Go Home, Gamer girl: Press release on unjust banishment from Calgary Expo


Early this morning, Fan Expo Canada staff (See edit notice at bottom)  banned Honey Badger Brigade (HBB) from the Calgary Comics and Entertainment Expo (CalEx). Security staff approached the HBB booth, ordered us to leave, and refused to state the reason why unless Alison Tieman agreed to speak to them away from the other members of the group, without recording. They informed Alison that they had received complaints on social media, including 25 allegations of harassment. No evidence was presented, no request was made for information from HBB, and no specific incident was cited until further questions were asked of security.

Upon further questioning, security mentioned the Women in Comics panel discussion from the previous day, where Alison was given permission to speak. Alison spoke briefly in relation to a topic brought up by the panelists. Accusers, however, claimed that Alison derailed the conversation. Alison and myself were in attendance, and you can listen to Alison’s statement in the panel here on YouTube. You can hear Alison, myself and indeed the entire panel in the full discussion record.

As you will hear, there was no harrassment. Expo staff and mob rule, in their crusade for ending harassment against women, harassed the Honey Badgers despite having no evidence of any policy violation. To those unfamiliar, HBB was founded by three women and has a highly diverse staff of volunteers, creators and lovers of free expression. Alison Tieman, a woman who spent 7 years writing graphic novels and fighting censorship, was censored by other women for speaking her mind, and advocating equal compassion for men, and true strength in character for women.

We ask all involved to question what it means to provide an open forum, and to examine how CalEx treats it’s patrons and exhibitors. Do they provide a safe space from harassment, or a safe space for the people who want to define what harassment means?

Please send press inquiries to xenospora@gmail.com for more information as the story develops. Also be sure to follow us on Twitter.

EDIT: Sources indicate that involved parties include Ben Marasco and Kelly Dowd, not Fan Expo. Our apologies go out to Fan Expo for any false association.

Sage Gerard
Facebooktwitterredditpinterestmailby feather

About the author

Sage Gerard

<span class="dsq-postid" data-dsqidentifier="151884 https://www.honeybadgerbrigade.com/?p=151884">483 comments</span>

  • I hate that this happened, but if it didn’t happen here, it would happen somewhere else. This was inevitable, and feminists played their role exactly how we’ve predicted they would.

    • current feminism is 1 step away from being the new Nazi or the Church during the Dark Ages

          • Not here, and not for anything of your strange, intrusive interest. But your stock and trade seems well stated in your obvious troll name.

          • Wait, you’re calling MY name a troll name???? BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHHAHAAHAHAAHA

            You’re partially right, this username is in part to troll bullshit like The Mary Sue (though I did just get blocked from there for posting viable arguments, not trolling, censoring cowards), but the irony of what you say is hilarious!!!

          • Ar yes the Mary Sue, banning people for not agreeing with them & *shock and horror*, showing up with viable counter arguments to their click bait articles.

        • Well so far I’ve been told I’m a traitorous bitch who supports violence and evil blah blah blah blah something like that.

          • gawd, my name is Jade….you have no idea how many times some feminist has assumed I was a female, and told me exactly the same thing.

          • Usually I get mistaken for guy online(not sure maybe it’s the Alucard icon) but hey I know how it feels. Mostly be harassed by FemNazis is annoying at best and infuriating on a bad day.

      • Feminism = Nazism now?

        Take a fucking history course, buddy. Unless you’re being literally led into a gas chamber for the crime of being male you disgrace those very real victims of the time when you make some jackass comparison like that.

        • It didn’t start with the gas chambers.
          Lest we forget. Of course, a “history course” doesn’t generally reveal what an “economics” introduction will, buddy.

        • Look at how the Nazis acted before they had those gas chambers. Read some fucking history yourself.

        • Read again mate, 1 step away, be it the genocide, but so far ideologically wise they are the nazi

          • When you factor in that the female to male suicide rate has shot up since the early 1970’s, subtract the total male suicide dead since then from what it would be if the ratio had remained unchanged, you get a fairly massive body count. You could also argue that the number of aborted children since the laws were changed many years ago could also be added to that body count. As to the whole Nazi/Communist/Socialist/Capitalist tilt, same $hit different day. Take a look at how many N.A. Indians went into the ground in the name of Progress, no different here. In fact Socialism was created as a ruse by Capitalists to control the population. Feminism was also created for the same reason by the same group.

          • I think that pretty much any way you slice it, there is a large body count associated with Feminism. It’s only because they get to cheat and claim that their unborn babies aren’t really “people” that the numbers seem a bit lower.

        • Maybe you should take a history course yourself? The Nazis did far more than put people in concentration camps, and the entirety of the horrible events of WW2 wern’t isolated to those camps.

          It happened in the streets, it happened through propaganda and silencing people, controlling media and discrimination running rampant.

          What happened in those camps were disgusting beyond words, but reducing the entire thing to just concentration camps disgraces thousands and thousands of other victims.

          • You’re so right. The Nazis used propaganda to frightening levels of effectiveness. They told the people that there was an elite group who had control of the media and academia, and did everything it could do to keep the truth from the papers, the radio, and the classroom. They told the people that if they didn’t play along with that elite, then that elite would ostracize from society and the marketplace any who disagreed with them. They told the people that this group had an ongoing nefarious conspiracy to mold German society into something that abhorred the traditional values that made Germany great. They told the people that if they didn’t act soon, it would be too late.

            The people joined in with the Nazis, made fearful by the propaganda. Thus, they began driving the Jewish people from any positions they held, and eventually even from their own private homes and businesses. And, while you’re definitely right that it’s not the whole story to bring up the mass killings and genocides, we shouldn’t forget that it was the propaganda against the Jewish people—not to mention the communists, the Romani, and homosexual people, to name a few others—that made the camps and deaths possible.

            Thank you so much for pointing that out!

          • Personally I see it more like McCarthyism witch hunts and black balling so far.

          • It started with “education.” A great woman, Erika Mann ( daughter of Nobel-winning novelist Thomas Mann) while in exile, documented how the party’s version of “justice” was sold to the citizens in her 1938 (!) book: “School for Barbarians: Education Under the Nazis.” The book is germane to discussions of present-day circumstances.

        • Yes, by all means, we should wait until we can make that specific comparison before becoming concerned.


        • I did a pretty intensive course on history and i can definitely say there was a long ass time before gas chambers where the nazi’s acted as if they were for the people and they wanted progress

        • So, therefore, someone isn’t a white supremacist unless they are actually wearing a white hood?

          Thanks for confusing distinction with difference.

        • Gas chambers were not the end-all or be-all of Nazism.

          Book burning, banned ideas, and silencing dissenters were all classic hallmarks of Nazism- hallmarks which the modern Feminist and SJW movement have gleefully embraced.

          No dissent from the feminist/SJW ideology will be tolerated- on pain of expulsion, demonization, or “othering”.

          The only thing the Feminists/SJW’s HAVEN’T adopted (so far) are Scarlet Letters and felt triangles.

          Or as the Keeper on Talos IV might have put it, “Wrong thinking will be punished.”

        • Nazism was a slow but steady process. It didn’t start with tanks crushing buildings,gas chambers,and concentration camps. Before that it was just some posters being put up,”fun” youth gatherings (re-education),and public speeches.

          Propaganda only works when it starts off subtle. Before you can kill a group of innocent people without resistance you have to convince the majority those people somehow deserve it.

          Seem familiar? It should! “#killallmen”. I mean c’mon,radical fems use that hashtag brazenly out in the open. And how about those “Male tears” mugs? Keep it classy,modern feminism!

          The Calgary expo is just one of social justice’s most recent failures and examples of banishing innocent people who merely had their own opinions. I wonder, did Calgary expo make the honey badgers where special little patches too so they could be easier to identify? Ey,it’s a joke but I never put sheer lunacy beyond sjws!

        • Well, gas chambers have been so thoroughly been proven to have never existed, so all the NAZI!!!!! shit is pretty dumb all together. But, yes, feminists are really evil human beings for the most part, which is what people mean when they say NAZI!!!!!

          • ACtually, the gas chambers have been VERY thoroughly documented. You might want to step away from the internet for a while, mate.

          • Yes. The hoax has been documented. That’s what hoaxes are. But unsealed rooms…. nevermind. School and TV win.

        • The Nazi camps were the last straw. They started with hate speech, they started by blaming the jews for all the world’s problems. It slowly got worse – they took their legal rights, terrorized them out of their jobs and homes. Before they knew it, suddenly half the Jewish Population was incarcerated.

          At the moment, feminism is spreading hate speech, blaming men for all the world’s problems, and well in the process of denying people (mostly men and children) of their legal and social rights. Standing back and saying that we shouldn’t liken then to the Nazis until they start building gas chambers, is nothing short of moronic.

        • Look how little boys are being jacked up on drugs to make them suitable to a classroom that is designed with little girls in mind. Even how entire scholastic endeavors can be destroyed at even the hint of rape or violence against women. At least the Nazis ended lives swiftly instead of dragging the pain out.

          • The Nazis were sadistic fucks -_-

            So death wasn’t quick for a lot of people.

        • You are the one who needs to read some history. Nazism did not start immediately with the gas chambers and war. Look at what the NAZIs were doing around 32-37, and compare some of it to what the extreme left is doing today, and you will see a lot of similarities. Tyranny starts small, and keeps growing, until it is stopped, and you are the one who is ignorant of history if you dont realize that.

      • A comparison to good ol’ Soviet Communism is more apt. The Soviets often stated they were for “peace”, “democracy”, “youth” and “freedom”.

        “Peace” and “youth” meant (even before the Vietnam War) conferences where the youth representatives of the world would condemn imperialism — again. The Russian and Ukrainian youth delegates were 35 to 40 years old.

        “Democracy” meant “economic democracy” not that the producers or consumers had a vote.

        They boasted they had more “freedom of the press” than the US. The State would publish your book for you. Unless, of course, it was “damaging to socialism”.

    • the role of tyrannical dictator, who plays, weak victimized damsell in distress, if they don’t have the only voice.
      predictable, why, gamergate, shirtgate……..feminism the last 50 years?
      quit sterotyping feminists with the truth or face their wrath.

      • Lots of male supporters of feminism are not so much manginas and White Knights as they are fellow believers in the fundamentalist social constructionism fallacy and the “critical theory” philosophy that stands behind the anti-Western civilization ethos. This can be seen in all grad humanities programs in all the universities.

    • I would like to thank the HBB team for their stand up attitude throughout this ordeal. I watched the interviews over the weekend. HBB could have raised a stink and called for a boycott of the Expo. Instead, HBB encouraged their fans to attend. They did not want the vendors to suffer. They arranged meet ups that were peaceful.

      I am concerned that Alison’s video will be used against her due to her falling apart. Stay strong, Alison. You have support within and without the community.

      You were the bigger men this weekend. Don’t let anyone tell you otherwise.

  • Well, ladies. You hoped for the wretches you oppose to fuck up. They fucked up.

    Carefully with the windfall, now……

      • It will last till tomorrow. You have to be good at what you do. The Badgers are not. Get better ladies.

      • I’m sure if we had the same citizens we have today, we would have squandered Peal Harbor. Look at the decisions made and how soldiers were used as cannon fodder, and you would have had the same outrage as you have today for the decisions made after 9/11 Funny how your standards change depending on who is in power. Afghanistan has been an even worse debacle under Obama than Iraq and yet we hear nothing about it. The minions are so easy to manipulate.

  • You begged for money to get you there with Pussy Riot guerrilla tactics. If you can’t get invited as a speaker find another creative way. Get better at what you do. That seems to work for people with talent. Work for it. You do know your podcasts suck don’t you? Become better and at least be coherent in what you do. See you after 5 minutes when your clicks die down.

    • *yawn* I have to agree with Chris. 1/10 trolling, the 1 simply for showing beginner Alinsky tactics.

      • That’s a laugh. You should hear from men that don’t want your tactics speaking for them. I am partial to GG. Grow up. You just practiced the Alinsky tactics against a progressive movement that has infiltrated gaming. You won’t get peoples ear that way. You will get a good echo chamber pat on the back though. It doesn’t reverberate any further than your nose. I say get better at what you do. Then maybe I will allow you to speak for me.

  • Some supposed intellectual named Brittney Le Blanc actually wrote “I truly believe in freedom of speech, but…”

    That means she’s a fascist.

    • This!

      One cannot say they “truly believe in freedom of speech’ and follow it with a “but”.

      • I have caveats tbh.
        As a Brit I think there are sensible limits on free expression that are easily agreed on.
        1) People need to have the option of not listening to your bullshit.
        ie: if you’re loud, obnoxious or intentionally offensive on public transport or private business, you can be compelled to leave or dealt with my law enforcement. I don’t agree with hard punishments, only decorum. Preaching hate outside a preschool? Arrest that men even if it’s non violent. Drunk and disorderly? Spend the night in the drunk tank.
        etc etc etc.
        All are limits on free speech with limited scope meant to ensure public safety and prevent trouble.

        2) Advocating violence.

        An easy one, but with nuance. I think most people don’t need to be told where the line lies, as reasonable people understand jokes, irony. hyperbole and even angry outbursts aren’t what it’s meant to prevent.
        That said; it’s careful territory. I actually do support the idea that extremists should be heard and not silence. Their ideas need to be known so we can laugh at them. Ideas that are suppressed are not refuted and can gain power/authority in the minds of the misguided.

        Now, the first is even MORE complicated, because discourse in public is absolutely allowed, and the idea of “free speech points” that are fenced off appals me.
        I think the expo is likely going to game the system to apply an interpretation of the first, as it’s VERY easy to assert.
        They use altruism and sensible, rational limitations placed on personal liberty (“my freedom to swing my arms ends where your nose begins”) to silence dissent or opposition. That’s how fascists and dictators have ALWAYS operated, they exploit the good in people for their own selfish agendas.

        I hope that somehow this enters a wider discussion, as I have absolute faith that “outsiders” and professionals looking at the events and the players involved will quickly realise who the abusive party is.
        Whatever disagreements they might have with some of the HBB (who hardly agree amongst themselves ><) it is apparent to anyone with wit that they are good people and many of them (including the attendees of the expo) share a passion for the hobby.

        Free speech is not about always getting to sat exactly what you want no matter the circumstances.
        But you are CERTAINLY not a supporter of free speech if you base your support for it on the content of what is said.
        If a well intentioned person were advocating my own strong beliefs by shouting and swearing at young mothers picking up their kids from nursery, I'd ask them to move along myself or even involve the police. Intimidation or abuse shouldn't be excused in the name of freedom. Nor in the name of "safety" as the expo have done.

        • The time, place, and manner restrictions are pretty well internalized in US jurisprudence and do not have very many opponents in this country. The opponents against violence advocacy restriction are even fewer. In the US, when somebody adds that “but” after claiming to support free speech, it’s generally to advocate restrictions other than what you’re talking about. This may be an american cultural habit that’s different from your side of the Atlantic.

  • Again it comes down to racism. Once a dominate bigoted group discovers that others are not of their kind – lynch them. Fan Expo Canada lynched the Honey Badgers at the behest of the mob. Good job Killing the Mockingbird Fan Expo Canada.

    • Racism? C’mon Chris. The Badgers were not welcome at a professional event with their message. This shit don’t work. It works against a good cause.

        • That’s clever. No I’m not. I was wondering how long it would take till you did that. Your on the backend. You are as narrow minded as Anita Sarkesian.

          • This is old verbiage on an old subject that most people here are very familiar with. Nothing clever, no insult intended, just that you lack reference and that is OK.

          • Yeah! Got it. Nothing can be discussed that is contrary to the party line. No responses to critique. No thinking just pandering. This is why GG is as flacid as the progressives are annoying. Bye. No deleting now promise?

          • This isn’t GG territory though. Yes, HoneyBadgers have been covering GG related material for some time, but they each have individual efforts as well.

            Here you are on Honey Badger territory. You’re bound to meet resistance.

            Talking in a more neutral GG zone like KIA will probably get you a more varied opinion on MRAs.

  • Calgary Comic and Entertainment Expo and Fan Expo are two different conventions run by different people. Research is a good thing.

  • Not surprised that this happened at all. What has it come to that only the “right” type of women are allowed at conventions nay not conventions “hugboxes for SJW’s”? Who has the right to say who is allowed and who is not allowed to attend? Those paying for the right to exhibit their art or those who are so weak and shallow that a mere piece of art causes them to quake in their doc martens? Has our society gotten that frail and small minded that they are unable to cope with any opinion that opposes their own? They spout diversity and inclusiveness but their actions speak far louder than their words as actions always do.

    Keep up the good fight ladies. You have our support.

    • GamerGate needs it’s own event? Would that not be the right tactic? If you can raise money to send the ladies to an event them maybe crowdfunding and leadership toward a truly open event would be a step in the right direction. Start small. It will take time. Daunting though. Gamers know how to get things done. Maybe Milo and Thunderfoot would C O V E R it.

      • First thing to do is burn CalgaryExpo’s Reputation to the ground and set the example that we will not tolerate harassment of women. Any true Feminist would stand up to Calgary Expo.

      • The fembots would only target it for sexism all over again. They will never tolerate a place where men can be happy.

        • It’s really a matter of choosing your battleground. Don’t select venues that are hospitable for the enemy to operate in. That can be tricky but if you stay away from large college campus and arenas in parts of the country that are excessively feminist your odds improve. Detroit was a great choice for the the first Men’s Conference. Granted there was still opposition and there were some hiccups but it was pretty well blunted. Feminists did more damage to themselves with their tantrums.

        • You run with that. It is real productive and when the name calling stops remember to grow up.

