Let's talk about suppression

[Deleted member 586536]

There's a semi interesting aspect that I want to go ahead and talk about. Just a notice of two similar things.


Hitler became Hilter because he believed that the Jews were suppressing him and the German race. It happened to be that he got his information from a small "newspaper" business that primarily focused on anti Semite rehetroic.

We're going to be making a lot of pins here. So just remember that this point exists as we're going to come back to it later.

There's also another aspect
https://encyclopedia.ushmm.org/content/en/article/nazi-propaganda-and-censorship

Primarily that he was a free speech advocate...

When the Nazis came to power in 1933, the German constitution guaranteed freedom of speech and freedom of the press. Through decrees and laws, the Nazis abolished these civil rights and destroyed German democracy. Starting in 1934, it was illegal to criticize the Nazi government. Even telling a joke about Hitler was considered treachery. People in Nazi Germany could not say or write whatever they wanted.

And then the moment he took power he no longer was. Or more accurately. Lied about supporting free speech.

The Nazis used both propaganda and censorship to control what students read in school. Nazi censors removed some textbooks from classrooms. New textbooks taught students to obey the Nazi Party, love Hitler, and hate Jews.

And that text books were banned.
Pin this one as well.

Then you had all the means of propaganda

• Glorifying Adolf Hitler by using his image on postcards, posters, and in the press;
• Spreading negative images and ideas about Jews in magazines, films, cartoons, and other media;
• Making radios more affordable so that more Germans could listen to Nazi ideas and news;
• Broadcasting Nazi speeches on the radio and public loudspeakers;
• Organizing large and celebratory Nazi Party rallies;
• Creating groups, like the Hitler Youth and League of German Girls, that fostered Nazi ideals.

Let's also put a pin into this.

At this point, if your not brain fucked. All of these should be bringing very loud bells in your head.

Let's unpin from the same order.

Hitler believed that Jews where suppressing Germans, and used that hate back belief to suppress and kill Jews.

While it doesn't match one to one. That sounds awfully similar to republican/maga rehetroic. History doesn't repeat but it often rhymes. That it's leftists, those liberals ruining the world. (Using liberals in the way they would use it as leftist and liberal do not belong in the same sentence.)
But let's briefly identify "liberal"
Because liberal has become sonyonmus with a particular party in the United States. Democrats.

Take this a step further. They intentionally conflate leftist and liberal in the same sentence.

Why would this all matter?
Well, it wasn't the Jews Hitler went after first. It was the socialist party. Aka the left leaning party.
See fascists will do what is opportune to gain power. So their affiliation when getting to power doesn't matter. Their actions vs their words speak. Hitler killed socialist first. And the reason why is he did/facism looks to kill it's opposition first is because they are the most likely to counter it. then thre angry hatefilled cycle continues. Spiraling to with in grouping and out grouping once the first opposition is killed.

Again history won't repeat the same way. But it rhymes.
So I find it interesting that Republicans/maga are expecting a civil war, but also gearing up for it. But also sounding happy that it's going to happen.
Not a single inch or ounce of remorse. Not a single moment of thinking about how much that would suck or hurt.

Let's unpin the second one finally. Being a free speech " supporter" while simultaneously trying to censor and control.

For starters. Maga/Republicans trying to apply the first admendemnt to business. Claiming that their opposition supports and likes to suppress free speech. While simultaneously, banning people from saying certain words in schools, and banning books, specifically trans books.

Where have we heard this before?
Now someone is likely going to say "but it doesn't ban democrats though!!!"
No it doesn't explicitly ban them. But if your a party that already actively harms trans and gay people. They are going to go to the opposition and more likely be a Democrat. (If we ONLY had a choice between the two parties for this argument to be clear. As I know many would vote with their conscious)
Point being however, it's rhyming. Strongly with what Hitler has done.

Lets get to propaganda.

This part is multifaceted. I could look into malt Walsh libs of ticktock causing bomb threats on a specifIc hospital because of a trans pediatrician (or malt Walsh's argument that they do sex change surgies. Which they don't.) I could look into the fact that Trump is the only one with bumper stickers, hats, flags, and much more. Echoing

• Glorifying Adolf Hitler by using his image on postcards, posters, and in the press;
• Spreading negative images and ideas about Jews in magazines, films, cartoons, and other media;

Cartoons about how "how rediclous the 'left' is" painting trump in a good light. Or Trump being the face of maga and the Republican party still. Despite him no longer being president.
Or how about the rehetroic regarding maralgo? Every single maga person I have seen, doesn't even give a second to question the possibility that Trump did something wrong.
Because to them, trump is never wrong.


