taipan

joined 5 months ago
[–] taipan 6 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)
[–] taipan 4 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

When you link a Wikipedia article, you can expect others to read it and call you out on it when it doesn't say what you claim it says. Wikipedia is very consistent with labelling fascism as far-right.

[–] taipan 2 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (3 children)

Your quote from the article describes the Third Position, not fascism in general. It does not say that fascism in general is neither left nor right. No need to get mad because you misread a Wikipedia article.

[–] taipan 1 points 2 weeks ago

Thanks for the retraction. It was the honest thing to do.

[–] taipan 3 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

By your standard, your posts here should be removed for misinformation because your numbers don't include all of the election votes. Here are the final results of the 2016 elections by state, with citations. The numbers are consistent with the infographic.

[–] taipan 3 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

I double checked the subtraction with the NYT numbers you linked to, and the numbers look correct to me. Which numbers are wrong?

[–] taipan 2 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (5 children)

No, the article you linked says "The Third Position is a set of neo-fascist political ideologies". It does not say that fascism in general is neither left or right. I'm not talking about the word "fascist" used as an insult.

[–] taipan 3 points 2 weeks ago (7 children)

Since you linked to another Wikipedia article, you should know that Wikipedia defines fascism as far-right:

Fascism is a far-right, authoritarian, ultranationalist political ideology and movement, characterized by a dictatorial leader, centralized autocracy, militarism, forcible suppression of opposition, belief in a natural social hierarchy, subordination of individual interests for the perceived good of the nation or race, and strong regimentation of society and the economy.

[–] taipan 100 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (6 children)

"I was not in my uniform, and at no point in my interaction with the staff did I identify myself as a member of the law enforcement community," Sheriff Owens said. "At no point did I indicate my position, nor did I ask the responders to do anything that they would not, had not, or have not done for anyone else who makes a business dispute call."

That's disingenuous. The 911 operator, who works for the police department, obviously knows the name of the sheriff. Any police department flags calls from police officers, including non-emergency calls. The sheriff should have known better than to waste public resources to strongarm a business when he could have simply emailed a complaint to corporate.

view more: ‹ prev next ›