  • The narrative of what happened is already out there. The truth (or even a remotely dissenting side of facts) has no relevance. Squeaking in the wind. As much as I support free speech and am tired of this lying bullshit in gaming and literature and comics and tech where everyone is being made to fearmonger those who simply don’t buy into agendas (and don’t want it shoved down their throat by people who have no interest in these things in the first place outside of a new niche in which to shove their agendas)… I also recognize how fruitless it is. Frankly, I’m pretty much ready to roll over. They own the mics. they win.

  • Welcome to the new Leftist Totalitarianism, comrade. Same as the old NAZI and Communist Totalitarianisms. The Left never changes. They just dupe a new batch rubes every generation.

    • is it a bad time to point out that the Communist Left movement was done as a direct retaliation to the Fascist RIGHT, and that the Nazi and Communist movements had absolutely nothing in common other than coincidently having a similar target for half of a world war?

      • Well, it’s bad in the sense that German and italian fascists were both socialists, and therefore Leftists. They were not of the Right in any historical sense, only in the rewriting of history sense the Left specializes in. The Right supports Constitutional Liberty – the freedom of the individual and free markets. Things opposed by totalitarian collectivists on the Left.

        • Lol more left/right bullshit.

          you are only half right about this. Yes SJW’s and feminists are on the left, but trad/cons and religious fundies are on the right.

          I love how you guys just have a complete brain fart about big government conservatives on the right side of the isle. The religious and social conservatives have just as much a grip on the right with their lobby as feminists and SJW’S do on the left.

          Please, please, please ask me to provide examples of how these factions on the right have nothing to do with “freedom of the individual” but support totalitarian collectivism just as factions on the left do.

          • There are no “big government conservatives.” That’s a contradiction in terms. And “Republican” does not equate to “conservative.” The differences gave rise to the TEA Party.

          • You don’t know what conservative means.
            It isn’t a movement or an ideology.
            It’s a principle.
            Conservative LITERALLY means something different EVERYWHERE, because it is about preserving traditions.

          • but but but america is the golden standard against wich all other things will be judged!

          • “You don’t know what conservative means.It isn’t a movement or an ideology.”

            OMG how ridiculous you are now. Conservative absolutely IS an ideology. The idea that conservatism prevents change is so stupid you can hardly respond in any other way than laughing. A country changes regardless, The point of politics is whether its socialist, conservative or liberal (or other) values who decides

            1) what kind of change happens

            2) in what way/by which method.

            For example a classical liberal want change by common choice. A classical socialist want change by revolution.

            Both are changes, just not same kind.

          • Conservative is a term that is overloaded which means both usages are perfectly acceptable but in a discussion, you’ll get nowhere unless you differentiate between the different meanings of the word so you stick to apples to apples usage of the word.

          • “Conservative is a term that is overloaded which means both usages are perfectly acceptable”

            Not at all. The argument you can make word 1 mean word 2 is the definition of unacceptable dishonest argument. Conservative already mean something If you want another label of the same kind certain people already use to pretend everyone but themselves are evil oppressors then at least go find a different word. This strawman-fantasy is just plain stupid. I am not even conservative but even I know what it means since I am neither afraid to read Conserative authors, nor liberal authors.

          • I’m sorry, but go open any decent dictionary to a random page and start reading. I bet you won’t get 10 words in before you hit an overloaded term. They’re everywhere.

          • Actually I do know, and when someone trots out a crude negative generality, it deserves to be answered generally. And just FYI, conservatism in modern political parlance is a SET of principles, one of which, perhaps the most fundamental, is a belief in limited government based on the original granted Constitutional powers.

          • Nope.
            That would be AMERICAN conservatism.
            Which just goes to show the problem I run in to every time I talk to an American right winger.

          • Outside of America, “conservative” is just a euphemism for “not as far left as avowed socialists” because there is no comparable historical foundation from which to measure. The alternatives are either totalitarian states, spawn of socialist revolutions, sad remnants of monarchies or newbies for which the term “historical” dates back a laughably small number of years. You are entitled to define “conservative” however you wish for personal use, but if you want to trot out the term in a context where American conservatism might or does apply, try harder for a little clarity in your position. Or stay home.

          • Nope.
            Conservative has an actual meaning, which Americans disregard.
            The British conservatives (though I might disagree with them) are not “social lite”

            All of mainstream British politics is fairly right of centre if you JUDGE ON POLICY.
            What you are mistaking is “American party politics” with politics as philosophy.
            Conservatism BY NATURE must mean different things in different places, because it is about CONSERVING.
            If you have a Monarchy, conservatives will be monarchists. Because that is what the word means.
            If you have a constitutional republic, you’ll never guess what conservatives are…!
            Fact is, modern American conservatism stems from classical liberalism, it has just been somewhat coopted by fundamentalism and a kind of identity politics every bit as toxic as that found amongst “liberals”
            You can tell by your childish petulance and utter contempt for reason and the definitions of words. Words mean what it is convenient for them to mean, in an exact mirror of what you think you hate from feminists and other “leftists”

            I think you could do with expanding your mind past right wing talking heads.
            You might learn something.

          • Too bad we cannot sit down and argue this. I suspect we might end up agreeing on more than not. But given, as is usually the case with a certain kind of leftist mentality mired in self-delusion, you have descended into name calling and personal criticism, it’s time to end the charade of a “discussion.” Have a good day.

          • I call bullshit. You specifically talked about the right. THAT is what I was responding to; your broad brushing glowing endorsement of the right. Trad/cons are ON the right, and they are an extremely powerful and influential faction ON THE RIGHT

            I also call bullshit of your description of the TEA party. The battle for the soul of the TEA party definitely included a Libertarian faction; but there is ample evidence that the Libertarians did not win out. I live in Texas and I met a huge number TEA party members that had all the same traditional/fundie bullshit list of complaints.

          • Yeah those evil religious fundies. They only built the greatest, most tolerant society in history, but hey, don’t let that stop you. The extreme left has only built totalitarian, oppressive societies. The more left you go(bigger government), the more the little guy suffers.. The left shoves their morals down my throat much more than the right does.

          • hahahaha, yeah that most tolerant society on earth with its own version of apartheid until the seventies and waging wars for financial interest across the globe since 1945.

          • Americans freed more people from tyranny than anyone in history, regardless of what old Soviet propaganda your communist/leftist friends spoon feed you. Which side of Germany was free, West or East? Which side of Korea is free, North or South?

            Americans freed Europe from Leftist tyranny and opposed the Communists all over the world, something the Left will forgive.

          • european here and I’m thankful for the americans that gave their life to end world war II, also the brits and ozzies wich you are always so quick to forget. These men however do not represent the politics that follow and this doesn’t change the fact that america since world ward II has been destabilizing regions for their own financial gain. Iran, Irak, Afghanistan, palestine, Nicaragua, chile, dominican republic, Libya, panama and the list goes on and on. and just because someone is left doesn’t mean that they approve of people like stalin, mao, pol pot or other idiots who thought communism or marxism meant a dictatorship where you kill your own people on masse.

          • “These men however do not represent the politics that follow and this doesn’t change the fact that america since world ward II has been destabilizing regions for their own financial gain. ”
            Nuance. I like it.

          • Well overall, and in the larger scheme of things (regardless of a lot of the horrors, contradictions and hypocrisy) it did evolve into that…a mostly tolerant society originally sparked by that certain document and the ideas that came from it.

            Calvin’s major fucktardery comes in when he says religious fundies created this society; a contradiction in terms is an understatement.

          • Yes, it is indeed evolving into that. I’m not saying they haven’t made great strides, but making claims about having the most tolerant society in history while a gay footballplayer can’t kiss his boyfriend on live television, where you have to pretend to believe in god to get elected or better yet where freedom of religion apparently doesn’t mean freedom from religion doesn’t have to give moral lessons to the rest. maybe they should try to visit europe. your left would be classified as proper right everywhere in europe. it’s ridiculous to believe that everything is the same everywhere else than in the US

          • Hah. Yes I have been and traveled through Europe many times, and I am a fan of the European model especially when it comes to enlightened ideas and tolerance.

            Unfortunately Europe, just like America is not immune to weird SJW post modernist thought; this why modern feminism has such a grip in certain parts of Europe. These ideas are a complete contradiction to most European thinking, as they have nothing to do with tolerance and human rights.

        • extremists on both sides are dangerous, always has and always will be. this does not mean that any side is morally better than the other.

          • Ah right, just like the Nazis who, in #15 of their party platform said:
            “We demand an expansion on a large scale of old age welfare.”

            Wait. Hm… that WOULD make them socialist even by your standard. Guess they were.

          • you mean this?

            15. We demand a generous increase in old-age pensions.

            how about you stop cherrypicking like an idiot bible thumper. You seem to forget that Germany was totally in pieces after the first world war. their people were dying of hunger including old people who had worked their whole lives. Just because they tried to rebuild doesn’t make them socialists. Their big inspiration was to go back to their empires of old, a conservative notion that everything was better when they were a world power. and they weren’t socialist then and they sure weren’t gonna be socialist after. They were aiming on a collectivism between the german people and only them. Why do you think they systematically deported and killed jews, gyppos, gays and any dissidents. fuck man that totally sounds socialist. And before you try to mention the USSR, they weren’t socialist they were a dictatorship.

          • I didn’t cherry pick, you brought up that a so called “socialist party” in your country (which you label “right-wing”) is “hacking into our social security” (which given usual slang usage means: taking away or reducing).

            So all I did was point out that the Nazis, who called themselves socialist as well, ALSO did the EXACT OPPOSITE of what you say your right-wing party is doing right now.

            Why do you think they systematically deported and killed jews, gyppos, gays and any dissidents. fuck man that totally sounds socialist.

            Seems your definition of socialism is a tautology of “anything I think is good.” At which point it becomes rather useless to argue with you since I don’t recognize you as any respectable authority on anything much less good, evil, or definitions.

            Tell you what, set aside all that murder and racism and please tell us what governing policies of the Nazi party you disagree with on principle. Unless of course your history knowledge is nothing more than a cartoonish caricature.

        • Considering how often the American right rewrites history for its own purposes….
          Your own right wing is historically liberal. If it weren’t you’d still be a fucking colony. ><

          • It’s obvious most of the posters on this forum claiming some knowledge of what “Americans” think are actually the typical hard left academic punks commonly found in the West. Anyone who thinks the American “right wing” are liberal is just too delirious to be taken seriously.

          • Or, they live in the real world.
            You know, the one where it doesn’t just end at the borders of USA.

          • The vast majority of right wingers I know of appreciate Germany’s FDP and don’t bat an eye at their liberal membership.

            Both left and right have a great deal of tribal signaling in the US and given the inherent political complexity of the US system, we are currently forced to rely on rational ignorance much more than most other countries. The US has the most complex political system on the planet and it is woefully underdocumented.

          • Actually, a lot of what is unique about the US is that its conservative movement is dedicated to conserving the liberal revolution of 1776. Most conservatives are not unaware of this. Figures on the right trying to reclaim the word liberalism is a discussion that crops up on the right and has been doing so for decades.

          • Indeed.
            But damn few right wingers I argue with appreciate this, especially the crop of libertarians of recent years.

            The rational and decent conservatives I can argue with on the merits all day knowing that they appreciate nuance, understand history and own the flaws of their “movement”
            Too often now I face people that redefine terms according to their own propaganda and pretend any deviation is evidence of political illiteracy.

            I don’t find any fault in conservatism, as a principle.
            Even the modern libertarian movement has great value, as it is expressing ideals held by many that need to be represented.
            The whole point of democracy is to engage with ideas and salvage from the wreckage of open debate the bits that work.

            I just don’t see a lot of that as hard lines get drawn and revisionist history is extolled as if Stalin’s example has been taken to heart.

          • True. Many libertarians have many beliefs that liberal find enjoyable. Rights for gays to marry, legal weed, legal abortions etc etc. There are right wing libertarians though.

      • No, nothing in common, other than an abiding love for Marx’s teachings, controlling everything via the state, and killing people who didn’t agree with them. National Sozialismus and die Kommunisten only disagreed on the methods.

        • National Socialists loved the teachings of Marx? I think you need to go and redo your history education.

          • There were alot of communist who supported Hitler in the beginning. They left because he didn’t nationalize the means of production. The totalitarian thing didn’t bother them too much.

          • Actrually he means the teaching of marx as they were implemented by his followers Lenin and Stalin..(as opposed to the theory Marx had that never seemed to work on…. well humans actually).. Where do you think Hitler got his ideas? He was in fact 10 years younger than Stalin.

          • “the theory Marx had that never seemed to work” is parroted by every single modern libertarian to justify deregulation and abolishing state authority.
            Honestly, it’s amusing to me how much socialist thinking has been adopted to justify libertarian goals.

          • “the theory Marx had that never seemed to work” is parroted by every single modern libertarian”

            Thats possible. However that is ALSO not an argument and it says nothing about whether its true or not. Facts off course are often similar because when talking about facts you are not allowed to change what others say. What makes a fact a fact is what its based on. What makes postmodernist claims bullshit is the absolute lack of basis other than a CULT of persons and trusting what they said at face value with no supporting evidence whatsoever.

          • Actually, the fight between the German Communists and the National Socialists was a fight between two Leftist power centers.

          • Your understanding of history is deeply flawed. No authoritative source agrees with you on this.

      • I used to ascribe that the Nazi’s were left, a major reason being that a Nobel Prize winning economist, Friedrich von Hayek, wrote extensively about it. And the punch line for those who thought differently was to have them cite any Nazi era contemporary with similar credentials who wrote that Nazi were right wing. Can’t find one – the assignment of Hitler to the right is leftist revisionist history.

        Since that time, I think Nazis are just that, neither left or right. Hitler himself critized both the left and the right in Mein Kampf and presented fascism and Nazism as a third way. This makes since, he was a populist trying to get as much support as possible and his opposition was the left and the right.

        • Thank you. A breath of sanity to this conversation.

          The complete ass kissing of the right on this thread is hard to stomach. It seems when righties and lefties talk about their “side” they always mention only the good shit, and when they talk about the other side they only mention the bad. It’s so obvious to anyone that looks at it from a critical/rational lens.

          F*** both the left and the right! The untold damage that they both have caused to men and boys is obscene.

          • What are you attributing to the right? What is the bad stuff? It funny how you accept the Left’s interpretation of the Right while trying to be independent. Most of the people a know from the right just want to live their life’s free of government intrusion. It’s called freedom.

          • Unless you’re gay, of course. Then the right wants to criminalize your existence, legalize discrimination against you, and prevent you from getting married. And before that it was Unless you’re black, of course. And before that is was Unless you’re a woman, of course.

          • Sure it’s a figment of my fucking imagination.

            Your last sentence shows… you either don’t get out much, you are dishonest, in denial, or all of the above.

            I don’t accept leftist propaganda; I observe, and I live with this shit. I have lived in Texas and the southern states for 10 years. Our politicians constantly cater to totalitarian big government brand conservatism; like INSTITUTING prayer and the Ten commandments in public schools, teaching creationism and ID alongside evolution in public schools, embracing the FUCKING Patriot Act unquestioningly (THE biggest big government document on the planet), banning gay marriage (and in many cases making sodomy illegal again), etc etc. I could keep going on and on. These folks are an extremely powerful and influential faction on the right and they are catered to and courted by right wing politicians, the most popular conservative talking heads (like Rush, Ann, and Sean), and conservative right leaning media. So don’t give me this brain fart bullshit like “Gee I don’t know what your talking about. Everyone I know on the right is about freedom”. I have a strong hunch that you actually agree with these idiots and you are just covering. Otherwise how in the holy FUCK could you be so unaware of these jokers and how powerful their lobby is? .

            Your last sentence shows how much in common that you have with feminists as well.

            Feminist: “All the feminists I know are about equality”

        • Note that Stalin denounced Trotsky as a Left Deviationist, while Trotsky denounced Stalin as a Rightist. Commies love to slam their Commie rivals as rightists. remember, Commies always lie. Hitler ran the NATIONAL SOCIALIST GERMAN WORKERS PARTY. he was a pretty skilled leftie liar in his own right.

      • Common to both:

        Politics: tyranny. Single party rule, secret police, camps, informants, arbitrary law, scapegoated and dehumanized “enemy” groups. Pervasive militarism and a pronounced tendency to war due to economic paralysis.

        Ethics: collectivism (the common good before the individual good, hostility to individual autonomy)

        Metaphysics: Collectivism (determinism, the idea that individual identity is a function of genetics/race/class/gender etc.)

        Nothing in common? Tell that to the dead.

        It’s always a bad time to demonstrate your utter ignorance of the history and ideas involved.

        • They’re common in that they’re both an authoritarian extremes. Fascism Right, Communism Left.

          • Chris, you’re ignorant. Mussolini, the founder of Fascism, explicitly declared it was socialist and Left.

          • What does this comment have to do with the discussion? Are you saying the Roman empire was right wing? It did what any Lefty loves to do. It confiscated the wealth of other people and fed it to the ruling class and its minions. Sound familiar.

          • Yes and how was the Roman Empire not leftist according to you? Compare the Roman Empire to most of its enemies. Compared to what enemies do you think the Romans were “rightwing. Ohh wait dont tell me… you mean compared to a small gaulish village where a small and fat gaul defeats the romans using magic potions?

          • “Fascism is the complete opposite of Marxian Socialism, the materialist
            conception of history of human civilization can be explained simply
            through the conflict of interests among the various social groups and
            by the change and development in the means and instruments of
            production.” – Benito Mussolini, from his esssay What Is Fascism

            Yep. That sure sounds like Mussolini explicitly declared fascism was socialist.