So I once again challenge maga/republicans. Are you sure your the one being prosecuted? Or are you looking to make an excuse to prosecute a group you don't like.

 

[leejaclane]

Worth pointing out also, when the nazis burned books, they were burning books about sexuality and gender. Wikipedia is of course not a source, but there are sources on the page to verify what's being said in this link, and you can search online for more info about it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Institut_für_Sexualwissenschaft

They were targeted for being pro-LGBT, for having LGBT staff, for having LGBT erotic literature -- which is exactly what the right-wing are doing now in the US and in the UK and in plenty of other countries as well. People will argue it's not the same because books aren't being burned, but if you think that you're focusing on the wrong aspect. Burning the books was an act of suppressing them, suppressing their contents. They don't have to burn the books, they just remove them. It is in fact the same.

 

[TraderPatTX]

Worth pointing out also, when the nazis burned books, they were burning books about sexuality and gender. Wikipedia is of course not a source, but there are sources on the page to verify what's being said in this link, and you can search online for more info about it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Institut_für_Sexualwissenschaft

They were targeted for being pro-LGBT, for having LGBT staff, for having LGBT erotic literature -- which is exactly what the right-wing are doing now in the US and in the UK and in plenty of other countries as well. People will argue it's not the same because books aren't being burned, but if you think that you're focusing on the wrong aspect. Burning the books was an act of suppressing them, suppressing their contents. They don't have to burn the books, they just remove them. It is in fact the same.

Point out where the "right-wing" is targeting pro-LGBT books. You make it sound like they are wanting them banned from all of society when in reality, they are wanting them removed from school libraries where they do not belong as they show pornographic images in them including oral sex. I for one, would be very upset if other adults were talking to my daughters about sexual acts and revealing their sexuality to them in the classroom. That is sick behavior to want to talk about sex to prepubescent kids. Parents are the ultimate authority over their own kids, not the government and definitely not the teachers unions. It's no wonder that hundreds of teachers and school staff have been indicted for having sexual relations with students this year alone.

https://www.fox10phoenix.com/news/135-teachers-charged-child-sex-crimes-this-year-alone

https://www.abc4.com/news/top-stori...rida-human-trafficking-investigation-sheriff/

https://www.kwch.com/2022/05/20/teacher-accused-making-child-pornography-police-say/

 

[omgcat]

Point out where the "right-wing" is targeting pro-LGBT books. You make it sound like they are wanting them banned from all of society when in reality, they are wanting them removed from school libraries where they do not belong as they show pornographic images in them including oral sex. I for one, would be very upset if other adults were talking to my daughters about sexual acts and revealing their sexuality to them in the classroom. That is sick behavior to want to talk about sex to prepubescent kids. Parents are the ultimate authority over their own kids, not the government and definitely not the teachers unions. It's no wonder that hundreds of teachers and school staff have been indicted for having sexual relations with students this year alone.

https://www.fox10phoenix.com/news/135-teachers-charged-child-sex-crimes-this-year-alone

https://www.abc4.com/news/top-stori...rida-human-trafficking-investigation-sheriff/

https://www.kwch.com/2022/05/20/teacher-accused-making-child-pornography-police-say/

except they ARE going after public libraries

Republican lawmakers moving forward on Indiana bill to ban 'harmful' library materials

Conservative activists want to ban 400 books from a library — but they aren't even on shelves​

The Right-Wing Plot To Destroy Public Libraries

GOP Legislators Target Librarians for Prosecution, Fines Under new Bill​

A collection of 14 Iowa Republican representatives introduced a bill Tuesday that makes it illegal for a person affiliated with a public school or public library to knowingly spread “material the person knows or reasonably should know, is obscene or harmful to minors.”

Censorship battles’ new frontier: Your public library

you have to be actually blind to not see what is coming next.

 

[Xzi]

As TraitorPat just demonstrated, republicans want to frame even basic sex ed as pedophilia/sexual assault. Because being pro-forced birth and refusing to educate teens about the consequences of sex surely makes for a great combination.

