what is happening - to protest ICE is to oppose democracy."

A fundamental cornerstone of democracy is the right to be able peacefully to protest ones own government. It’s not just about votes.

Brexit is a perfect example. I think there's an argument that you could say from 2016 to - say - 2021 "protesting against brexit is illegal. We had a vote, and to protest brexit is to protest democracy, and we do not accept that you have a right to protest democracy". One might similarly say "the US population voted for what is happening - to protest ICE is to oppose democracy."

I think it's clear that you are completely missing the point of democracy. Democracy ought to entail the freedom to hold and express your own views regardless of what the government or the rest of the population thinks.

What you should be saying is: "To protest Brexit is to exercise your democratic right to disagree with the majority, and to continue arguing your alternative view."

And: "To protest ICE is to exercise your democratic right to disagree with government policy, regardless of whatever support it may receive from other quarters."

Your version, in comparison, is an anti-democratic travesty.

Why are you focusing on and smearing ‘MAGA’ voters? We were talking about people who viewed themselves as lifelong Democrats.

This appears to be the true face of the ‘liberal left’ - dehumanising and making nasty generalisations accusing people of being “racist, nationalist, misogynist, backwards POS” about anyone who has different views - even the former Democrat voters who turned to Trump in their desperation.

That's a very reductive comment and baseless that most feminists are in agreement on this. There is nothing at all that categorically says men cannot be feminists if they support and are active in movements that work to achieve political, economic and social equality for women and ill repeat the relevance of what I was saying is that I'm highly dubious of men who haven't researched feminism enough to feel comfortable calling themselves a feminist and will categorically say their GC beliefs aren't coming from a feminist perspective. As other posters have sex they may just be a biological essentialist and not actually gender critical. They're also extremely comfortable calling women silly little girls and making misogynist comments about women being on their knees which doesn't a feminist ally make either.

But I’m certain enough what his intention was.

It’s beyond me how anyone can look at Linehan retweeting this without comment as anything other than an endorsement especially in the context of the current tone of his Twitter output.

So if people dont comment on something then that is an endorsement of the thing?

Where do you draw the line? Imagine a party had it's number 1 manifesto promise "remove all worship from schools". It got 55% of the vote and 75% of the seats. Just to make sure it held a referendum and got 80% support.

Is it really good for democracy if the government spend £10m a day policing protests which are pushing a deeply unpopular view that worship should stay in schools? Is it good for democracy if government listens to the minority instead of the majority?

I agree with this. Twitter can be quite addictive and it’s highly tribal.

Apparently if you don't pile on to 'comment' then you approve of everything anyone on X says.

It would be extremely bad for democracy to stifle peaceful dissent merely because policing it costs money.

Governments that listen to the minority instead of the majority, on important enough issues, are usually dumped at the next election.

This thread is turning into a great example of people saying this place is apparently a majority of left wing or politically homeless "women" feminists who support being mocking, critical or derisive or any political ideology when it comes to left wing politics getting extremely upset on the behalf of random right wing voters (who presumably aren't even seeing PPs comments on here to be upset by them?) why if we don't have to agree on anything can't anyone be derisive about MAGA voters if they wish to? It's really really odd to be so sensitive about a political ideology that you don't feel a kinship with that you can't even scroll past criticism of it? It's the fact that every single time someone is left wing or quite stridently feminist on here it's attacked and belittled before eventually (we still have a few pages..) descend into other baseless accusations that people are posting concerns about right wing politics in bad faith to "smear" or scould despite being GC feminists.

Sharing something to your platform is amplifying something. No one's forcing someone to make a comment on every post on X but surely presumably the content they're sharing if they're going to claim it's retweeted in a context that isn't stated. I can't tell if you just don't use twitter to understand what a report is or if you're being obtuse.

Is it really good for democracy if the government spend £10m a day policing protests which are pushing a deeply unpopular view that worship should stay in schools?

It's more than just good, it's a fundamental right of those of us lucky enough to live in a democratic society. It would be disastrous for democracy if the government didn't enable peaceful protest.

The fact that they may be unpopular (with some) is irrelevant. As long as a view meets a basic test like "worthy of respect in a democratic society", which is a very very low bar, the government is obliged to allow people to express it. Regardless. That's what general taxation is for.

Just remember - it's the turn of the deeply unpopular view that you hold, next.

@JamieCannister version of democracy seems to be Elective Dictatorship. Which I suppose, is where the USA is with Trump. Most nations have checks and balances on state power but they seem to be failing in the US.

No, if people repeat something without adding any context it’s almost always a reflection of their own views.

Quite.

Who is saying you can’t criticise right wing commenters? That’s not the issue with this thread.

why if we don't have to agree on anything can't anyone be derisive about MAGA voters if they wish to? It's really really odd to be so sensitive about a political ideology that you don't feel a kinship with that you can't even scroll past criticism of it?

It’s not ‘criticism’ though is it? It’s throwing about baseless and unfounded accusations in order to smear a whole group of people and signal the ‘correct’ and ‘permissible’ way of thinking. This is intended to remove whole groups of people and points from the list of ‘permissible views’ which is partly how we’ve ended up in our current situation. It’s not helpful to anyone.

I actually defended the right of people to mock any extremists on any side, because sometimes it’s easier to laugh at these things. Another pp was annoyed that left wing extremists were being mocked. Why shouldn’t they be?

It would be extremely bad for democracy to stifle peaceful dissent merely because policing it costs money.

And you would have thought, very un-American.

(1) Maybe that is because it is over the last 17 years that left wing protestors have become "commie race traitors"

(2) The more you make the left an unelectable shit show of misogyny the more individuals on the right can get away with more and more extreme things whilst not handing power back to the Dems

Well if anytime someone says something vaguely critical of the right wing they get multiple posters (who claim to not even support the right) questioning their motives or policing their language it doesn't foster an environment where all political opinions can be expressed. If we can mock and derise them all why is it only a certain wing of politics that gets defended on here?

I think you'll find people were pointing out the hypocrisy of sweeping mocking statements being made about the left as though it's one solid movement while particularly accurate descriptions levied at MAGA for example which are only part of the right wing are mobbed by multiple posters, on this thread and many others, to the point left wing GC feminists are saying they don't feel this is a board where they can share left wing feminist opinions.

But they're talking about people who proudly state they're MAGA, not necessarily any person who voted for Trump. Unless you're saying that it's factually incorrect that someone who is left wing and a feminist will see those who proudly support categorically racist or misogynist MAGA politicians and policies as racist and misogynistic? You think that's completely baseless? 🤨 Perhaps an opinion you don't hold but it must be shut down apparently but someone can say "everyone on the left is X'" as has also been state son this thread and you didn't take issue with that? And you don't agree with those that hold anti racist and feminist principals to criticise MAGA?

That’s the exact opposite of most of the posts on this thread. There are at least three or four posters here who are anti FWR who think women here that they don’t approve of should publicly repent for any of their past or current support for Glinner or KJK. And obviously they’re getting some pushback there.