          • “Whatever happens, you won’t lose me. Tweleve years of my life in the party ought to be sufficient guarantee of my socialist faith. Socialism is in my blood.” -Mussolini to the Italian Socialists

            “You think you can turn me out, but you will find I shall come back again. I am and shall remain a socialist and my convictions will never change! They are bred into my very bones.” -Mussolini (again)

            Tell me, which of the platforms of the Fasci di Combattimento party in Milan (founded March 23, 1919) were not socialist? A minimum wage? Building “rigidly secular” schools? A large progress tax on capital? The seizure of all goods belonging to religious congregations?

            How is it NOT socialist?

          • Unsourced quotes from Jonah Goldberg. Oooookay. You’re not drinking the Kool-Aid, not at all.

            You just keep believing everything the right tells you, and then you can be like every other conservative — left supporting fascist and crying that they “betrayed” conservatism just like every other conservative politician before them.

            I really wish you knuckleheads would stop pretending that conservatism is anarchism. I mean for god’s sake, the words socialist, anarchist and libertarian used to mean the same thing. The very concept of a free market is a socialist invention. Conservatisms origins rise out of a reaction AGAINST democracy and in favor of the monarchy. You know Edmund Burke? NOT AN ANARCHIST.

            Socialism is only the idea that men should be free to work and to own the product of their labor — and REAL socialism recognizes that the STATE is the enemy of free men. But between the liars on the right and the liars on the left, the idea at the heart of socialism — the working men deserve freedom, dignity and respect — is always stolen away to give cover to tyrants.

            This is how you dumbasses end up voting fascist assholes like George Bush into office, and then once he acts exactly like you’d expect a fascist to act, you all scream that he wasn’t a REAL conservatives. You’re all so fucking delusional. A bunch of Useful Idiots.

          • The quote comes from Mussolini’s biography, as sourced as yours.

            Ah and here you are to tell us what “real” socialism is. And why should we heed you over the decades and examples of thousands and thousands of practicioners.

            Still, thanks for providing me with my daily dose of irony:

            *REAL socialism recognizes that the STATE is the enemy of free men
            *you all scream that he wasn’t a REAL conservatives

            It’s not often I see someone critique people for using the “No-true scotsman” fallacy, IMMEDIATELY after using it themselves. Perhaps “we” are not the ones that are so delusional. I recommend a moment of self-reflection.

          • “The quote comes from Mussolini’s biography, as sourced as yours.”

            Except I listed my source BEFORE someone called me out on using unsourced quotes. And I’d like an actual source for the quote.

            “Ah and here you are to tell us what “real” socialism is. And why should we heed you over the decades and examples of thousands and thousands of practicioners.”

            Because being ignorant of history makes you look stupid. Because learning history from fuckwits like Jonah Goldberg makes you a USeful idiot and a dupe, and speaks volumes about your naivety and dimwittedness.

            “It’s not often I see someone critique people for using the “No-true scotsman” fallacy, IMMEDIATELY after using it themselves.”

            I was not using the no-true-scotsman fallacy, dumbfuck.

          • Also, your stupid, misleading quotes are from BEFORE Mussolini was kicked out by the socialist and BEFORE he came up with the idea of fascism, you dumb asshole.

          • Ah so then you can spell out all the policies he implemented as a leader which were not socialist? Was it the establishment of woman suffrage? No wait, further down you said:

            “Then the right wants to criminalize your existence, legalize
            discrimination against you, and prevent you from getting married. And
            before that it was Unless you’re black, of course. And before that is
            was Unless you’re a woman, of course.”

            So therefore by your own metric, Mussolini can’t be right wing. You have any further evidence, or is using an ill suited pejorative the only arrow you have in your quiver?

          • “Ah so then you can spell out all the policies he implemented as a leader which were not socialist?”

            Mussolini was a fascist. All the polices he implemented were therefore necessarily fascist policies.

          • So therefore fascism is left-wing. Else you would have to concede that woman suffrage and rights are right-wing.

          • All policies by a Republican government are necessarily Republican. But they can also be called conservative (Hyde amendment), libertarian (reduction of government by Reagan), or socialist (Nixon’s wage and price controls). Why would a fascist politician be unable to implement a socialist policy?

          • Then there’s this:
            The foundation of Fascism is the conception of the State, its character, its duty, and its aim. Fascism conceives of the State as an absolute, in comparison with which all individuals or groups are relative, only to be conceived of in their relation to the State. The conception of the Liberal State is not that of a directing force, guiding the play and development, both material and spiritual, of a collective body, but merely a force limited to the function of recording results: on the other hand, the Fascist State is itself conscious and has itself a will and a personality — thus it may be called the “ethic” State

            This differs from Marxism only because it dispenses with the fig leaf that eventually the state will wither away. It advocates as final ideal what the bolsheviks established in reality but called the dictatorship of the proletariat as a transitional form that never seemed to transition.

            Tomato Tomahto, do you really see a difference? I can, but only if I squint real hard and turn my head juuuust so.

          • The primary difference I see between the two is who the lies appeal to. Conservatives fall for fascism’s glittering lies, progressives fall for Marxist’s fantasies.

            I mostly object to conservatives claiming that fascism is a product of the “liberal left” and acting like the pacifistic anarcho-socialists on the left are advocating fascism while they vote in actual fascists like George Bush. I object to conservatives acting like their shit doesn’t stink.

            The average American conservative agrees with the vast majority of fascists positions: that socialists are pure evil, that homosexuals are degenerates that threaten society, that progressive art and culture is sick and should be suppressed, that women should be housewives, that we have enemies that must be terrified into submission by the power of our armies. And they hate “socialism” for the 29 days out of the month they aren’t cashing their social security checks.

            Take the average American conservative voter, teach him German and send him back in time 80 years, and he’d fucking vote for Hitler. There ain’t fucking crap on Hitler’s agenda they would disagree with.

          • Nobody, and I mean nobody, has any real objection to re-enacting the utopian communist experiments so long as you don’t steal or commit violence or fraud. I’m not familiar with the “pacifistic anarcho-socialists” specifically so I won’t comment directly on a group or movement I know too little about.

            The idea that George Bush was an actual fascist is beyond ludicrous. The most glaring reason is that the man left power on time and without the classless destruction that met his administration when he entered. The man ended up resisting the tide towards crony capitalism far too little but he certainly did the right thing when he killed off Arthur Anderson, something a fascist would be very unlikely to do.

          • I said he was a fascist, not a dictator.

            All I know is that I predicted before his inauguration that we would go to war, have an economic collapse, and regressive social policies. I predicted these things based on the fact that he was a fascist. And my every prediction came true.

            A rich elite who thinks there is glory in war and that the point of the government is to keep his rich friends rich, and provide bread and circuses for the hoi polloi. A fascist.

            The man didn’t resist crony capitalism because crony capitalism is the beating heart of fascism, and it’s the only point of conservative politics. Everything else is just smoke and mirrors, it’s ALL about crony capitalism (as if there was any other kind of capitalism!).

            ” I’m not familiar with the “pacifistic anarcho-socialists” specifically so I won’t comment directly on a group or movement I know too little about.”

            Yeah you are. Its your average moonbatty liberal who wants to end war, feed the hungry, let the gays marry, curtail the excess of the capitalists, etc. There the people you conservatives are always trying to smear as fascists by claiming fascism is a leftist movement.

          • “All I know is that I predicted before his inauguration that we would go to war”

            Except you never went to war. The coalition went to war – not USA – same as the Korean War was UN that went to war – not USA. Also as Ron Paul repeatedly have said: congress never declared war. Also as Bill Maher said. this behavior when musing about who to bomb is just awful in general. Also as Jeremy Scahill said: Obama-administration actually performs more acts of Dirty Wars than Bush and extended the Bush programs and interpretations of the right to execute people by Drone Strikes.

          • Who said anyone isnt a fascist? By the definition used here fascism as a word is garbage which anyone can be accused of. It seems its hardly anything but a version of “argumentum ad hitlerum” which everyone use to try smear Hitler on the other side. Basically this part of the debate looks like a religion where nazism is worshipped as an evil god that must be appeased and thus gets to rule how people are allowed to live.

            Its a klusterf-ck

          • I think Carter was the last president not to have a war and that’s only because Carter decided not to go to war over the invasion of our embassy in Iran. Ford also didn’t have a war. The previous US president not to have a war was Hoover. With 8 of the previous 10 presidents having a war, that George W Bush would go to war wasn’t a hard prediction. Both Bush and Cheney were talking about recession looming during the time between the election and their inauguration so economic problems were a surprise to exactly nobody who was paying attention.

            And for those “moonbatty liberal” types, it’s surprising how quickly they start to go foul mouthed when they talk to me and end up talking about how I’ll be off to a reeducation camp. So, pardon me for doubting my own personal experience and being polite and asking what exactly are these beliefs you’re talking about.

          • it’s surprising how quickly they start to go foul mouthed when they talk to me

            Oh you can look around on this thread, TM and notice how quickly Miles goes foulmouthed towards me so I do believe your personal experience is still affirmed that he is pretty batty (or at the very least, very thin skinned).

          • Who the lies appeal to is a matter of product segmentation which is a marketing issue. Congratulations, you just admitted you’re wrong about national socialism not being socialism.

            I’ll take my victory lap now.

      • I should also add that the Communists predated – and inspired – the various fascist movements of interwar Europe. That’s why the Marxists called them “reactionary”, and why one of their mutual bread-and-butter propaganda points was the idea that they were “a bulwark against” the other side.

        The two drew a lot of their strength from playing off each other like that, much like (some) conservatives and the Left do today; they work like pincers. Fight a doctrine that slaughters the individual with a doctrine that slaughters the individual. It’s the Ackbar Spectrum, the Great Trap of the 20th century, the idea that a mugger’s Left fist is somehow the opposite of his Right fist, and so all we have to choose from is which uppercut to take.

        120 million dead so far, and here you are having learned absolutely nothing. No wonder anti-Semitism is coming back.

        • Only in liberal Europe and on our liberal college campuses. Strange how that happens.

      • NAZI’s were National Socialists who have their origin in the German Workers Party. The whole notion that they are a product of the right has always been absurd and historically false, they were absolutely leftists, and used to be allied with the Stalin communists in the early days of WW2.

    • Oh look its americans “discussing” european history and making idiots of themselfs.

      As someone who graduated from german gymnasium in history, with special topic of national socialsim propaganda, NAZI always were a extremist right movement.

      Holy fuck americans are retarded. It’s unbelievable.

      • yes, they see the word socialism and scream LEFTISM, all the while forgetting that national socialism rose out of the idea of the old powerful german empire. trying to go back to those old ideals and identity. nationalism is inherent conservative ffs.

        • “nationalism is inherent conservative ffs.”

          1. Bullshit, not even close to true.

          2. Example on nationalism Leftwingers support: Vietnam, Kuba and Palestine.

          • 1)it’s not bullshit. The Nazi’s were DEEPLY conservative. Socialism is populist in much of the world. Hell, the PRINCIPLES of socialism are popular in the US, you’re just not allowed to say the word.

            2)citations to support an unrelated claim don’t prove your claim.

            3)there are PLENTY of shitty regimes that rose from left wing rhetoric and left wing ideology. National socialism just wasn’t one.
            It did however adopt many socialist policies. The ones that worked. And transformed a crippled, young and stagnant nation into a global superpower in under a decade.
            The other tools it used to accomplish this were; nationalism, authoritarianism, racism (engineering an outside “threat” to unite people)
            Now, some of these tools are abhorrent and definitely evil.
            I’d argue “socialism” is not one of them.

          • Don’t argue with Americans. They apply their twisted world views to just about anything while ignoring history books.

            It’s called ideology.

          • LOL you’re blinded by the ideology that prevents you from realizing the nationalist socialist party were socialist. I don’t suppose you’re going to realize how stupid that makes you look by anything you read here. That’s your problem. Just don’t think you’re an expert on Americans; you’re a product of a cliche, self-loathing fustercluck culture. Smile as Islam suffocates your smarmy society, freak.

          • No, you’re being a dupe. The National Socialists were called such because they presented themselves as an alternative to International Socialism, which was actual socialism. The Nazis were entirely supported by the capitalists, which is rather odd if they were actual socialists.

            The Nazis were socialists in the exact same way that the Democratic People’s Republic of North Korea is a democratic republic — i.e. not at all.

          • Capitalists supporting left wing parties are not exactly a new innovation. Go crack a history book sometime, or maybe a campaign finance report.

          • So…the Nazs were socialists who support came entirely from capitalists, and whose first acts once in power were to arrest socialists and destroy the unions. Sure. That makes sense.

          • Ah so when Stalin begin his Great Terror against other socialists, that totally made the ye olde USSR right wing, eh?

          • Only small-minded idiots who don’t understand political realities try to shove everything into “right” and “left”. Those terms are only meaningful in the context of a liberal democracy. Outside of liberal democracy, they are meaningless and add nothing to the conversation.

            Stalin is one of many examples of why the violent revolution Marxists call for, and the state-sponsored socialism that follows, will always fail. In order to win a violent revolution and seize the means of production and apparatus of the state, the Marxist revolution will ALWAYS have to turn to violent, inhuman men — Stalin, Castro, Pol Pot, Mao, Chavez, etc. Those men, once they gain control of the state and means of production, will never allow a communist society to develop, because that would lead to a loss of their own power and status. Thus revolutionary Marxists states will ALWAYS collapse into regressive, totalitarian dictatorships.

            A totalitarian dictatorship is NEITHER left nor right. Left and right presume the existence of a plurality of voices exercising control, but in a totalitarian dictatorship there is ONLY THE DICTATOR. How could Stalin be “right wing” or “left wing?” HE WAS THE WHOLE GODDAMN BIRD.

            Because you fail to understand these realities, you fail to understand why conservatism must always lead to fascism. History cannot be stopped, change is ever present. Progress is ever present. With change and progress comes the destruction of traditional institutional power. No force can stop this.

            However, through extreme and violent repression, it can be made to *appear* to stop. Like you can’t stop people from being gay, and once gay people decide they want equal rights, the only thing you can do to stop it is to start killing gay people. That’s why all conservative governments fail or become fascist. The very thing that conservatives promise — that things won’t change — can never be delivered without resorting to fascist violence. Thus anyone promising it is either a fascist, a fraud, or both.

          • So to sum up your point: all the instances of communism, were “right wing.”

            Congrats, you’ve gone around the bend. But don’t worry, I’m sure THIS time, you and your kind will get it right.

          • Go fuck yourself, you disingenuous fucking piece of shit. That is the EXACT OPPOSITE of what I just argued, you lying little reptilian fuck. You fucking fascist fuckwads argue exactly like the fucking feminists.

            I’m not wasting anymore time aruinng with the kind of rat-bastard FUCK who would sum up my arument as the EXACT FUCKING OPPOSITE OF WHAT I JUST SAID. You’re lying sack of shit, just like every other fucking “conservative” crypto-fascict fuckwad I’ve ever had the displeasure of arguing with.

            Go suck George Bush’s dick, you fuck.

          • OK, that’s you second tantrum under the name miles adams.
            1. “New” civility, or
            2. Don’t feed the simple contrarians.

          • >>Go fuck yourself, you disingenuous fucking piece of shit.

            You can always tell when a Leftist is in a thread by the thoughtful, deeply reasoned and educated responses they give.

          • READ THIS:

            “A totalitarian dictatorship is NEITHER left nor right. Left and right presume the existence of a plurality of voices exercising control, but in a totalitarian dictatorship there is ONLY THE DICTATOR. How could Stalin be “right wing” or “left wing?” HE WAS THE WHOLE GODDAMN BIRD.”


          • Read, already sent to friends since I love to share a good joke. Same old package, different label. The holy grail of “third way” oh “this time it’ll be different” and on and on and on. Truly there is nothing new under the sun.

          • I’m pretty sure it’s providing products and services that customers want at quality and price superior or lower than any competitor.

            And yes, I know Mondragon is the favorite of distributionists everywhere.

          • laissez faire business is now a “third way”? Well gee I wish someone told Marx and all those other complainers about it for all these decades.

            It’s simple: you have a rigged economy or a free economy. Once a completely rigged economy (communism) proved impossible or horrible, everyone keeps trying to propose a “third way” which is just half the distance from the last amount rigging to a free economy. And then it fails, so a “new” third way is tried. On and on until people figure out that rigging the system never works out as intended.

            Of course it’s funny that I gave mondragon the benefit of a doubt only I see TMLutas has showed up to prove that it was the benefit of a rigged economy after all (so I was wrong about my assumption) and I believe under your value system, it would be fascist. Was I in error in interpreting that you were in favor of it?

          • Mondragon was founded in 1956 under Franco’s fascism including his policy of economic autarky and thus had many years to build and extend without having to be very good. It also had a Catholic priest at its heart which endeared it to the Francoists. Since the end of the Franco era, Mondragon profited from the EU’s push to equalize Spain with the rest of the member nations. Mondragon had its first major component failure with the bankruptcy of Fagor. It has slowly moved away from employee ownership and currently operates under a two tier labor system between favored employee owners and a larger group of employee non-owners.

            So, yes, Mondragon’s success is not that difficult to explain. It was born with an impeccable Catholic pedigree in a time when very Catholic Franco was running the show and perfectly willing to put his thumb on the scale for favored institutions. It has benefited from EU economic spending for political aims and when the money to subsidize its inefficiencies started running low it pragmatically and virtually silently shifted its business model to one that is much less distinctive.

            Does this help?

          • I see the propagandists have gotten the message out on Mondragon. Your little canned response there is the exact same spew of disingenuous talking points I got from another libertardian last week. Did they cover it in the new issue of Reason? Give you all your marching orders?

            Your first several points are essentially pure bullshit. I love this line though, which is the EXACT same line the other guy pulled on me:

            “Mondragon had its first major component failure with the bankruptcy of Fagor.”

            I love how you say that like its a bad thing, and not an AMAZING thing. The MCC has 250+ components like Fagor, and Fagor is the first one to fail? You compare that to capitalist failure rates and its incredible.