 

[LainaGabranth]

As TraitorPat just demonstrated, republicans want to frame even basic sex ed as pedophilia/sexual assault. Because being pro-forced birth and refusing to educate teens about the consequences of sex surely makes for a great combination.

For fucking real. It's an open and shut argument, the right is persecuting the LGBTQ+, and are trying to make it legal to do so. The only reason anyone would be even remotely fine with these candidates doing this level of open oppression is if they themselves are bigoted, but I'd love to hear TraitorPat here explain why he's pro LGBTQ+, despite constantly railing against them harder than I rail his mom every night.

 

[The Catboy]

Point out where the "right-wing" is targeting pro-LGBT books. You make it sound like they are wanting them banned from all of society when in reality, they are wanting them removed from school libraries where they do not belong as they show pornographic images in them including oral sex. I for one, would be very upset if other adults were talking to my daughters about sexual acts and revealing their sexuality to them in the classroom. That is sick behavior to want to talk about sex to prepubescent kids. Parents are the ultimate authority over their own kids, not the government and definitely not the teachers unions. It's no wonder that hundreds of teachers and school staff have been indicted for having sexual relations with students this year alone.

https://www.fox10phoenix.com/news/135-teachers-charged-child-sex-crimes-this-year-alone

https://www.abc4.com/news/top-stori...rida-human-trafficking-investigation-sheriff/

https://www.kwch.com/2022/05/20/teacher-accused-making-child-pornography-police-say/

You really shoestringed this post together.
They want to ban LGBT+ books not because there's anything sexual in them, but because they hate the LGBT+. Then spread bullshit about the material being "sexual" as that plays into the narrative that the LGBT+ is perverse and they know people aren't even going to read the books in the first place. Equally, even if there was sexual material, people tend to ignore sexual material when it's not LGBT+ related. We see this happening in all forms of media, when LGBT+ content suddenly bumps the rating up a notch, regardless of the content shown. Even if this has lessened over the years, it still played in the same fear-mongering of the LGBT+ supposed perverse nature.
Of course, you then decided to shoestring a connection to teachers having sex with kids. That's stupid and you know it's stupid. Sex ed is not why teachers are having sex with students and it's silly to think it is. LGBT+ content is not the reason why teachers have had sex with students and there's literally no connection to that being the reason. The more obvious likely problem is teachers taking advantage of their position of power to be predatory. This seems like a far more likely explanation than blaming sex ed or LGBT+ material in schools. If you have anything to argue against that, please provide some resources.

 

[TraderPatTX]

except they ARE going after public libraries

Republican lawmakers moving forward on Indiana bill to ban 'harmful' library materials

Conservative activists want to ban 400 books from a library — but they aren't even on shelves​

The Right-Wing Plot To Destroy Public Libraries

GOP Legislators Target Librarians for Prosecution, Fines Under new Bill​

Censorship battles’ new frontier: Your public library

you have to be actually blind to not see what is coming next.

Do kids still go to public libraries? Why do you want porn to available to kids for?

I'm not blind. I see videos all the time of adults twerking for kids, adults dancing so kids can stuff dollar bills in their outfits, kids being exposed to naked men at pride rallies. Teachers and Disney employees getting arrested for child trafficking. So yes, I do see what is coming next if parents don't start putting their collective foot down.

 

[TraderPatTX]

You really shoestringed this post together.
They want to ban LGBT+ books not because there's anything sexual in them, but because they hate the LGBT+. Then spread bullshit about the material being "sexual" as that plays into the narrative that the LGBT+ is perverse and they know people aren't even going to read the books in the first place. Equally, even if there was sexual material, people tend to ignore sexual material when it's not LGBT+ related. We see this happening in all forms of media, when LGBT+ content suddenly bumps the rating up a notch, regardless of the content shown. Even if this has lessened over the years, it still played in the same fear-mongering of the LGBT+ supposed perverse nature.
Of course, you then decided to shoestring a connection to teachers having sex with kids. That's stupid and you know it's stupid. Sex ed is not why teachers are having sex with students and it's silly to think it is. LGBT+ content is not the reason why teachers have had sex with students and there's literally no connection to that being the reason. The more obvious likely problem is teachers taking advantage of their position of power to be predatory. This seems like a far more likely explanation than blaming sex ed or LGBT+ material in schools. If you have anything to argue against that, please provide some resources.

So oral sex is not sexual? Bill Clinton, is that you?

