Film, Media & TV0 min ago
The Rushing Tide Of Fascism ...
155 Answers
... is taking over this site. After years of copious quotes from Hitler's favourite English newspaper, we are now getting quotes from the far more odious Breibart website, a website which makes Attila the Hun look Liberal.
And they have the gall to suggest Islam is taking over - I haven't seen many quotes from Muslim sites here.
And they have the gall to suggest Islam is taking over - I haven't seen many quotes from Muslim sites here.
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by Canary42. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Definition of ‘fascist’: Under fascist rule, the emphasis is on the group — the nation — with few individual rights. You must support the ruling party's views on society, politics, and culture — or else.
https:/
Remind anyone of anything?
https:/
Remind anyone of anything?
-- answer removed --
-- answer removed --
-- answer removed --
-- answer removed --
-- answer removed --
-- answer removed --
-- answer removed --
Am I wrong to think that certain posters opinions change with the weather?
Maybe it's just me.
Anyway, I doubt that the esteemed pages of Answerbank will be a source of breaking news if it all does kick off.
All down to high jinks and misunderstandings till the front door comes off its hinges.
Let's chat guys, we can work through our differences.
Maybe it's just me.
Anyway, I doubt that the esteemed pages of Answerbank will be a source of breaking news if it all does kick off.
All down to high jinks and misunderstandings till the front door comes off its hinges.
Let's chat guys, we can work through our differences.
"Let's chat guys, we can work through our differences."
I don't think we can.
There are some contributors who think that the gradual infiltration of Muslims into the West either isn't happening or if it is it is insignificant and/or doesn't matter. Then there are others who believe it is happening, that it is significant and that it does matter.
I don't see how you can reconcile those two viewpoints. But there's no need for any unpleasantness amongst us.
I don't think we can.
There are some contributors who think that the gradual infiltration of Muslims into the West either isn't happening or if it is it is insignificant and/or doesn't matter. Then there are others who believe it is happening, that it is significant and that it does matter.
I don't see how you can reconcile those two viewpoints. But there's no need for any unpleasantness amongst us.
I share the concerns of the OP.
My personal view is that fascist extremists are seeking to spread their own forms of disinformation on any website that will tolerate their twisted views. Including this one.
My impression is that the Daily Mail is the preferred source of ‘news’ in the News section on this site. Speaking personally, I became concerned when the first reference to Breitbart was not laughed out of town, and now Breitbart appears to have become an accepted source of ‘news’ on this site, and discussions around it are taken seriously.
I didn’t see the reference to Stormfront, but it is part of the same trend of normalising sites that spread lies and disinformation, while ridiculing sites and individuals that are less fascist in tone.
Is there a connection, I wonder, with this peer-reviewed research?
https:/
The full paper is here:
https:/
A summary from the New York Times is here:
https:/
For those who don’t want to read it, I’ll summarise. Using a variety of robust measures, the researchers looked at the frequency of racially-motivated attacks in Germany on asylum-seekers and the local coverage on TV news; usage of Facebook and the impact of other events, such as major sporting events involving the German national team.
Where Facebook use was above the mean (by one standard deviation), the frequency of such attacks increased by 50%. This is a strong correlation.
The frequency of attacks was not correlated with any other effect
This was confirmed by looking at relevant statistics when the internet was unavailable. Racially-motivated attacks slowed in proportion. TV news coverage of atrocities did not significantly affect the number of attacks, but an increase in the number of Facebook posts by the AfD (right-wing German political party) was strongly correlated with increases in racially-motivated attacks.
The conclusion is that at least 13% of racially-motivated attacks occur as a direct result of people reading posts on Facebook from far-right sources.
I look at the AB community and it seems to me that there are many people with a lot of time on their hands. Some of them appear to spend that time looking at Youtube vidoes and Stormfront, Breibart and other sites of a similar nature.
It would be fascinating, and perhaps revealing, to correlate the social media usage against the level of tolerance for other views among users of this site. What results might one see, do you think?
My personal view is that fascist extremists are seeking to spread their own forms of disinformation on any website that will tolerate their twisted views. Including this one.
My impression is that the Daily Mail is the preferred source of ‘news’ in the News section on this site. Speaking personally, I became concerned when the first reference to Breitbart was not laughed out of town, and now Breitbart appears to have become an accepted source of ‘news’ on this site, and discussions around it are taken seriously.
I didn’t see the reference to Stormfront, but it is part of the same trend of normalising sites that spread lies and disinformation, while ridiculing sites and individuals that are less fascist in tone.
Is there a connection, I wonder, with this peer-reviewed research?
https:/
The full paper is here:
https:/
A summary from the New York Times is here:
https:/
For those who don’t want to read it, I’ll summarise. Using a variety of robust measures, the researchers looked at the frequency of racially-motivated attacks in Germany on asylum-seekers and the local coverage on TV news; usage of Facebook and the impact of other events, such as major sporting events involving the German national team.
Where Facebook use was above the mean (by one standard deviation), the frequency of such attacks increased by 50%. This is a strong correlation.
The frequency of attacks was not correlated with any other effect
This was confirmed by looking at relevant statistics when the internet was unavailable. Racially-motivated attacks slowed in proportion. TV news coverage of atrocities did not significantly affect the number of attacks, but an increase in the number of Facebook posts by the AfD (right-wing German political party) was strongly correlated with increases in racially-motivated attacks.
The conclusion is that at least 13% of racially-motivated attacks occur as a direct result of people reading posts on Facebook from far-right sources.
I look at the AB community and it seems to me that there are many people with a lot of time on their hands. Some of them appear to spend that time looking at Youtube vidoes and Stormfront, Breibart and other sites of a similar nature.
It would be fascinating, and perhaps revealing, to correlate the social media usage against the level of tolerance for other views among users of this site. What results might one see, do you think?
IJKLM - That is a remarkably clear post, however, I feel it will gain precious little purchase on this site.
The general consensus between those on the right (and the far right), on AnswerBank, is that Islam is the *ultimate* face of Fascism in the world, and they tend to truncate any further discussion of any other examples of fascism/fascist actions by flinging that into the works. It works very well as a diversionary tactic, unfortunately.
The general consensus between those on the right (and the far right), on AnswerBank, is that Islam is the *ultimate* face of Fascism in the world, and they tend to truncate any further discussion of any other examples of fascism/fascist actions by flinging that into the works. It works very well as a diversionary tactic, unfortunately.