          • That’s really funny. No.

            I actually researched and based my commentary on the Wikipedia article on Mondragon, refreshing my memory of dates and learning about the relatively recent bankruptcy. The two tier labor arrangement was new to me as well. Any resemblance to somebody else’s commentary is an artifact of parallel construction.

            My first point was that Mondragon was founded in 1956. My second point was that it was founded in Spain while Franco ruled the place. My third point was that Franco had an economic policy of autarky. My fourth point was that Mondragon is, at heart, a profoundly Catholic institution. My fifth point is that Franco liked Catholicism, a lot. So which one of these is wrong?

          • Dude, you are talking to brick walls.

            It is obvious to anyone with an ounce of intellectual reason and honesty that most anti-human rights regimes throughout history have had BOTH left and right totalitarian elements to them..

            The over the top ass kissing of all things right wing on this thread is nauseating. What’s even more nauseating is that some of these folks would actually try to make the case that the right is sooooo much better for the welfare of men and boys lol!!

            They DO sound like feminists in a lot of their reasoning.

          • Ah so if I don’t accept your ad hoc definitions, then I’m a lying weasel with no ethics.

            Hm… guess that means it makes it a lot easier to dehumanize me then, eh? Tell me, am I such a problem to your worldview that you’ll have to get rid of me to make your system work? Will I have to go to a reeducation camp? Seems you’re well on the path to being a regressive, totalitarian dictator yourself…

          • ” The very thing that conservatives promise — that things won’t change — can never be delivered”

            Except conservatives do not demand things not to change. Thats a strawman – caused by a complete lack of actual conservatives in the education system (perfectly argued by social psychologist Jonathan Haidt). Since there is no opposition lying and making shit up is not prevented thus any idiot having the correct opinions is regarded as a expert on conservative evils.

            The most obvious example of this is Professor Diederik Stapel who not only presented studies proving consertives are less nice in every single way. He also realized since his collegues got to hear what they wanted there was no need to perform the ACTUAL studies. Thus the good professor fabricated every single experiment.

            The scope speaks for itself.

            “Stapel had committed fraud in at least 55 of his papers, as well as in 10 Ph.D. dissertations written by his students. “

          • Whatever, man. I have been trying to figure out what conservatism is about by asking conservatives for twenty years, and from what I’ve gathered conservatism is pretty much exactly the same as feminism: A bunch of fascist fuckheads who lie, dissemble, and engage in disingenuous bullshit so that they can never be pinned down.

            All I know is that conservatives are lying sacks of shit and they always vote for fascists.

          • ‘ ‘A bunch of fascist fuckheads who lie, dissemble, and engage in disingenuous bullshit so that they can never be pinned down”.


            Aren’t the similarities to fems amazing? Except instead of “good” feminists screaming NAWALT, It should be “good” conservatives screaming NACALT (NOT ALL CONSERVATIVES ARE LIKE THAT).

          • I’m glad someone else sees it. They’re exactly like feminists. They use the same sort of motte and bailey defense to defend conservatism from any and all criticism, they revel in No True Scotsman fallacies, and they constantly ignore that their supposedly radical fringe are the most popular voices on their side.

            I mean seriously, look at how popular Glenn Beck became. Tell me how Glenn Beck is any fucking different from Anita Sarkeesian? It’s the exact same bullshit.

          • Have you also read and heard how Rush and Ann Coulter constantly lick the asses of these jokers when they want to institute teaching creationism and it’s mutant offspring ID in PUBLIC schools? Or when they want to institute prayer or the Ten Commandments in PUBLIC schools? Small government? Yeah, right through our keyholes lol.

            Yep their biggest and most popular talking heads, shows and writers just happen to be “their supposedly radical fringe” all right.

          • I love how you can speak for all conservatives. Just like I love it when lefties think they can speak for all progressives.

            I’ve lived in Texas and the southern United states for 10 years now. Get this through your chunk of granite that you call a skull; trad/cons and religious fundies consider themselves the “true” conservatives. They DO NOT consider Libertarians or Libertarian leaning individuals real conservatives.

            If one does NOT think that America is a “Christian Nation”, gay marriage is bad and should be outlawed, the drug war is a good thing, the Patriot Act in it’s entirety is a good thing, creationism and it’s mutant offspring ID should be taught alongside evolution in public schools lol, prayer(Christian) and the Ten Commandments should be instituted in public schools, and that pornography should be outlawed….then one according to traditional fundie conservatives, is most certainly NOT a true conservative.

            This brand of trad/cons is what Fox News (with a few exceptions like Shep and the Red Eye show), politicians, the top conservative talking head writers and celebrities (Rush, Sean, Ann), overwhelmingly cater to. These “conservatives” are a huge voting bloc and they have a very powerful lobby. They are every bit as influential on the right as feminists are on the left.

          • >>you fail to understand why conservatism must always lead to fascism.

            And yet it’s always Leftist governments that actually bring fascism and totalitarianism. Odd that. I’m thinking that your theory, when compared to real world results, needs a little work. In science it would be called a failed or disproved hypothesis.

          • That is absolutely untrue, to the point where I don’t think you actually understand what “leftist” and “right-wing” mean at all.

            Hitler, Mussolini, Franco, Pinochet, none of them were leftists. They murdered leftists by the hundreds and thousands. They were all opposed to leftists. They were all supported by capitalists, who are the enemy of leftists.

            If you’re going to call fascism a leftist government, then you are essentially saying there is no such thing as a right-wing government. What could a right wing government possibly look like? If violently anti-left, pro-capitalist governments are not right wing, then WHAT THE FUCK IS?

          • Maybe. But just because your brother tries to kill you doesn’t mean he’s automatically not your family. The bloodline remains no matter how much one might cry about disowning.

          • For a more recent example of the phenomenon, look up Israeli donations to Hamas in the 1980s when Israel thought they’d be a good counterweight to the PLO. The idea that successfully fighting off the bolsheviks meant we had to inoculate society with a sort of socialism lite had support in a lot of societies. It was one of the arguments used to advocate for the New Deal in the US.

            The Nazis were totalitarians. They sought to strip out anybody that could form the nucleus of an independent power center. Unions qualify which is why they were transformed into the DAF union, an organization thoroughly under Nazi control. The nazis hated the internationalist socialists, in part because they appealed to and fought over the same recruits. The history of people shifting back and forth between nationalist and internationalist socialism is pretty well documented in diaries and organization membership lists of the time.

          • Please search “No True Scotsman” and stop embarrassing yourself.

            Besides, International Socialism was exterminating the Kulaks and would murder millions more in China in the coming years, not to mention the other Communists micro-genocides. Color us unimpressed with True Socialism.

          • Nah man, International Socialism was just a worker’s solidarity movement engaged in struggle for greater recognition of worker rights. It was the Marxists — who were largely not from the working class at all, but rather petit bourgeois, just like our modern SJWs — who introduced violent revolution and vanguard political parties into the mix.

            The Communists destroyed International Socialism from within, but they should not be confused with International Socialism. Real socialism is necessarily nonviolent, free market and requires no vanguard of elites. Real socialism is just another name for anarchism.

          • Contra Hayek: private property is like internal firewalls in an aircraft carrier. Once you destroy the internal partitioning, the entire ship becomes a floating bomb awaiting a spark. Your old International Socialists may not have committed the murders, but they prepared the fields for the slaughter.

            As for your equation of Anarchism and Socialism, then why maintain the distinction?

          • “The National Socialists were called such because they presented themselves as an alternative to International Socialism, which was actual socialism.”

            WRONG, Nationalist Socialists were called as such because they thought the socialist murder of peoples oppressors should be based on etnicity, not on class. Stalin was in fact a very nationalist socialist while the internationalist socialism movements ideological leader was Trotsky. Stalin also had the exact same plans as Hitler which is why he built the worlds large scale Paratrooper-divisions. He did not want the revolution to go international (as Trotsky did). He wanted it to stay national,build an socialist red army which would conquer the non-socialist countries by force. Except Hitler was faster.

          • How nice. Ein Volk, Ein Theory, eh? They don’t agree with you:

            >’The “Liberalism” discussed here is primarily 19th-century liberalism, the free-market ideology, from which, Maennel explains, Marxism has evolved. National-Socialism, as a true, folk-based socialism, opposes both Liberalism and its bastard child Marxism.”

          • I am not American but even I understand the absurdity of speaking about Americas 50+ states like there werent huge general differences in what world view they have depending on what state they live in,

          • “I am a socialist!” ~Adolph Hitler, 1930.
            And let’s never forget they were the National Socialist Party.
            You can airbrush history all you want, it doesn’t change the facts.

          • Was he also an atheist?
            I mean, most people that claim he was a socialist also claim he was an atheist despite the fact he avowed repeatedly his catholic faith and the fact the Vatican celebrated his birthday every year of his rule over Germany.

            Basically, the way people justify this none nuanced claim is to ignore almost everything Hitler said and did and cherry pick statements.
            He took over what amounted to a working class party. He did so by using rhetoric they would accept.
            As he secured his leadership he was quite open with his contempt for “other socialists”
            He explicitly stated that his own socialism was separate from other inferior forms.
            Because socialism has always been international, not nationalist.

            It’s like if you said, well, I’m an American patriot! I just hate America and all the politicians!
            Maybe, in the mind of a warped individual that makes sense, but in reality, declaring yourself something does not make it so.

            Now, did Hitler and the Nazi’s shamelessly steal socialist policy and rhetoric?
            They did the same with religion, spirituality, nationalism, capitalism (there are some pretty successful companies that started their fortunes under those socialists! Because it totally makes sense that private companies would make lots of money under a despotic socialist regime, right?)

            Be critical of things that are, not of what you wish were so.

          • “Was he also an atheist?”

            Not at all. He was theist regarding himself being god. He was atheist regarding every other religion – exactly the same as Stalin.

          • You might want to look up Nazi sponsored Positive Christianity. It’s fair to say that Hitler grew up Catholic but what he said in private and what he said in public about it split in the 1930s and clearly by 1937 the split had become severe. He didn’t dare denounce the faith of so many Germans publicly and hope to have his government survive but his actions clearly diverged from mainstream christianity in radical ways. What his true beliefs were is actually unclear to me. Much clearer is that he is very unlikely to have died a Catholic.

            The idea of national socialism arose in a number of countries including the faraway empire of Japan. Were all of these national socialist movements perpetrating the same fraud or do they collectively constitute a legitimate variant of the socialist family? How does their well documented cooperation differ from the cooperation of the internationalist socialists?

            In practice, the “internationalist” socialists could act pretty nationalist. If we’re looking at the difference between declarations of what is so vs what is reality, isn’t the internationalist claim of the marxists just as fair game as the socialist claims of the national socialists?

          • But when we just arbitrarily put different values on different utterances based exclusively on how well they support out conclusions, that is just dishonest.

            Socialism was VERY popular, Hitler abused that.
            Catholicism was the major religion, he abused that.
            You see; I already conceded that Hitler could practice religious faith without representing it. That Hitler’s actions and beliefs are not Catholicism writ large.

            I ALSO say that Hitler used the parts of socialism that were convenient, used the rhetoric that supported what he wanted.

            I apply the same standard to both.
            I dislike when people will say “Hitler was an atheist” based on inferences and ignoring the repeatedly avowed faith of Hitler *and* the Nazi’s but then declare “Nazi’s are socialists” because “they called themselves socialists”

            Don’t you see the hypocrisy?

          • “But when we just arbitrarily put different values on different utterances based exclusively on how well they support out conclusions, that is just dishonest.”


            Physician, heal thyself.

            My father, as a boy, walked with my grandfather past the local fascists in Romania who were speechifying (totally a word) in the village square. He asked my grandfather about them. The reply was a simple dismissive “they will take our land”. National socialists are socialists because they do socialist things and they call for socialist things to be done and they adopt the label of socialism. It’s not just an adoption of a label alone that makes them socialists but the label is not the sum of the evidence and you’ve been ignoring the other forms of evidence that have been presented up thread.

          • Physician, heal thyself.
            Right back at you buddy.
            I’m here arguing with people that are hypocritical dickwads 100% of the time.
            All you gave is “Hitler was totally a socialist because he said some socialist things, and that makes him a socialist and all socialists are basically Hitler”
            That’s pretty much the size of the argument I see from “I’m totally not a right winger” libertarians.
            You ignore all evidence you don’t like while admonishing others, I concede points all the damn time, but somehow that doesn’t count because I don’t draw identical conclusions to you.
            I’ll take your silly argument to the extreme: Socialists breath. They even enjoy breathing and would really prefer to continue doing it.
            You also breath, and am sure you also would prefer to do so.
            That makes you a socialist.
            Well, you’re doing something socialists do, right?

            Or another silly extreme: there are people that describe themselves as animals, and even as “trans ethnic”
            I guess if they SAY they are, and put on an act liek they are, they TOTALLY must be transnigger otherkin. Right?

            If you want to cast stones, make sure you do not occupy a glass house.
            What single concession do you make?

          • I’m sorry but I’m a little unclear what constitutes being a socialist other than saying you are and acting in the broad tradition of socialist economic policy. Socialism is, after all, an economic doctrine.

            I’ll throw you a bone and give you a real potential point for confusion, catholic social justice theory has had some historic confusion. But there’s a real difference between socialism and catholic social justice in that the popes include the principle of subsidiarity along with solidarity and that they only want government to intervene where private solidarity fails. If you look closely at all, you can differentiate between the two. I’ve not seen any difference between internationalist socialism and nationalist socialism besides the limiting principle to which they apply their solidarity. Class enemies in the case of internationalists, people outside the national group for nationalists. The activities themselves are not readily distinguishable.

            So what’s the point of differentiation in economic policy between the nazis and what you term the socialists?

          • So, a dictatorship that enriched quite a few capitalist ventures is “socialism” to you?
            And you are *sure* that you understand what words mean?
            The core tenet of socialism is extremely simple: empower the workers.
            Early socialists were convinced there was only *one* way to do this, by seizing the means of production.
            We all know where that lead, and it wasn’t to workers having a say in their conditions and recompense.
            We still see co-ops displaying the thinking behind it though, as those doing the work also share the ownership. That system can and does work.
            Most modern socialists accept a public-private partnership. Some things do work best in a competitive free market, some do not.
            You could perhaps argue that the Nazi’s practised this. But so does EVERY SINGLE NATION ON THE PLANET. Even the communist ones.

            The problem we have here is you are so lost in partisan politics that it’s not really worth discussing anything with you.
            NO matter what concessions anyone makes, you’ll just take that as a win and assume it validates your opinion more, rather than bring you to rethink your opinions.
            It’s very sad, and it is every bit as endemic in right wing/libertarian circles as it is with the social justice crowd.
            Both “teams” just love to sit in their echo chambers and pat themselves on the back with how right they are

          • I didn’t take you seriously from the first, and you just proved exactly why I shouldn’t with your asinine bullshit.

          • You might want to add, massive financial fraud to your list of causes of German transformation. Take a look at MEFO bills sometime. When you borrow heavily off the books of course your official results look fantastic. A good amount of the lousy timing that Germany adopted in terms of military action is well explained that their financial frauds were catching up to them so they needed new territory to loot in order to stave off their economic collapse.

          • “The Nazi’s were DEEPLY conservative. ”

            Do you beliveve I slept through history lessions or something? The nazis was not conservative at all. However the person most successful at stopping the nazis WAS. Nobody in the entire Germany did a better job against Hitler than old conservative general Hindenburg. In the 1932 election at a whopping 84 years of age Hindenburg still defeated Hitler and before his death Hindenburg still was a threat against Hitler due to the fact that had they ended up in conflict the army would side with old war hero Hindenburg. Hitler needed the armys support so bad he pretended to respect Hindenburg and arranged his own men to be murdered in “night of long knives”.

            By todays standard the nazis would probably in many ways be conservative yes but now you forget that it did NOT happen today. This was in the 30s where what you today would see as conservative values would not be regarded conservative at all because conservative back then meant UPPER-CLASS values, And Hitler was a working class upstart who idolized the successes of Josef Stalin. He was utterly despised by 30s era conservatives and could not even defeat a senile 80+ Hindenburg for the presidency.

          • “his greatest opponent was conservative”
            Don’t disagree at all.
            That doesn’t disprove his own conservatism.
            Nor does any of the other stuff you said.
            I mean, what have the Americans done for 70 years? Or are we living in a utopia bought about by anti communist propaganda?

            Shall I continue shouting?

            My commentary here has been all about arguing with right wing morons that want to declare everything positive to be exclusive property of the right wing, and everything bad and evil always due to “the left”
            It’s idiocy.
            You want to know what happens when conservatism is allowed to dominate unopposed?
            Take a look at the most regressive, oppressive nations on earth.
            The whole point is that politics is a balance.
            Not all progress is good, not all tradition is good.
            That’s why we need debate, dissent AND to give each other the common courtesy of assuming good intent.

            Fact is, without the left wing, there would be no independent America.
            The conservatives of the time were supporting their legal and rightful government. The one that had paid for the establishing and protection of the colonies.
            It was the extremist liberals of the time that performed terrorist acts, committed treason and began an insurrection that you owe EVERYTHING to.

            Am I saying they were entirely wrong?
            Nope. The British Empire was not some morally righteous entity.
            What I would do is point to what happened to nations that stayed within the Empire and later the common wealth.
            Not exactly hell on Earth.
            The point is politics is complicated.
            History is complicated.
            The second ANYONE starts generalising as if their shit smells like rainbows EVERYONE should be up in arms telling them to STFU.


            Yes but that is also the problem with your argument. This was not at all what consevative meant in Germany during the 30s.