Take a look at these pictures and tell me you are ok with a kindergartner looking at these.

https://www.ibtimes.sg/texas-school...book-sexually-explicit-cartoons-library-60974

 

[Taleweaver]

So oral sex is not sexual? Bill Clinton, is that you?

Take a look at these pictures and tell me you are ok with a kindergartner looking at these.

https://www.ibtimes.sg/texas-school...book-sexually-explicit-cartoons-library-60974

Are you trying to argue or just trolling?

Your rhetorical question has nothing to do with what @The Catboy said, and i think you know this very well.

Second... If you want to plea your case, you shouldn't use hyperboles. Your linked source wasn't from a kindergarten library but from a high school. Kind of a difference, y'know?
Second... It's pretty easy to screenshot one page of something and label it whatever you want. That soccer mom probably just flipped through the rest just to find what took her offense. Either way: just because she labels it porn doesn't mean that it is.

Oh, and in straight answer: yes, I'm fine with teenagers reading coming of age books/graphic novels like 'gender queer'. I'm wondering why you aren't. If they want to find porn, you bet they've got much easier ways to obtain it, so i don't know if you're dishonest or just incredibly naive.

 

[LainaGabranth]

Are you trying to argue or just trolling?

Your rhetorical question has nothing to do with what @The Catboy said, and i think you know this very well.

Second... If you want to plea your case, you shouldn't use hyperboles. Your linked source wasn't from a kindergarten library but from a high school. Kind of a difference, y'know?
Second... It's pretty easy to screenshot one page of something and label it whatever you want. That soccer mom probably just flipped through the rest just to find what took her offense. Either way: just because she labels it porn doesn't mean that it is.

Oh, and in straight answer: yes, I'm fine with teenagers reading coming of age books/graphic novels like 'gender queer'. I'm wondering why you aren't. If they want to find porn, you bet they've got much easier ways to obtain it, so i don't know if you're dishonest or just incredibly naive.

Idk if this is your first post of Trader's that you've read but he's an idiot lmao.

 

[Taleweaver]

Idk if this is your first post of Trader's that you've read but he's an idiot lmao.

I've read more posts that i don't agree with (like his first one in this thread), but... Don't take it personally, but I'd rather make up my own mind of people. If they're idiots, they're perfectly able to prove it themselves.

 

[LainaGabranth]

I've read more posts that i don't agree with (like his first one in this thread), but... Don't take it personally, but I'd rather make up my own mind of people. If they're idiots, they're perfectly able to prove it themselves.

Nah I get you. You'll see very quickly what I mean.

 

[TraderPatTX]

Are you trying to argue or just trolling?

Your rhetorical question has nothing to do with what @The Catboy said, and i think you know this very well.

Second... If you want to plea your case, you shouldn't use hyperboles. Your linked source wasn't from a kindergarten library but from a high school. Kind of a difference, y'know?

That one story happened to be in a high school, which is also filled with kids. Last I checked, it is illegal to show kids porn, but the left likes to get their rocks of talking to minors about sex. There's a word to describe people like that.

Second... It's pretty easy to screenshot one page of something and label it whatever you want. That soccer mom probably just flipped through the rest just to find what took her offense. Either way: just because she labels it porn doesn't mean that it is.

So one page of oral sex is ok, but three pages is too much? Is this your argument?

Well, this particular, and it seems many, parents are not ok with people talking to their kids about sex acts and last I checked, parents pay for these teachers' salaries.

Oh, and in straight answer: yes, I'm fine with teenagers reading coming of age books/graphic novels like 'gender queer'. I'm wondering why you aren't. If they want to find porn, you bet they've got much easier ways to obtain it, so i don't know if you're dishonest or just incredibly naive.

By that logic, kids can just buy guns illegally on the street, lets just make it legal to sell them guns without parental consent. Let's do the same with drugs. Hey, kids are gonna have sex anyway, let's build private rooms in schools so kids can have sex in them instead of getting raped in the bathrooms. Make sure and don't tell the parents about that too.

You people are truly sick in the head wanting to sexualize children. That's if they actually make it through the abortion mills.

 

[TraderPatTX]

If you really want to talk about suppression, let's talk about Hunter Biden's laptop. There's plenty of material there to talk about that has been suppressed for 2 years. It has it all. Pay to play schemes with Ukraine and China with 10% for Big Guy. Compromised family members ripe for foreign nations to take advantage of.