            You are confusing what would be considered conservative today (when universities are like one inch from banning being conservative at all because feminists are so “inclusive”) with what meant being conservative in Germany. Hitler and his ilk was NOT conservatives back then in their reality. Hindenburg however was a real upper class conservative who even at his death bed called hitler “your majesty” cause in senility he thought Hitler was actually Kaiser Wilhelm.

            Compared to Hindenburg (a real conservative of his time) its just ludicruos to call Hitler conservative. Conservatives were the old people Hitler was the candidate for youth and virility. Consertives were the old money people. Hitler was the “rich from business” person which would be considered conservative today but by no means whatsoever was consevative values in the 30s. Conservatives was the “god and king” people. Hitler hated religion cause he wanted to be god, not worship one. etc…

          • You really do have some strange assertions.
            I already concede that 1)SJW’s are worse than right wing idiocy atm.
            2)Conservatism isn’t a bad thing.
            3)I *already covered* how conservatism is a principle, not an ideology, and subject to a greater degree of deviation than most other “movements”

            So, essentially, all of your replies to me seem to be, basically “I don’t like your tone”
            I have yet to see you address the fact that right wingers in the comment section will behave EXACTLY LIKE THE SJWs, with attempts to shame, with redefining words at convenience, with demands for purity of thought (“think as we do, or you’re DEFINITELY Stalin”)
            These are common themes whenever right wingers talk about SJW
            They don’t stop at being critical of SJW, they characterise EVERY LEFT WING THING IN HISTORY as being fascist, communist, social justice and pretend that the right has zero history of any wrong doing and that any citation offered cant POSSIBLE count because “that’s history bro, conservatism now is different”

            It’s *mind boggling* how this shit continues.
            Arguing with SJWs and feminists is EXACTLY THE SAME as when I argue with libertarians and conservatives,
            There are about the same number of sane, reasonable individuals in each camp too.

            As to “it’s the left that are attacking my hobbies”
            It’s the left that has done it with more success.
            The right has been doing the same thing for fucking DECADES.
            They just failed at it.
            Sadly, the ideologues from the left managed to play the long con in many cases, and exploit the altruism of the ignorant.
            Amusingly, it’s exactly what despots and fascists have done forever.
            No evil motherfucker declares themselves evil, and very few even perceive that they might be,

          • “My commentary here has been all about arguing with right wing morons”

            Yes, except I am not rightwing at all. I am however anti-SJW but it was the F-N leftwing people that chose to support the SJW-crowd attacking my hobbies and interests. They chose me to be against them – not the other way around. The reason we even have this discussion is that the left is currently in every way worse than rightwingers used to be at typical rightwing stuff. In fact I would say SJW has the same opposition to free speech based on religion. Because in every single way SJW actually IS a religion based on worshipping strawman-conservative-fascism (invented by Adorno as I understand it) as an “evil god” which every step of the way in SJW-eyes decide how me must live.

          • 1) “Socialism is populist in much of the world.”

            Ohh really? Funny then how it seems the people escaping over the Berlin Wall went the wrong direction. But off course its very popular with professional liars at university to teach a pretend socialism which doesnt exist.

            2) “Hell, the PRINCIPLES of socialism are popular in the US,”

            Yes, as long as the people promoting them do not have to live by the awful crap rules they promote. Its very popular among academics like Chomsky and West to become rich the capitalist way while selling socialism as a product. Its called hypocrisy!

            3) “there are PLENTY of shitty regimes that rose from left wing rhetoric and left wing ideology. National socialism just wasn’t one.”

            Actually initially it was, except the first experiment did not go very well with the voters. So the nazis toned down the Lenin-propaganda. But not before the Lenin-Hitler comparison had been reported by the New York Times 1924 under the heading “Hitlerite riot in Berlin – Beer glasses fly when speaker (Göbbels) compare Hitler to Lenin”

            4) “It did however adopt many socialist policies. The ones that worked.”

            Same as every single socialist “republic” (dictatorship) on earth. They ALL adopt the policys which “work” (in getting power) and they ALL ignore the stuff which does not work. As Lenin stated, as long as they end up in power it doesnt matter. As soon as they have power they dont NEED to adopt the policys they promised.

            Thus marxist academics never think a socialist country has “true real communism” As you said they only like the PRINCIPLES of socialism. Not the actual reality of socialism.

            “The other tools it used to accomplish this were; nationalism”

            YES AND So did the Soviet Union. Stalin was the nationalist part of russian communism. The “internationalist” part of Russian communism was Trotsky who got an axe in his head in Mexico.


            YES AND So did the Soviet Union as well as practically for every other socialist country in the world. For example Cuba, Northern Korea and pre-90s China.

            “racism (engineering an outside “threat” to unite people)”

            YES AND so did the soviet union. Not only were the Soviet version of ethnic extermination in Ukraine (HOLODOMOR) equal in terms of horrible crimes against humanity. In 2003 the historian Shane O’ Rourke discovered evidence that the ethnic cleansing of cossaks (DECOSSACKIZATION) also were much worse than believed and actually constituted a genocide against the cossacks according to him.

          • “1)it’s not bullshit. The Nazi’s were DEEPLY conservative. “

            Well yes, if in some universe “conservative” means ripping up the existing society and replacing it, by means of terror, with hard core socialism that Marx, Lenin, and Stalin would have loved. The Nazi brand of government was socialism with some idol worship, corporate ownership, and master race bigotry added for sauce

            The 25-point Program of the National Socialist German Workers Party (headed by Adolf Hitler)

            …We demand that the state be charged first with providing the opportunity for a livelihood and way of life for the citizens.

            Abolition of unearned (work and labour) incomes. Breaking of debt (interest)-slavery.

            We demand the nationalisation of all (previous) associated industries (trusts).

            We demand a division of profits of all heavy industries.

            We demand an expansion on a large scale of old age welfare.

            We demand struggle without consideration against those whose activity is injurious to the general interest. Common national criminals,usurers, profiteers and so forth are to be punished with death

            The state is to be responsible for a fundamental reconstruction of our whole national education program,

            We demand legal opposition to known lies and their promulgation through the press…

          • You guys really do just consume copious amounts of propaganda….
            It’s actually amazing.
            It’s more funny because you’re all convinced that “liberals” are in a conspiracy to do the same. Class projection.
            Much like the SJWs.
            The most ironic thing is that you both do it, you both hate each other, and yet you both rely on and support the same entrenched systems.

          • “copious ..amazing…funny..projection…hate…entrenched”

            Flush the blather based dogma that transparently tries to set you up as a cape wearing hero fighting ‘gainst the man. Nobody cares about the kid donning a cape to jump off the shed ‘cept his mommy. Address a fact or two. Ok, just one to start.

        • If Hitler were trying to restore the First or Second Reichs, he would have restored the Holy Roman Empire or the Hohenzollerns.

          Everyone else: you need to understand what a leftist means when they say “right-wing” or “conservative.” It started with the Marxists and their “dialectical materialism”: a “reactionary” was promoted to the role of a Satan trying to retard radical progress to stage 5, the dictatorship of the proletariat, and stage 6, pure Communism.

          Marxists have abandoned economic Class warfare as the Grand Theory of Everything, but the Lesser Theories of Everything have spread, and all of them look like Whig History (the inevitable, three steps forward two steps back historical progress) in the middle of an ugly ‘roid rage.

          No Lefty cares if you have morals politics other than theirs: you are interfering with their hateful Progress, therefore you are Reactionary and you must be destroyed. Their hateful labels show you their positions, not yours.

          • Regarding the comparison of racism in Nazi-Germany and racism in Communist-Soviet Union.

            Not only were the Soviet version of ethnic extermination in Ukraine (HOLODOMOR) equal in terms of horrible crimes against humanity. In 2003 the historian Shane O’ Rourke discovered evidence that the ethnic cleansing of cossaks (DECOSSACKIZATION) also were much worse than believed and actually constituted a genocide against the cossacks according to him.

            When talking about racism remember that jews are no nore a different race compared to “aryan germans” than russians are a different race compared to ukrainians or cossacks.

        • “Nationalism, ideology based on the premise that the individual’s loyalty and devotion to the nation-state surpass other individual or group interests.” — Encyclopedia Britannica

          No, thanks, I’m American.

        • If you look at the extremes of 20th century political philosophy the extreme right and the extreme left ended up in very similar places. Orwell hated Communists and fascists with equal fervor.

          • I look at the he political spectrum more as a circle and not a straight line. if you choose one point as the medium between both philosophies and go either way, the extremes will meet up at the same point as you said.

          • I tend to agree. There isn’t all that much difference between Hitler and Stalin when you look at their records.

      • Socialism is socialism. It’s still the same bullshit government controlling goods, services, and movement. It doesn’t matter whether the agents wear swastikas or hammers and sickles. That’s why Americans call it a leftist movement. Socialism and increasing government control comes from the left in America. Who cares if you took gym class in Germany.

        • I’m not going to hold my breath waiting for you to offer a single example of feminism in the United States advocating within the last decade for a socialist program.

          “Socialism” is NOT “anything government does that I don’t like.”

          A small part of a recent article appearing on the World Socialist WebSite, damning the UVA rape hoax and feminism’s attempts to destroy due process for accused men:

          “Rolling Stone’s retraction of University of Virginia gang rape story,”
          By David Walsh 7 April 2015

          As we noted last November in regard to Harvard University’s new, anti-democratic sexual misconduct policy: “Obama’s sexual assault publicity stunt is directed in particular at shoring up support for the Democrats among those liberal and ‘left’ layers of the upper middle class mesmerized by questions of personal identity.”

          The “progressive agenda” today of the affluent left includes and hardly goes farther than support for gay marriage, opposition to the “rape culture” and an obsession with race. All of this is meant to divert attention from the crimes of the White House and the relentless attacks on the working class in the US. The hysteria over supposedly widespread rape in the US and elsewhere is part of the effort to bamboozle some people and intimidate others.


          Do some basic homework.

          • And Title IX, because “sports”..
            And “Alien Spouse laws” because “women” DESERVE…”
            Now let’s chat about feminist “Jazz hands”…..

          • Well, I know you agree that the fems are relying on the state to take over as chivalrous white knight.

            I think some on this thread would point to somel those programs as being an example of “socialism”

          • Feminism advocated hard for the Affordable Care Act.

            They fought against anyone who might want to provide a health insurance policy that didn’t include fully covered abortions and abortifacients.

            A hardline Capitalist or a Libertarian would want both options to be available but wouldn’t want to use the force of law to penalize not using one or the other.

            A socialist advocates wealth ‘redistribution’ programs AND force, and guess what Obamacare is, at its core?

            It’s Corporatist law serving Socialist agenda.

            And Feminists couldn’t ballyhoo hard enough for it.

      • All that impressive Gymnasium education, yet you still come off like a middle-schooler who just discovered naughty words.

        As to the National Socialist German Worker’s Party, it requires a strange definition of “right” to declare their program “extremist right”. Their economics were corporatist, which was perhaps less left than full-blown communism, but were more state-oriented than anything being proposed in Western Europe or America, especially by the right. Nothing in the Nazi viewpoint was friendly to free-market capitalism as practiced in Britain and France.

        And yes, they made endless noise about flood and soil and war and the sacred Volk. None of these phenomena are inherently right-wing. Most of it was cribbed from the original nationalists of the French Revolution. Nationalism was very much a progressive phenomenon throughout the 19th century, although the establishment had managed to co-opt it by the 20th.

        In any case, blood-and-iron corporatism is only right-wing when compared to communism. The Nazis did not get their start among the aristocracy and bourgeois, nor among the workers, but among the petty clerks and ex-military freebooters. Neither groups were traditional power-centers in German society.

        • What are you talking about? They were very pro-competition. They had no beef with capitalism, they liked it cause it brings in competition they believed in so hard. It is just that some on the right need to paint them as left, because omg something on the right would sound bad.

          In what way was nazi progressive phenomenon? Rights for women or minorities? Are you joking?

          Nazi did not just co-opted nationalism, the struggle for survival between nations was right at the core of their ideology. That is what it all was about, if was literally about building the Reich.

          And seriously, why should right-wing come necessary from traditional power-centers? Just because that is how some on American left thing American support for right wing comes now? Traditional power-centers in Germany were essentially aristocracy and inherited military ranks. They were not about right or left wing, they were about old school authoritarian regime.

          • WOW! How many “avatars” do you USE in one thread?
            Is the Gamer gate moral logic “treasury’ suffering form the same malady of too much emotional welfare for “special” folks as the Hugo, (and National Socialist for that matter), and now US treasury’s 18,000,000,000,000 hole from all those negative transfers of”balanced budgets”?
            But, you know, trigger warnings, jazz hands, and safe “recovery” zones, from failure to propagandize, failure to
            brand critics as “badthink”, and failure to “..fool ALL the people, ALL of the time”.
            Juden shop, CLOSED! “Badspeak” VERBOTEN!
            And folks just watched as the censored were led away…..

          • They were left in the following ways:

            Management of economic life by the state, for the benefit of all citizens (contra your assertion, they did not believe in competition, and considered it a decadent outgrowth of British ideology)

            Animal rights.

            Gun control.

            The dissolution of classes into an equality of race.


            Eugenics, which was very much a part of the cultural left for the first half of the 20th century.

            To answer your other question, in order for something to be “right-wing” it needs to be in favor of conserving existing structures. To be “reactionary” means to restore a previous structure. Hence, if Hitler was in favor of maintaining the bourgeois democracy of the Weimar Republic, he would be a conservative. If he was in favor of restoring the monarchy, he would be a reactionary. But he was neither. He wanted to create an entirely new state, based upon a socialist critique of capitalism, a concept of dictatorship evolved from the French and Russian Revolutions, and a theory of race science and cultural militarism.

            We have come to regard racism as a purely right-wing phenomenon. But the Nazis took them to places where no conservative had ever gone. A white supremacist in the United States might regard the peonage of American blacks under Jim Crow as “the natural order of things.” He might refrain from associating with Jews. But it would never occur to him to wipe these people from the face of the earth. As long as they “knew their place”, they could carry on doing whatever it was they did. Hitler decided that inferior races needed to be destroyed, based on a pseudo-scientific notion, borrowed from eugenicists of the Margaret Sanger variety, that the inferiors, merely by existing, created a drag on the rational ordering of society. It’s a dark utopian vision, of the kind no Klansman would bother conceiving.

            Miltarism is likewise to be found amid all left-revolutionary movements, from writing of the Marsailles to the Bolsheviks’ rapturous invocation of the terror to Peru’s Shining Path, the Viet Cong, Sandanistas, etc. This is not to say that militarism is exclusively left. But neither is it exclusively right.

        • Communism is the dissolution of corporations until there they are run the workers. Corporatism is not left wing. It’s by it’s very definition right wing as it imposes hierarchies into a feudal system.

          Nationalism can be both left and right wing. Nazis created a new power center of petty clerks and ex-military. Their was a new bourgeois they created and it was called, “Not Jewish”

          • Corporatism is inherently authoritarian. You’re confusing your definitions because you can’t think outside of a line.

          • Communism is not the dissolution of corporations until they are run by the workers. Communism is the dissolution of coporations into the state.

            Corporatism is the management of corporations by the state.

            The difference between them is irrelevant to everyone that does not belong to the ruling class.

      • Ah so which of the nazi party platforms were “extremist right”?

        #11? Abolition of unearned incomes? Breaking of rent-slavery? #12 – the confiscation of war profits? #13 – the nationalization of industries? #14 – profit sharing of heavy industries? #15 -expansion of old age welfare? #20 – education at the expense of the state? #21 – the state to care for national health? #23 – Publications with are counter to the general good are forbidden?

        Huh… funny how that last one also shows up in china, russia, cuba… pretty much anywhere the left takes over.

        Americans aren’t retarded, we just follow the evidence.

        • You don’t know what a left or right political belief is.

          Is being anti -global warming a left or a right issue? It depends. In america it’s a right wing belief to be anti global warming. In other countries it’s the left.

          China, Russia, and Cuba aren’t left wing countries. Russia and China are: Anti feminists, anti gay. They are pro government but that’s not a left wing ideal. The right wing is pro government as well unless you believe the republican party was vehemently anti-bush. They are anti-democrat run government.

          Left wing ideology is social progress and equality. Usually meaning you are free to do whatever you want socially. Get gay married, smoke marijuana, and not be religious or forced to follow any religious doctrine. That would apply to many European country but would certainly not apply to right wing Russia or China.

          Feminists are right wing extremists. They are much closer to muslims who believe a woman should be covered. That true freedom is being covered because men are terrible. But instead they believe that the men should have a dog lease by either society or the government as they enjoy freedom while men are in the metaphorical niqab.

          • You have a really weird, idiosyncratic view of left/right that appears to be driven by your attempt to force the libertarian/authoritarian axis into your one-dimensional model. You’re a linear thinker in a multidimensional world.

          • A lot of this is semantics, but yeah, Nazism has always been associated with extreme right wing ideology. Communism has generally been associated with extreme left-wing ideology. Feminists have managed to lay its claws into both wings of the spectrum. That takes talent.

          • Not always, Graham. Nazi = National Socialist German Workers Party
            Socialism is not right wing, never has been, never will be. But somehow people love to say the incarnate evil of leftist extremist scum, is really the result of right wing ideology.

          • Dan, that’s just a name. Nazism was largely on the Italian fascist movement. Actually, a lot of their most toxic ideology in general and Hitler’s in particular, went all the way back to Martin Luther’s lunatic screeds. The Nazis also had a nominal connection to the Catholic Church and yet they had a very confusing relation with both the Papacy and Catholics in general.

          • I understand Nazism, socialism, fascism, and couldn’t care less about Catholism, nominal or whatever, Luthers’ stumbles, etc. but none of that is the political right wing.
            Don’t switch horses mid stream to avoid giving an answer like lefties love to do, Graham; explain how Nazism is right wing or put a sock in it.

          • My point is that trying to attach a rah-rah political symbol to “the left” or “the right” is ultimately self-defeating. It’s ineffective binary thinking, absent of relevant data, and it’s the kind of nonsense that feminists use to get their gangs together.

          • Since the ’60s they’ve mostly associated with left-wing politics. Commies were a better bet than fascists at the time. The Nazis became unfashionable in the ’40s. But the late 19th/early 20th century feminists tended to identify more with conservative Victorian and German Nationalist sentiments and politics.

          • Nah it’s easy. Just make a scale of complete anarchy on one end, complete totalitarianism on the other (like a number line – also like a number line, just as infinity is never reached, so too does no human society reach the complete end of either side). In America it’s usually more accurate to put anarchy on the right end, totalitarianism on the left. So if you want to see where someone is, pick a point on the scale and move it towards the end that their particular policy idea would aim to move society.

            Then the only question becomes how much weight should be given to the moves (i.e. whether social regulations should move the marker further than economic regulations). =D

          • I’m literally laughing on my floor at the notion that Feminism is a Right-Wing movement.

            You might be correct about Suffragettes…. but Suffragettes and Feminists HATED each other, and existed as contemporaries.

            Feminism is Marxism repackaged to appeal to women and WK’s.

            Marx himself said that getting women on board was critical to the success of his revolution – how else do you expect it to work?

            Lastly, listen to any harpy beller on about oppression this and patriarchy that, but do me a favor – substitute the following words:

            ‘Patriarchy’, ‘Men’, ‘Traditional family structure’ = Bourgeois

            ‘women’ ‘women and poc’ ‘women and minorities’ ‘marginalized groups’ = Proletariat

            And then you go ahead and tell me it’s a ‘Right Wing’ movement.

          • His flaw is not seeing the similarities. His flaw is jumping to the conclusion that such such similarities make it “right wing”.

            Feminists are certainly a powerful faction on the left, however feminists, and the trad/cons on the right, are two sides of the same gynocentric coin. There are many similarities; the two that immediately spring to mind are: 1) Women are damsels in distress that need to be protected, 2) both are anti-sex.

            Got more examples if you want ’em.

          • Minor correction, but it’s not “two sides of the same coin,” it’s the baptists and bootleggers phenomena whereby two opposites end up as partial allies (unless you REALLY want to argue that baptists and bootleggers are just alike).

          • The flaw is using only the left/right spectrum to evaluate everything. When you use a big gov vs individual liberty spectrum the similarities between fascism and marxism become quite clear, with free market small gov libertarianism being the real opposite of both. At the moment, in the USA, most libertarians have sided with the right, mainly because lately far more assaults on liberty have come from the left rather than the right. Thus libertarianism is often considered right wing and conservative, and the right is becoming associated with individual liberty. But it is not an inherent property of the right or the left, since both the right and the left have their totalitarians (as was evident when libertarians used to oppose the moral majority people and side with the left against them). The real contest is between totalitarian collectivism and individual iberty. At the moment the main threat to liberty comes from the left, but it may not always. So while lovers of liberty can rightly say at the moment they are with the conservatives, the key value is not conservtism, but liberty, and we should never forget that.

          • Hmmmm. Well I agree 100% with your first sentence. As far as the rest of what you say I have mixed feelings on.

            Yes, I know many Libertarians, and they are even more socially liberal than most self identified liberals! They absolutely cannot stand trad/cons and religious fundies. So no argument there. The main reason why they have begrudgingly sided with the right is because of what they see as an assault on the free market from the left; there are some other reasons, but this seems to be the main one.

            For me personally, I do not agree with Libertarians oversimplified philosophy of capitalism; in other words that it is a self correcting system and if we just leave it alone, it will work itself out. But let’s put that aside for right now cuz I could write a book on it.

            Where I disagree with you mainly is on your view that currently the left is the greater of two evils when it comes to an assault on Liberty. The totalitarianism on the right (which you alluded to as the moral majority) from traditional/religious right conservatives is monstrous, and they have just as much power and influence with their lobbies on the right, as feminists and SJW’s on the left.

          • I agree with you that under Bush the right was also a threat to liberty, but for the last 6 yrs the threat to liberty has come mainly from the left. And on critical cultural institutions, like our colleges, the press, and Hollywood, the threat to liberty is pretty much exclusively from the left. Of course that does not mean the right cannot become a threat to liberty again. That is why I dont want just a repub victory, but a repub victory by a candidate who will not just return us to Bush style conservatism, which was not a lot better than Obama. Of course a libertarian victory would be even better, but there are just not enough libertarians out there to make that possible, the libertarian party rarely gets more than 1%, unless perhaps Rand Paul takes the repub nomination. My evaluation at the moment is the repub party is about 40% liberty oriented, partly thanks to a liberty orientation among many parts of the tea party, while the dem party is pretty much 90% totalitarian.

          • In other words the same old tune of “left is everything good, right is everything bad.” I mean you outright call it “social progress” without ANY definition of progress towards what. I would have a lot more respect for you guys if you just dropped the “left/right” monikor and just outright admit it’s a “hero/villain” dynamic in your mind. (no really, swap “left/left-wing” with hero and same with the opposite and nothing changes in your comment – it’s pretty much a religious tract)

          • A mess. Dewey belongs in that spot? “Liberalism” is a word used to mean a wide range of notions. Historically it is the alternative to aristocratic monarchy (which does not even appear in this goofy chart. “Fundamentalism” is the adherence to any perfectly strict doctrine and is thus applicable to many cults, religions and political ideologies (it is a mental state: the rule-following mentality). The chart is badly a-historical and seems to derive definitions from simplistic pop culture summary-trendy notions rather than true study.

          • Aristocratic monarchy has no place in this chart because it isn’t a political concept itself, but a subset of it (likely ranging in the authoritarianism/nationalism/traditionalism region). And your understanding of what fundementalism is politically is flawed.

          • oh no! a wiki source! we are undone! >loud wailing followed by ‘I’m melting… melting…'<

          • Not any specific refutation to my points, just name calling.

            Hm. Seem SJWs do that a lot too. Tell me, you been at the Calgary Expo recently? Escort anyone off the premises?

          • You have no point. On top of having very poor reading comprehention, you also deny reality to validate your political views. Political fanatics like you should seek help.

          • Hmm… again no facts listed, just insults.

            Seems far more likely you’re just another american SJW seeking legitimacy by hiding behind the flag of another country.

            Welcome to the internet. Next time bring your ideas and arguments to the debate. Your self-selected accomplishments have no authority here. Tits or gtfo.

        • You are quite correct. In reality Fascism and Marxism are far more alike that different. It is a leftist illusion that they are opposites. The problem is using the left/right spectrum to evaluate everything, which obscures what is actually happening because each totalitarian group has propaganda that makes their brand of totalitarianism completely opposed to all the other brands of totalitarianism.

          Once you use the libertarian spectrum, of big gov power vs individual liberty, you correctly end up with both Fascism and Marxism being in the totalitarian quadrant, with small gov being laisse faire democratic capitalism in the liberty quadrant, and conventional liberal and conservative being quadrants in the middle between liberty and totalitarianism.

          In Europe, both left and right had their totalitarians, but once either one went totalitarian, they both ended up in the same place, big gov totalitarianism. in the USA, most libertarians are now allied with the conservatives, so most of the totalitarianism in the US is now coming from the left.

      • Unfortunately, Americans have had to spend a lot of blood and treasure on European history and have become a part of it.

        Two World Wars and the military occupation of Europe for 50 years (still ongoing by the way) to prevent a third world war.

        Excuse our opinion on your sorry blood ridden continent.

      • As http://politicalcompass.org/ (for example) shows, it’s not as simple as “right” and “left.” It’s more like Authoritarianism vs. Libertarianism on two scales — social and economic.

        Thus Hitler and Stalin (Nazism and Marxism) are very similar in that they advocate for placing a great deal of power in the hands of the state on the social control scale. But economically, Marxism advocates centralized economic control, Nazism less so.

        Mohandas Gandhi and Milton Friedman would be at a similar point on the social control scale, but Gandhi would be on the collectivist end of the economic scale, with Friedman on the libertarian end.

        If the German gymnasium is teaching the simplistic “right” and “left,” and concluding that Marxism and Nazism are polar opposites, they’re doing a disservice to their students.

        This is one of the models I used when I was teaching Government.

      • Why do you lie to us and claim NSDAP loved capitalism and free markets? Why did they hate the right to bear arms? How is Socialism an extreme right-wing movement? Why don’t you answer Mr Winchester’s questions below?

        Now, if and when you reply to this, try to remember: no screaming; no exclamation points; no sounding like you’re clicking your heels and screaming “sieg heil,” it’s disturbing.

        • Hitler relaxed gun control with exception of Jews. He liked guns and fights. That is how they got to power.

          • Oh, I suspect gypsies, homosexuals, and “intellectuals”, didn’t enjoy relaxed firearm confiscation “policy” for ..um…peace.

          • Yup, it was pretty clear who is going to use the guns and what for – the ones that basically already ruled the street fights up to then.

          • The Communists were also out on those streets, congratulating themselves on ramping up the violence there.

            Thank you for deliberately equating “gun control” as an explicitly racist act. You are correct: the Nazis abrogated the right of self-defense by tightening gun control on “undesirables” and showered permits on the racially “correct.” Thank you.

      • Can you still get your money back for the fraud perpetrated on
        you by a “comprehensive” National Socialist “studies” clsass?

      • Ooooo, lookie, WhoDat Nation is back to derail the topic at hand away from the clear and present danger displayed by those nice convention security forces, in response to fully loaded diapers being slung from behind mommy’s apron.
        The hurt from their allies at Hugo must BURN!

        • Is any of this relevant to the subject at hand or is this just a pissing contest between Poli-Sci 101 students? The Badgers were treated like shit at Calgary while they were just doing their thing peacefully. This is the issue. Focus, people.

      • Then you must know what the “S” in NSDAP stands for. Explain to us how that’s a extremist right thing, will you?


        • So because the “S” stands for socialist, that means that Hitler believed in socialism and utilized it in his decisions? With your logic you probably believe that the Democractic People’s Republic of Korea is actually a democracy and Kim Jong Un was voted into power by his subjects.

          • “We are socialists, we are enemies of today’s capitalistic economic system
            for the exploitation of the economically weak, with its unfair salaries,
            with its unseemly evaluation of a human being according to wealth and
            property instead of responsibility and performance, and we are all
            determined to destroy this system under all conditions.”

            –Adolf Hitler

      • Oh look, it is someone engaging in projection. National SOCIALISTS, do you understand that words have meaning. FACISM, which is just extreme statism, which is no more that aggregating power to the state, which are modern LEFTIST goals, you really need to learn to read. Whoever taught you, did you a major disservice by lying to you and not teaching you to reason and think for yourself. And the Nazis started off using a lot of the same techniques modern leftists are trying to learn.

      • Nice revisionist history – Nazism is a LEFT leaning ideology. Only modern regressives with a bent toward socialism/communism like yourself want to make it seem like it’s right wing.

      • Honestly this is just diversion and distraction. I mean sure, maybe Nazis “did” have some conservative values. Maybe there’s also more to communism and socialism than meets the eye! Great,whatever.

        I’m not “against” sjw-ism/radical feminism because of politics. I don’t care whether or not they claim to be conservative or liberal.

        What irks me is they ban innocent people from events just for having different opinions and try to scapegoat “certain kinds of people” for all the worlds ills. Sjws have also done their own book burnings and one of them even broke a CD of GTA at a public speech to make his point. (Lipschitz) Sjws & feminists are not above using censorship, silencing tactics,misinformation, and propaganda. They do it all the time.

        That is something Nazis did too which is why the comparison is made. I mean maybe they didn’t claim to be “liberal” but they definitely wanted to be seen as “progressive” and they were very aggressive about using the media and the arts to control the thoughts and opinions of the population.

        However sure,we all know far right conservatives act much in the same deplorable way! Which is why I tend to bring up “the horse shoe effect”. Aka, if you go too far right or to far left you end up in the same crazy place!

      • “Oh look its americans “discussing” european history and making idiots of themselves.”

        Oh look, it’s a German who doesn’t know that stuff is American history too.

        ‘NAZI always were a extremist right movement.”
        In the same way Stalinism was. It’s the Horseshoe Effect.

  • Feminism has jumped the shark. They are too precious and dainty to harbor views that don’t conform to their exact specifications. But they are tolerant.

  • It’s not just feminism but gender studies that are pushing this anti freedom of speech close mindedness.
    The vsgina monologues is being banned from college campuses because it’s non inclusive of women without vaginas. Who is pushing this but totalitarians?
    No. I don’t have to accept that women without vaginas are afflicted because the vagina monologues isn’t inclusive enough. Get over your selves already, cry babies.

    • I endorse the totalitarianism against the vagina monologues. I find it hilarious. If this kind of totalitarianism is allowed to flourish, then feminism will destroy itself. Imagine a world where political correctness becomes so extreme that SJW women won’t even be allowed to define themselves women. Without being able to even define themselves as a group, how will they be able to even be feminists anymore? Hilarious.

  • While it’s too bad that you guys were kicked out (I would have stopped by tomorrow to meet all of you) this probably will end up wildly beneficial for GG and the HBB in the long run. Keep up the good work guys.

  • I’m not a fan of you guys(gals? whatever) and disagree with A LOT of your ideas, but i’m also a firm believer that a contrary opinion must be faced in a debate, not with fallacy and expulsion.

    I don’t know who the hell imagined it was a good idea to boot you from the expo, but they just created a poisonous precedent. It’ll come back to bite’em later when more people asks to ban the others for even more frivolous reasons

    • Actually DukeMagus stop kidding. You know exactly WHO it was who booted them off expo. If you want details read “Heterophobia” by Daphne Patai which explains in detail who and how they got “harassment” to be able to mean anything they dont like.

  • Friday achievement of these so-called feminists: Women being silenced by force, scammed out of money. Theres now a total number of two Vivian cosplayers who’ve been seriously mistreated in a convention. I thought feminists wanted to defend women and their freedom to choose what clothes they wear.

    You have to push for a legal case, its the only way for them to retract their statements, as past has shown with stuff like the #ggautoblocker.

  • I was going to go to the expo but now I won’t. Props to Alison and the Honey Badgers, keep fighting the good fight.

  • “We’re kicking you out. We have no evidence of you doing anything wrong, and you can’t record us kicking you out because it’d make us look bad.” How reasonable.

    • ALWAYS RECORD (sound) IN PUBLIC ….. Feel happy to lie to their face as they do if they ask you not to.. and then release the recording you promised not to make to show them what being the victim of people lying feels like.

  • Unbelievable that in this day age, discussion is now not allowed, if you have a different point of view

  • GG is all about harassing women!

    Says the people who harass women and get them banned from conventions. But please, keep posting your little twitter screencaps while it’s getting increasingly difficult for pro-GG people to even go to Conventions and enjoy nerd culture.

    Ya know the culture that they built!?

  • Absolutely disgusting that this happened to you, and I am deeply sorry it did. I am, however, grateful that this is hard evidence of feminism attempting to stamp out dissenting voices and discriminating against people who don’t tow the line.

  • As a german, this reminds me painfully of the early starts of our darkest times… I would advice every man to get out of USA while you still can… And same for female Anti-Feminists…

    • This happened in Canada but the US is in just as bad shape.The lunatics are running the asylum.

    • I never in my life thought I’d see a German spell the noun “German” with a lower-case “g.”

  • It is depressing when all the usual suspect media outlets state with no qualification that #Gamergate is an online movement known for its harassment of women. The game apparently is to create the narrative early on and lock it in. Then in subsequent articles you can simply refer to the narrative as an established fact.

  • The absolute nerve in that facade of a speech about how the right to speak and be heard (even when opinions differ from theirs) is something they stand for..stating, as bold as brass that they’re against censorship..in response to the librarian woman having something negative to say about people who ban things.

    Then immediately concoct a pack of lies so they can take the right to speak and be heard away from people who don’t agree with them. So they had them silenced!

    And what a bare faced liar that Brittney Le Blanc is. Unbelievable. (actually..No it Isn’t..It’s what they do best)

    All the best guys.

  • You need to Sue Calgary Expo.

    Primarily if they do not refund you for the cost of attending the Expo itself, but also for damages based on political discrimination. As no rules were broken that you could have been aware of, you have solid grounds for a suit. An appropriate response would have been to issue a warning with some measures that could be complied to. They didn’t do that. Instead, they kicked you out for having different politics and in response to unverified lies and rumors. Make them hurt where they cost you as well, in their wallets.

    On top of that, you need to sue The Mary Sue for libel, as they spread highly malicious lies about you, which were then used BY the Expo to justify their actions. Because you can prove that they WERE lies (within a court of law I’m sure your recordings would demonstrate that their narrative is a false one), and the fact that they are tied financially to the Expo itself (a fact they revealed in their article) there is probably also grounds for collusion between the two entities (though there may be little in the way of a law that this is breaking, it could be very material to a court case to demonstrate the discrimination you faced). You can also demonstrate that another of their claims, the idea that you lied your way in with an association to a web comic that you ARE in fact associated with, is a lie. So sue their asses as well.

    Considering the potential damage that the Mary Sue Article could have caused to your reputations and potential for employment, this suit likely has much greater potential.

    If you want to live up to your reputation AS honey badgers, time to act like one. Don’t give a fuck, lawyer up, and attack them for damaging you. Start a legal fund and get a good lawyer. Win it, and show the world exactly who these assholes are.