Maybe Ashley Biden's diary would be more your speed. Inappropriate showers when she was 6. A lifetime of abuse.

Both of these were suppressed and instead of going after the illegality of what these items contain, the FBI decided to go after the people who exposed them. And the compliant, corporate media made sure to obey the government's orders. Totally not fascist at all.

 

[MariArch]

Can't go wrong with suppression. but the problem is that it takes so damn long to get the tax stamp to buy a suppressor. And it's fucking 400 dollars and the ATF can't even bother to send it to you till 9 months later. Fuck the feddys

 

[The Catboy]

So oral sex is not sexual? Bill Clinton, is that you?

Take a look at these pictures and tell me you are ok with a kindergartner looking at these.

https://www.ibtimes.sg/texas-school...book-sexually-explicit-cartoons-library-60974

You avoided everything in my post and changed the subject. Address my fucking comment properly, changing the subject and creating a strawman only makes your points look far more stupid

If you really want to talk about suppression, let's talk about Hunter Biden's laptop. There's plenty of material there to talk about that has been suppressed for 2 years. It has it all. Pay to play schemes with Ukraine and China with 10% for Big Guy. Compromised family members ripe for foreign nations to take advantage of.

Maybe Ashley Biden's diary would be more your speed. Inappropriate showers when she was 6. A lifetime of abuse.

Both of these were suppressed and instead of going after the illegality of what these items contain, the FBI decided to go after the people who exposed them. And the compliant, corporate media made sure to obey the government's orders. Totally not fascist at all.

Those are a lot of buzzwords for literally nothing of substance said.

 

[Nightwish]

Last I checked, it is illegal to show kids porn, but the left likes to get their rocks of talking to minors about sex.

Not only is that nonsense, but, last I checked, kids have found a way to see, and often enough do, "worse" well before the internet, with only adults being able to explain consent, the difference between love and lust, that pregnancy could be a result, and all the rest of it.
Speaking of consent, not only are closer connections more often the problem, they need to know it's not ok and that they have plenty of people to complain or report to. Don't forget it's an age of rebelling against, or at least ignoring, your parents even if they're the best in the world.
You can't protect "kids" by hiding the world from them and expect them to be adults overnight at 18. When you can, there's plenty who fail harder after because they are not prepared to be adults. Thakfully, they're more capable than you think when you respect their capabilities.

 

[The Catboy]

Not only is that nonsense, but, last I checked, kids have found a way to see, and often enough do, "worse" well before the internet, with only adults being able to explain consent, the difference between love and lust, that pregnancy could be a result, and all the rest of it.
Speaking of consent, not only are closer connections more often the problem, they need to know it's not ok and that they have plenty of people to complain or report to. Don't forget it's an age of rebelling against, or at least ignoring, your parents even if they're the best in the world.
You can't protect "kids" by hiding the world from them and expect them to be adults overnight at 18. When you can, there's plenty who fail harder after because they are not prepared to be adults. Thakfully, they're more capable than you think when you respect their capabilities.

Actually, 18 U.S. Code § 1470 - Transfer of obscene material to minors

Whoever, using the mail or any facility or means of interstate or foreign commerce, knowingly transfers obscene matter to another individual who has not attained the age of 16 years, knowing that such other individual has not attained the age of 16 years, or attempts to do so, shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 10 years, or both.

(Added Pub. L. 105–314, title IV, § 401(a), Oct. 30, 1998, 112 Stat. 2979.)

So the law more or less states that knowingly sending inappropriate material to a minor under 16, is a crime. Of course, this does not cover education material nor education on sexual acts, sexuality, safe sex, and so on. It only covers material that is legitimately pornographic in nature and without educational value.

Sauce: https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1470
https://www.justice.gov/criminal-ceos/citizens-guide-us-federal-law-obscenity

It is worth noting, that this does require "knowingly," thus leaving room for deniability. This is why 18+ sites aren't taken down when minors are found viewing them. If the site makes it clear that it's of an adult nature, then it falls onto the parents to be monitoring for that material. Equally, someone posting their own images is also not liable if they did not deliberately send them to a minor. This again is why adult performers can use sites like Twitter and not be in violation of the law.

 

[Viri]

Damn it, they found us out! I guess I'll have to wait a few more decades before I can start gassing people I don't like, while demanding parts of Canada become part of Greater America!