  • Just glancing quickly through the comments, it appears that no-one else raised this… While I was pursuing my issues in the workplace in Australia a decade ago, the equal opportunity laws were often framed in a gender-neutral way… meaning, theoretically at least, you could use the bigots’ own laws against them. Practice usually turned out to be a different matter, but hey… if the case is egregious enough, maybe you could pull it off. Canada/USA would have similar laws, eg:

  • That’s it? Something like 20 seconds of reasonable discourse, and she’s banned for life from a whole range of events across Canada, effectively harming her career? What?!

  • I read someone say on the escapist that in Canada it may be possible to file legal charges for discrimination because of this? If so will the HBB take this to the law?

  • I remember a lot of stories and movies about WWII era and things the Nazis did that started out with scenes such as this.

  • while what this expo and what these cretins are up to is disgusting. i’m not fighting this fight for the right to display controversial hashtags on booths at expos. i’m in this for the ISSUES that matter. Doing stunts at expos, and flashing hashtag art is a pointless identity game, that have nothing to do with what this is about. So i hope the 10k was worth it, they’ll get a lot of attention, & probably encourage more “GG” Stunts. and this will do Nada to effect change in the industry. but hey, at least we’re fighting for an ‘identity” right?


    • That’s a fairly narrow-minded perception, Kelly!

      With censorship being quite easily arguably responsible for GG becoming a thing in the first place, I don’t think it’s at all inappropriate for these folks to use the hash-tag to help facilitate a discussion about censorship if they so chose.

  • Well, it happened in Canada, so basically if it’s not America, I don’t care. If it happens here (America) we sue the crap out of them and take all their money. Strike back. Twice as hard.

  • the SJWs and other Leftie scum are also trying to destroy science fiction with their Stalinist tactics in the Hugo awards voting.

    Remember, all of those who support quality SFF with actual stories can STILL BUY A SUPPORTING MEMBERSHIP to Sasquan,, the World Scifi convention for 40 semoleons, which gets one a packet of ebooks of the nominees, probably worth $80 on the market, the right to vote this year, and the right to nominate next year.

    the place to register is


    so sign up, read the nominees, AND VOTE!!

  • I think that with the complete audio recorded, it is clear that to anyone willing to listen to that audio that HBB did nothing wrong and were bullied out of the expo by a group that cannot tolerate other opinions.

    I hope your able to make a legal case out of this, though I fear it’ll just lead to a no unauthorized recording rule in future.

  • Lesson of the day: ALWAYS RECORD (sound) IN PUBLIC ….. Feel happy to lie to their face as they do if they ask you not to….. and then release the recording you promised not to make to show them what it feels like to be victim of lies.

  • This honestly makes my blood boil.

    As a lifelong socialist and bleeding heart, these fucks are going to drive away any thinking and reasoning person from a political school of thought with tremendous value.

    They stand on the shoulders of giants and take a hefty dump on their faces.

    They have legitimised some of the nuttiest and most extreme right wingers and conspiracies (many of which are still largely unreasonable, they simply have foundation now and cant be dismissed, they must be resolved)

    I get legitimately angry over politics rarely, even though heated debate is common from me.
    When my eyes mist and vision darkens I know the subject has crossed a line for me.
    These wolves in sheep’s clothing; these bigots posing as “progressive” or “liberal”; these identity politicians that seem to dominate feminism and “the left” (from the centre right democrats to the real socialist parties of Western Europe) need to be unmasked.

    Why cant people in positions of authority see through the façade?
    It’s barely covering the malice and narcissism. A thin veneer of “good intent” as we are lured down the road to hell.
    Every single time they are PROVEN both unpopular and unreasonable, they simply deny it and move on, the pretence of innocence apparently a magical shield from consequence.

    My faith in humanity and in the political leadership of my own “side” continues to plummet.

    • Because this is where it always leads: censorship and tyranny. No socialist society can support the views of anybody that doesn’t totally Believe In It.

      • If we go by “history” then I’m afraid conservatism, religious faith and capitalism ALL have an equally bad or worse track record.

        Consider: socialism is extremely influential in all of western Europe.
        Nationalised and public owned services are common and extremely popular.
        Last I checked, we weren’t a hell hole of political prisoners.
        I can point to say… Iran, where a dictator was installed by the US because the left wing government wanted to nationalise oil ownership and enrich the people of Iran. I can point to nearly all of the middle easy, where nationalist, conservative, religious governments have a VERY bad track record with political dissidents.
        What about USA itself. A nation that has invaded and installed dictators on behalf of BANANA CORPORATIONS.
        A nation where the fear of communism lead the government to go on a massive witch hunt for political dissidents to accuse of treason.
        What about my own nation, the UK.
        Before socialism had an impact on politics; no universal suffrage, no worker rights, debtors prisons, child labour etc etc etc.

        What I’m saying is that if all you do is trust what the detractors say about a political ideology what you will hear is everything bad they ever did, and obfuscation or denial of any good.
        Without socialism there would NEVER have been the reforms we have seen.
        Benevolent aristocrats didn’t wake up one morning and think “maybe we should not exploit the poor quite so much”

        I could enumerate all of the ills of capitalism, but that doesn’t prevent me from admitting it is a powerful tool.
        The free market works in a LOT of instances.
        Without capitalism, we would not have made the progress we’ve seen.
        I’d simply add that capitalism without government is impossible. Money requires government, and many of the things we enjoy saw the initial investment from tax funds, not some savvy venture capitalist.

        Socialists have LONG adopted a mix economy model.
        The reason they did so is we aren’t living in the 1800’s
        As great as early socialist thinkers were, they lived in their own time and their conclusions were thought necessary in their own circumstances.
        Times have changed.

        • “Socialism is extremely influential in Western Europe.” Indeed. It was also extremely influential in Eastern Europe, too. The tanks rolling through Prague in ’68 are evidence of that. Western Europe is also home to Spain, Italy, Portugal: three of the worst and most broken economies in the Western world. Oh, and most, if not all, of the lowest birth rates in the Western world are also in socialized Western Europe.

          Capitalism is the system that has brought man out of the caves. It has provided the highest standard of living, most productivity, most wealth and most invention/innovation in human history… but it’s bad because Walmart, right?

          Money does not require government, diversity requires government.

          • Money requires several things, foremost is civilisation.
            w/o that money has buggerall value, you barter things of value.

            Even coinage; precious metals only hold the value given to them by a society.
            Now, if I had said currency, I’d be more on point, as that is more what I was talking about.
            A dollar has no inherent value.
            The coin may or may not have value for its metal, but the notes certainly do not, and digital currency even less.

            They are simply a promise. We will honour the value represented by this item.
            That requires government and is essentially by fiat.

            Again, you are conflating “socialism” with “communism”
            You’re also seemingly excusing other political influences that cause a GREAT DEAL of conflict.
            Religion is a conservative thing. Not all conservatives are religious, not all religious believers are conservative, but the religions themselves most certainly are.
            What about the USA, the avowed opponent of “socialism” to the point it is a dirty word.
            Well; they’ve just been involved in or caused more conflict than any other nation since the end of WW2.
            From engineering wars by lying to the public (gulf of Tonkin, WMD’s etc etc) to CIA funded coups (Iran), to installing dictatorships at the behest of private business (Honduras)

            But the real problem is TOTALLY the political movement whose existence has always been empowering the workforce to be rewarded with the fruits of their labours.
            Total bad guys.

          • You’re mistaking socialism with workability. It always leads to communism. Always. Socialism requires bigger government since that’s how one administers it. That gov’t requires higher and higher tax rates and especially on those who make more. Those people either leave to less expensive nations/states or find tax solutions (retirements, capital gains, etc.). At the point where revenues aren’t enough, you require immigrants of zero loyalty for wallets to pay into the system. (People in socialistic nations have many fewer children to pay into the pyramid.) Proximity plus diversity equals war and has for the entirety of human history. Communism is just really big government socialism.

            Oh, so the USA is bad for being coservative and throwing about military power? How about your socialist Germany, China, Russia, Argentina letting bullets fly? Germany for obvious times, China in the 50-60s in Korea and Vietnam, Russia for generations and Argentina in the 80s. More have died in the name of socialism and communism than religion ever has. Trying to deny that is just willful blindness. Remember, Germany was the National SOCIALIST Worker’s Party.

            So, keep trying to convince yourself that socialism is The Best Way Forward but the entirety of human history shows otherwise.

          • Your propagandist revisionist history shows otherwise.

            Without the socialist movement your life would be very different.
            It doesn’t MATTER whether you agree with it or not, or even if it is right or not.
            Workers had zero rights. Social mobility was non existent.
            Socialism arose to address this.
            Things changed.
            It’s not even an arguable point. It’s just facts.

            The Roman empire conquered a great deal of the world.
            It spread civiloisation and Christianity wherever it went.
            The influences of this are STILL felt today.
            No Roman Empire; No Catholic Church, No reformation and so no protestants.
            That’s a LOT of art, culture, law and the source of many great things (including socialism, secularism anda great deal of educational institutions) would all have never existed in the form we see.
            Does appreciating the impact Rome and Christianity had on the world mean I agree with Religion, Catholicism or the culture of ancient Rome (which was rather bloody, unforgiving, unfair and vindictive)?
            In your mind it must…. Nothing good could POSSIBLY result from things you disagree with….

          • You’re right. Nothing cries out “social mobility” quite like losing rights to placate immigrants brought kn to pay for the Ponzi scheme, waiting in line for food like Venezuela and Cuba, and the massive police state required to enforce egalitarianism like the entirety of Western Europe. Of course, that end game called communism requires even more.

            As far as your second half, don’t look now but you’re almost making a case for Christianity. The cognitive dissonance will leave a mark.

    • The biggest issue the developed world faces is implementation of progressive taxation, the rich are getting richer and the poor poor and middle class eaten out by outsourcing and robots. Yet it pains me as a liberal democrat to see real issues like progressive taxation, decaying infrastructure, need for clean sustainable energy, etc, drowned out completely by non-issues like “campus rape culture” or “the need for safe spaces for marginalized people”, well pretty soon 99% of the population is going to be marginalized by the plutocracy! 50+ million Americans and growing are below the poverty line and these fuckers think relatively rich college girls are the real oppressed vulnerable class in America?!?! These wing-nut liberals and their state of constant offense and more-progress-then-thou attitude are a plague!

      • Absolutely <3

        The decent majority of folks want hard work rewarded, to leave something to their kids (even as a socialist I'm pragmatic about nepotism. Who doesn't want to make sure their kids are well cared for?) and to not see anyone left in extreme poverty.
        People on the right, in the centre and on the left can all unite on those principles imo, they only differ in what each thinks it takes to achieve.

        We just seem to see those seeking authority *never* pursuing these goals, regardless of rhetoric, and the use of identity politics to make preserving the status quo seem like progress annoys me no end.

        Those on the right blame the poor and immigrants, all the while the rich get richer by exploiting practices even the most anarchic of capitalists declare immoral.

        Those on the left are constantly distracted by identity politics to be fooled that all we need is to change what the rich people *look like* or the contents of their underwear and that will magically fix the problems.

  • Are you going to pursue getting back the money you put into the Expo, or sue them? Because this is pure injustice.

  • Give some people power and they become harassers while unjustly accusing others of being harassers.

  • You refuse to leave and insist they file the relevant criminal charges. They won’t do so, and will then lurk around in a fashion that gives YOU just cause to file charges against them.

  • good boys and girls swear blind obedience to the feminist collective
    obedience is good
    freedom of thought and all debate is bad
    join the collective or be cast off to the far reaches of space

  • You know what? It doesn’t fucking matter who’s left and who’s right. The argument over “well, historically, they did this.” and “they did that.” is completly beside the damn point.
    Freedom of speech and expression is the issue here. I don’t give a flying fuck what you label yourselves, and I’m not going to give you a label for myself, because I’ve about had it with labels.
    The fact that someone can’t cope with someone else differing opinion to the point where they start a witch hunt and run the dissenters out of town is wrong. The fact that certain people claim cannot differentiate between an opposing opinion and actual hate speech is rediculous. The fact that someone would claim real injury at being exposed to different opinions is ludicrous (and it makes me think they are a lier and full of shit)

    The asshats that ran off the Honey Badgers needs a fucking reality check. The idiots who resort to these nasty and fucked up tactics to silence an opposing opinion need to be stood up to, because they are pathetic bullies, regardless of there damn political opinion.

    • This comment section is almost completely unmoderated but anyone who advocates violence will be banned after one warning. That is this warning. We do not condone any violence or censorship here. They are welcome to complain.

  • Can i get a clarification as to exactly what happened if fan expo is not at fault who is? and why did they have the ability to remove whoever they wanted from the event.

  • The rhetoric from The Mary Sue seems to be that you guys went there under false pretences, because you registered under a comic site.

    • Are Mary Sue organizing CalgaryExpo? Otherwise it doesnt matter shit what Mary Sue says. In absense of recording (which I blame CalgaryExpo for) I will trust Alison Tienan who said the reason stated by the people THERE was the “harassment” of the panel earlier. I also assume the reason they did not want that recored is that they want to have the resposibility of small children regarding what they actually said. I would NEVER have removed recording. I would have promised it was off and recorded every second cause only lying assholes are afraid of being recorded while accusing people.,

      • The point is CalgaryExpo didn’t evict based on harassment. They evicted based on the fact the Badger crew registered under a comic site which isn’t explicitly them.

        • “The point is CalgaryExpo didn’t evict based on harassment. ”

          100% UNTRUE According to Alison Tienan after first asking her to remove recording the CalgaryExpo people themselves said the reason was the harassment from that panel. Thats what SHE said about a situation we would have irrefutable evidence from had not EXPO themselves made sure no evidence existed..


          Same Expo people deleted their OWN tweet which showed them using a parody-humor text as “evidence” of what the Badgers was about. However before these cowards could delete their own tweet it was screencopied and thus everyone can see the official Expo twitter wrote that idiotic tweet and then attempted to “take back”

          • I’m saying that’s the story they put out, and the one they are holding on to. Like you, I am outraged at this shit. They were fucking stretching every loophole they could find to kick the honey badgers out.

  • So let me get this straight. You attend a convention with the express purpose of interrupting and disrupting panels and harassing the panelists, violate CCEE’s policies, are then removed from the con for violating those policies… and you are so fucking deluded that you think you’re the VICTIM here?

    I have nothing but respect for CCEE for taking appropriate steps towards ensuring their convention is harassment-free. Deny it all you want, lie until you’re blue in the face, but you were there to harass. I have nothing against opposing points of view. I may even agree with SOME of your points. But you didn’t attend the convention to simply make those points, or hold your own panel making those points, you attended the convention expressly and exclusively to attack anyone who didn’t share your opinions. Which makes you villains, period.

    Also, just an FYI: removing abusive bullies like you from an event is not ‘censorship’, asshole.

    This post you’ve written above? My god. I don’t know if you’re diabolical liars or just so fucking self-deluded that you actually believe the steaming shit that comes out of your mouths. In either case, get the fuck out of geekdom, because no real geeks want you in it.

    • Apparently you didn’t listen to the audio of the “harassment” in question. The entire exchange was civil and there wasn’t a single threatening word uttered from either side. It was an intellectual conversation between individuals with dissenting opinions. It would be one thing if there had been any actual harassment during the panel, because I’m sure most rational people can agree that it would make sense that they were ejected from the expo, but the proof just isn’t there. If fact, all the evidence very clearly supports that is contrary to what happend. Your piss and vinegar is entirely unjustifed.

    • Wow… why are you so angry? Do you have evidence that they are “abusive bullies” or that “attended the convention expressly and exclusively to attack anyone who didn’t share your opinions.”. I think you are demonizing these people beyond reason, I recommend you smoke some weed, get outside, maybe eat a donuts, relax. There are many things to be angry about: the billions world wide who go to sleep hungry, dying of curable illness, being raped and murdered by unbelievable violence, for example. I would hope you direct your hate better, perhaps you can volunteer at a food shelter for starters: see who the real villains of your own society are.

    • Next time try reading both sides of the story instead of just that biased liberal garbage that the Mary Sue writes. You might save yourself from looking like an asshole but I get the feeling you do that on a regular basis anyway. The fact that you believes the steaming shit that you type shows that you have an agenda and are not interested in the truth, much like every feminist in the world. So do us a favor and fuck off back to your hugbox.

    • “So let me get this straight. You attend a convention with the express purpose of interrupting and disrupting panels and harassing the panelists,”
      You don’t have it straight at all. Try again.

  • False accusation, and force by proxy.
    Folks that might consider going to their designated safe space, and staying there.
    “Revenge”, by “anonymous” loaded diaper, for Hugo?

  • My blood boils when I hear about Twitter driven bullshit like this. The only positive thing that I can see coming from this is that you are a capable group who will fight back. Many others lack the resources and ability to fight back and call attention to this.

  • Just complained my ass off to organizers and alerted sponsors of the blatant injustice.

  • You people are disgusting, I’m so gad you were rightly expelled from this con for spreading your hate speech, bigoted straight white males like you have NO voice anymore, and your pathetic attempts to bully your way back into a position of power and privilege will be blocked a every turn.

    • I sometime wonder how people like you that are so stupid are able to function on a daily basis without help. The Badgers are women, not men you brain damaged cuck.

      • Jimmy Russell is a troll- as in hurr durr I rustled your jimmys. He just peed himself a little in excitement over getting attention from you (and now, me).

      • You know that you just responded to a well-known “plant” who says absurdly ridiculous things while claiming to be a feminist, right? He does it to help keep dumb people mad at feminism. He boasts about it all day over on Reddit.

    • “bigoted straight white males like you have NO ”
      These are WOMEN, you drooling idiot.
      “Jimmy Russell”? Sounds white male to me.

  • There’s a simple way to tell if it’s the Ex or the volunteers behind this: see if they are allowed to return.

  • Interacted with some of the SJWs for the first time on a hostile blog. These people are rabid ideologues. There is no getting through to them. Media producers need to organize their own outlets and conventions. It’s the only way.

    • “Interdisciplinary Studies” departments – “Critical Theory” – “post-structualism.” The ideologues own the universities and long ago chased out almost 100% of objective scholars.

  • “Do they provide a safe space from harassment, or a safe space for the people who want to define what harassment means?”

    Holy SCHNIKIES! Why are these people from Webster’s or American Heritage being given preferential treatment over those who could be harassed? Now, nothing against the good editors at, say, the OED, but they should not be treated better at the expense of those being victimized. For shame!

  • Wow 25 harassment accusations against the Honey Badgers???? to silence them from a campus???? wow shits gonna hit the fan for that one guys!!!

  • Getting out of Canada might help. America, for good and for ill, has a much stronger libertarian streak than the UK and it’s remnant colonies. In this case, it’s likely a good thing. PC is a curse-word in most of the US, even among a lot of us traditional liberals. Hitting up US cons is probably a safer bet, especially cons held outside of California and New York. I’m behind you nerds. I don’t have a lot of money or mobility but I’d really like to help out. I’m frustrated because I don’t know how to do so. Much love to all.

  • I wonder how the badgers feel about being called “token women” by that sack of shit Bob Chipman?

  • So this is what I wake up to on an early Sunday afternoon, after a very restful 10 hours’ sleep.. A woman banned from a convention for “harassment”, when all she did was disagree with the popular view?

    Is this a recent thing up in Canada, or has it been around/building for quite awhile? I’ve never crossed that border, despite having lived next to it for many, many years..

  • You should consider sueing them to recover the fees. The money is probably negligible, but you could definitely make them squirm and force them to make public the lies they used against you.

  • I love how feminists are trying to claim that expressing a different opinion is now harassment and that harassment doesn’t even have to be proven to eject people from their conventions. People don’t have to boycott this convention. I suspect vendors are going to slowly stop attending. They now know how the game is played at Calgary Expo. Go against the group think and your gone. Freedom of speech is not allowed in the Calgary Expo. Keep that hugbox wrapped up tight ladies. Nothing has to be proven. Evidence is misogynistic garbage created by cis white males who need to check their privilege. Listen and believe. Donate to my patreon! Good lord I hope Honey Badgers sue. Isn’t Calgary expo funded by taxpayers money or something?

  • Calgary Expo Sponsor List

    City Of Calgary
    311-403-268-CITY (2489) if calling from outside Calgary

    I AM Downtown

    Calgary Downtown Association
    720, 304 – 8th Avenue SW
    Calgary, Alberta, T2P 1C2
    Phone: (403) 215-1570
    Fax: (403) 265-1932

    Make A Wish Foundation – Southern Alberta Canada
    Make-A-Wish® Southern Alberta
    Suite 4-2308 24 Street SW
    T2T 5H8, Calgary
    Phone Number: 403-228-3666
    Toll Free: 1-866-502-3666
    General Email: salbertachapter@makeawish.ca

    ATB Financial

    Space Canada
    Bell Media
    299 Queen Street West
    Toronto, Ontario, M5V 2Z5

    Rue Morgue Canada
    1411 Dufferin St.
    Toronto ON M6H 4C7 CANADA
    PH: 416.651.9675
    FX: 416.651.6085

    Red Skull Comics
    720A Edmonton Trail NE
    Calgary AB, T2E 3J4

    X92.9FM Radio
    400, 255 17th Avenue SW
    Calgary, Alberta, T2S 2T8
    Main Phone: 403-670-0210
    Fax: 403-212-1399
    Request Line: 403-238-X929

    Gay Calgary
    2136 – 17th Avenue SW
    Calgary, Alberta, Canada
    T2T 0G3
    (403) 543-6960

    Coco Brooks Pizza
    5251 48 Ave SE
    Calgary, AB, T2B 3S2
    Email: info@cocobrooks.com

    Blame Betty Clothing
    29 17TH AVE SW – VIEW MAP

    Graphic Language – Dean Reeves

    Bullseye Creative
    TELEPHONE: 1-206-352-6264
    SEATTLE, WA 98119

    Vistek Calgary
    Vistek Calgary (Downtown)
    1231 10th Avenue SW.
    Calgary, Alberta, T3C 0J3
    tel. 403-244-0333
    toll free: 1-800-561-0333
    fax: 403-244-1048
    Sales: calgary.sales@vistek.ca

    Summit Trucks
    CMP Branch: 1313 36 St. NE, Calgary, AB T2A 6P9 | 403.207.1043
    Shaw Branch: 4620 Blackfoot Trail SE, Calgary,AB T2G 4G2 | 403.243.6200

    Air Miles Canada
    AIR MILES Customer Care
    P.O. Box 130, Station B, Toronto, Ontario, M5T 2T3
    Fax Us at 416-733-3965 or 1-888-963-9191

    Powerseed (Air Electronics)

    Square, Inc.

    Southland Transportation

  • Here’s the problem: Calgary Expo doesn’t advertise providing an “open forum”. It’s not meant to be a place for slinging of political agendas, especially ones considered that controversial. Calgary Expo’s staff clearly felt (rightfully, judging by the number of complaints) that the presence of this group was creating conflict, and the spirit of the show is to keep things fun and friendly for all involved. Whether the position of the group was right or wrong (I’m not taking a position on that since I’m not familiar with it) it WAS DEFINITELY creating conflict and making people uncomfortable, which goes against what the show stands for. Seeing as they were the ones who paid to rent that space, they have the right to decide how it’s used.

    You don’t have to like the decision, but they were well within their rights, consistent with their reasoning, and it makes sense.

    • Were there any feminist comic representatives? Yes. Does this sound like a fun, no-conflict panel? Feminism IS conflict. And it DOES make people uncomfortable. And yet the Expo saw fit to give them a FORUM.

      • You’re missing the point. The show has demonstrated for YEARS a lean in the feminist direction. A feminist showing up to talk to a group primarily made up of feminists about feminism is clearly not going to cause a lot of conflict. That’s why there are no screencaps out there of the absolute inundation of complaints that there were feminists present (while there are about the MRA materials used by the HBB).

        A group that has long shown a history of adversarial views toward feminism showing up not only to a convention with feminist leanings, but taking less than one day of said convention to attend and interrupt a feminist panel is very clearly. Yes, both views can cause conflict – but one was in a societally appropriate place where it was highly unlikely to offend the vast majority of convention-goers, and the other demonstrated quite clearly that not only did they have no problem causing conflict, but appears that this very well may have been their intention all along.

        Here’s the thing: I don’t really have a position on the HBB in general. I’m not familiar enough with them to have one, but at every possible stage they reek of having worked their way in via “wolf in sheep’s clothing” tactics to pick a fight with a convention they knew was made up primarily of people who would find their actions disruptive, and who are now PRETENDING to be surprised when that happened, no doubt to try and rile up their supporters and increase their own relevancy. That’s where my objection comes in. If they’d been up front about who they were and what they were doing there, and the booth had been granted on THOSE GROUNDS, and the ejection was even remotely surprising when using even the slightest ammount of common sense, I’d probably be supporting them. However, this might as well read “Butcher sets up booth espousing the virtues of pork at a Muslim conference and is ejected.” – No shit. You came to a place that’s supposed to be fun and friendly to pick fights.

        • It doesn’t appear that this convention simply supports these feminist values; since it actually has a panel, clearly it promotes them. In doing so, it is stepping on any opposition to their views, since surely they oppose all notions put forth by MRA’s. That is, the panel is an act of territorialism and colonization. Does feminism really speak for the comic world? Does it really speak for the video game world? Hell, does it even really speak for women? NO! Feminism has always strived for ideological dictatorship and single-sided expression.

          The very notion that any ideal opposing feminism is somehow a threat to the peace, fun and safety of a COMIC convention should speak volumes. And it does. It says that feminism has become the thought police pushing for a new version of the Comics Code Authority by barging into others’ territory then stomping on any who oppose them. Like Gamergate.

          It’s a comic convention. An eclectic group of people interested in COMICS being reduced to singular agreement or expulsion. It is only that major media supports this neo-McCarthyism that there aren’t reams of articles denouncing this act. Instead, major media magnifies feminist causes and stifles anything contradicting them. Here, we have something that discusses “safe space” as if ideas are threats. If that is not the essence of McCarthyism – if that is not the essence of a crippling level of butt-hurt – it is at least the typical rationalization behind ALL censorship.

          Feminists want a “safe space” for the purpose of throwing rocks.

        • “The panel in question was at a convention that’s been very upfront about it’s support of feminist values, ”
          Oddly enough, what Alison was complaining about was the disempowerment of women these people dish out.
          Tell me, who is the feminist and who the anti-feminist in this whole abortion of a convention?

    • Than feminists should also be banned. Feminists are the biggest slingers of hatred and derailment since Eve first ran off with the snake

  • Is there anywhere to find what additional conventions they put on? I want to be certain I do not attend.

  • My sources indicate that David Miscavige is planing join the SJW now the his gig with Scientology is almost up.

  • You guys broke the rules and got what you deserved. Are you seriously crying about it?

      • He’s not going to list the rules. This is what SJWs do, issue blanket accusations with no substantiation. The one good thing about this is that the “myth” of Leftist ignorance and stupidity is turning out to be more of a fact than a myth.

        • …you know, quite a few of us leftists are as absolutely disgusted with the SJWs as the most rock-ribbed conservative–they are totalitarian. Not Left totalitarian, just plain old totalitarian, regardless of where they mutated from, imo (though the left has its share of blame in how its treated men in most countries, the right does, too, of course; I can’t think of a major political group whose hands are clean.) Not trying to pick a fight, just trying to point out that this goes beyond Left vs. Right and well into Moderates vs. Extremists, or the Freedom-Loving vs. the Freedom-Hating. As far as I’m concerned, if you’re here supporting the HBB then you’re an ally of mine.

          • That’s a fair point ExpatMatt. Next time I’ll try to avoid the usage of the “broad brush of generalization”.

  • when a difference of opinion becomes harassment then it is just as the Nazi’s are. keep your heads up Honey Badgers..those females are not worth the skin they are in.. i’m so disappointed in what feminism has been brought down to. these Damsels are taking women back to the time when we were owned by the familial males and had no rights to our own thoughts,property and money. except this time we are being brought down by our own gender.. sad very sad

  • Is there anywhere that cites these allegations yet, in any way that is verifiable or that can be acted upon to confirm?

    • Not so sure. Look up the page (on google) called “Serial Killers Girls.” Sometimes a girl gets overtly pychopathic quite early.

  • I believe Joseph Stalin said it best: Ideas are more powerful than guns. We would not let our enemies have guns, why should we let them have ideas.

  • Welcome to the wonderful world of leftwing activism, intolerance masquerading as freedom, justice, and equality.

  • Rush Limbaugh coined the term Feminazi decades ago, and now the millennials are finding out what that means.

  • its funny since the female panelist, stephanie chan (the one who claimed the hbb members where derailing the panel and is defending on twitter the choice to ban them) claims to be a feminist and all for empowering women and yet i find a photo of her and her friends on fb with the caption “rape face” with all of them posing scared. hypocrite -_-

  • Social Justice Warriors. Lets visit this one for a moment.

    “Social Justice”…Seriously? They think their Scooby Logic temper tantrums somehow evolve into Justice of any kind?

    “Warriors” ROFLMAO. Before we engage in war with these cupcakes we MUSTEST be sure to issue Trigger Warnings.


    • See the thing is, that is clearly a lie.
      The recordings don’t lie. Dainty little piranhas who can’t stand the light of day or a contrary thought don’t get to call whatever they like harassment and then expect anyone to take them seriously.

      • Hahaha, yeah. That incomplete recording up there? Great. Going in and disrupting everyone’s panels is enough. You didn’t need to go the full 9 yards.

  • You have my full support, this was a declaration of war on nerd/geek/gaming/sci-fi culture, and even on free speech, human rights, and anyone who’s against censorship, whether or not we agree with what people have to say, we have to let them have an opportunity to say it, and it cannot stand.

    I’ve been all over this since day one (I have a few weeks off during the slow period for my work, and am just generally taking care of business related matters, and enjoying my time while I have it), so I am well aware of the whole situation, and have been as it’s been unfolding, I approached the CCEE fb page Friday, civilly requesting (in fb chat) an elaboration, the response was vague, but they assured me it had nothing to do with censorship or anything else of the like (which evidently was EXACTLY what they have done), I told them it was all well and good, but I was looking for a simple answer as to “why”, they did not respond, instead they blocked me from messaging them. A few days later they went on a banning spree, although many of us had argued cogently, respectfully, and civilly, being polite while presenting facts while at the same time supporters of the CCEE were nasty, volatile and insulting, we were the ones being blocked en masse from commenting. The debate has been non-stop, with supporters of CCEE claiming “misrepresentation to procure a booth” “harassment and bringing a discussion panel to a halt” “organizing a riot” being the preponderant accusations against you guys, all of which have been debunked, all of which has large evidence to the contrary (thanks to the diligence and professionalism you guys have shown), all of which we have been politely presenting to the CCEE supporters.

    They’ve been facing such a crisis from the masses, that they’ve been bitching and moaning to fb staff, and now fb is issuing suspensions to many people who have been fighting back against CCEE’S censorship and bullying….for example:

    I just received a suspension on fb for posting the following comments (screencaps attached):

    The comment I was responding to: “The hypocricy of deriding “mean girls who weren’t even there”, and then flooding the expo with one star reviews from people who didn’t attend (by the by, since this is Gamergate we’re talking about, what would happen if a journalist one starred a game without playing it, because they disagreed with the portrayal of women in it? ETHICS!), is lost on y’all, right?

    The reaction wasn’t purely online, Guests and attendees both reported the booth, panelists reported the conduct at the panel (whether you agree with that or not). There was a local response.

    The spin that the expo stole ten thousand dollars is ridiculous. That’s the Badger’s fundraising total, not the cost of a booth.

    The spin that they are misogynistic “mean girls” who banned “gamer girls” is ridiculous. The Honey Badger booth was staffed by both men and women, and both were asked to leave and banned equally.

    The spin that the Expo has no right to ask people to leave for whatever reason they deem valid is ridiculous. It’s a private event.

    The spin that security guards laughed at them…..well, I’ll just leave that one alone. Anyone who believes that is clearly living in fantasy.

    Soliciting one star reviews from people who didn’t attend is dishonest and questionably ethical.”

    My response (the one for which I got a fb suspension, and if you can spot the violation of fb community standards please let me know, because I’ll be damned if I can find it):

    “Sadie Kay, you are a fool, nobody is soliciting one star reviews, this is simply gamer’s response to having one of the big conventions spit in our faces.

    Half the people making those reviews were attendees you idiot!

    Beyond that, while attendees were going about their business, entirely unaware of the drama the expo reps were creating as it unfolded, so those of us who were not there are more informed on the situation than attendees are.”

    That’s it, that’s what I posted, and I got a suspension from fb over it….so, you tell me, is this turning into a massive censorship war? Are we going to have to take to arms and revolt to defend our rights??? WTF is going on here?

    I agree with mad_cat, this was inevitable, the question is, do we stand idly by and mildly raise our voices in a limited fashion? Or do we fight back and make our voices heard? Do we put an end to this PC “your rights end where my feelings begin”, “equality for all as long as it’s our idea of equality”, oppressive censorship bullshit? The biggest bullies I’ve ever come across were the ones that claim to be against bullies. I say, enough is enough, this is where we draw the line, they slapped gamer’s in the face, it’s time to push back and fight before we sink any lower.

    I sincerely hope you file a lawsuit, you will have my full support, I will help when and where I can. What I see here is a human rights violation, defamation of character (i.e. all the “hate group” claims in the media, particularly the Mary Sue), criminal harassment (the false police report, acts of security when you were getting evicted), violation of rights to free speech.

  • “Safe space” definition is: “conformity with the dogma promulgated by preists and priestesses of “Interdiscplinary Studies,” “Critical Theory,” and “post-structuralism.” Heresy and heterodoxy are not only deemed “unsafe” but expression of such constitutes evidence of pre-crime. Efforts are being made in Social Justice jurisprudence studies (at the top law schools) to address the emforcement of pre-crime laws against wrongthink crimes. Stay tuned. The progress is progressing.

  • ok its time for me to put my two cents in.. for 1. yes I believe females should have the same rights as men and all that stuff. now that I have said that. Feminism will always be around. they are never happy. and never will be. and that’s because they feel all men are bad. and out to under mind females. what else have I read on there sites?? oh yes and that all men are evil. and all men are killers.. lol I really did read all this from Feminism sites.. lol funny right?? they feel its ok if a female do some thing. like lets say a female takes a guys car and keys it. then its ok or if a female beats the tar out of a guy. oh then its ok. But how dear a man do the same thing then he is a bad man and should have the book thrown at him. he should be put under the jail and never let out.. now do not get me wrong I am not saying its ok to hit females.. its not!! how ever its not ok for females to do it ether.. no one should hit any one. I am just trying to make a point.. I am not saying life is fair its not. but in many ways females have the upper hand and if these Feminist would open there dang eyes and stop saying poor me.. and stop blaming all men for there problems and just blame the ones who really are being unfair to them. things would be a lot better for them and just maybe there might even be some guys who would even stand by them. as long as they do not attack him..

  • I would love to be asked to leave the Calgary Expo for wearing my GG, (Great Grandpa) t-shirt! Then I would have a picnic in a park near by before I drove home.
    With feminist today I guess these kind of actions cause triggers to be triggered; what fun!

By Sage Gerard

Listen to Honey Badger Radio!

Support Alison, Brian and Hannah creating HBR Content!

Recent Posts

Recent Comments





Follow Us

Facebooktwitterrssyoutubeby feather