jump to content
my subreddits
more »
Want to join? Log in or sign up in seconds.|
[-]
use the following search parameters to narrow your results:
subreddit:subreddit
find submissions in "subreddit"
author:username
find submissions by "username"
site:example.com
find submissions from "example.com"
url:text
search for "text" in url
selftext:text
search for "text" in self post contents
self:yes (or self:no)
include (or exclude) self posts
nsfw:yes (or nsfw:no)
include (or exclude) results marked as NSFW
e.g. subreddit:aww site:imgur.com dog
this post was submitted on
19 points (74% upvoted)
shortlink:
reset password

conspiracy

subscribeunsubscribe345,467 free thinkers readers
439 thinking freely users here now
This subreddit is a thinking ground. Above all else, we respect everyone's opinions and ALL religions. We hope to challenge issues which have captured the public’s imagination, from JFK to 9/11. This is a forum for free thinking, not hate speech. Respect other views and opinions, and keep an open mind.
Our intentions are aimed towards a fairer, more transparent world and a better future for everyone.

Rules of Reddit: http://www.reddit.com/rules

Rules of r/Conspiracy:

  1. Derisive slurs against people's race, religion, ethnicity, nationality, social order or creed are not tolerated.
  2. No accusations of rules violations in comments. Please report violations.
  3. No blog spam/malicious web sites.
  4. No abusive/threatening language.
  5. No stalking or trolling.
  6. No caps lock.
  7. Facebook links will be removed.
  8. No memes... use /r/ConspiracyMemes. Other image posts are subject to removal at moderators discretion.
  9. Posting links in other subs pointing to specific submissions or comments here is subject to a ban, depending on context.
  10. Posts that attack this sub, users or mods thereof, will be removed. Accusing another user of being a troll or shill can be viewed as an attack, depending on context. Repeat offenders are subject to a ban.
  11. Misleading, fabricated or sensationalist headlines are subject to removal.
  12. Self posts that lack context or content may be removed.
Rules are explained in depth at FAQ page.
We are all different and we all have different beliefs, so please be respectful.
Have you been banned? Please click here before abusing the moderators.

Related subreddits:

Injustices Information
911 truth Wikileaks
Endless War World Politics
Collapse Politics Uncensored
Post Collapse Conspiracy Fact
Social Engineering PermaCulture
Propaganda Documentaries
Descent Into Tyranny Documented Truth
Military Conspiracy United We Stand
Bad Cop No Donut NSA Leaks
Palestine altnewz
Intelligence Other
Intelligence UFOs
BlackOPs Paranormal
False Flag Watch The Survival Guide
Privacy UAP
Subliminals Perma Culture
Activism Conspiracy Memes
Agenda 21 Psychonaut
Limited Hangouts High Strangeness
Moderator Transparency
Got any other subreddits you think should be listed here? Send a message to #conspiracy.

Conspiracy AMAs

Non-reddit resources

a community for
No problem. We won't show you that ad again. Why didn't you like it?
Oops! I didn't mean to do this.
discuss this ad on reddit
all 32 comments
[–]jacks1000[S] 7 points8 points9 points  (0 children)
There has been a consistent conspiracy among the media to slur Trump supporters as "authoritarians" or even "fascists."
But it's not true. So how is it so many media elites have all, in concert, used this same slur "authoritarian?"
To figure it out, simply look up where the slur "authoritarian" came from, and the agenda of the people who popularized the slur.
[–]Playaguy 1 point2 points3 points  (1 child)
"Of course, authoritarians and populists can overlap and share dark tendencies toward nativism, racism and conspiracism. But they do have profoundly different perceptions of authority. Populists see themselves in opposition to elites of all kinds. Authoritarians see themselves as aligned with those in charge. This difference sets the candidates’ supporters apart."
Translation --- Anyone who does not agree with the official narrative is an 'Enemy of the State'.
[–]jacks1000[S] 2 points3 points4 points  (0 children)
nativism, racism
Notice that ONLY white people ever get called "nativists" or "racists." Black people are hardly enthused about mass immigration from Latin America, but they are never called "nativists" or "racists."
Basically, "racist" and related terms like "nativists" are simply code words for "white people."
[–]kgt5003 1 point2 points3 points  (15 children)
I've called his supporters authoritarian when they cheered for him when he said he wants to "open up the libel laws" to make it easier for him to sue people who report negatively about him. It's one thing to support him in spite of that... it's another thing to cheer him saying that. Also whenever I bring that up to people who support him they always find excuses to embrace the idea and say "well the media is constantly lying about him so he needs some recourse!" Well, we already have libel laws for that.
The easiest way to sort this out is to picture Obama saying some of the things that Trump says. Would people still cheer for it then? Would people cheer Obama saying that he wants to open up the libel laws so he can sue reporters more easily or would they say he is trying to stifle free speech and create a (more) government-run media and the next step will be getting websites shut down and people arrested for commenting online? Would people cheer for Obama saying we need to continue to militarize our police or would they say he is creating a standing domestic army? Would people cheer for Obama saying we should torture suspected terrorists and kill their family members or would they say he's a war criminal?
[–]jacks1000[S] 1 point2 points3 points  (14 children)
Donald Trump isn't getting support for his stray remarks about libel laws. He is getting cheers for saying the media lies, because the media does nothing but lie.
None of what you are talking about has anything to do with the slur "authoritarian" anyway. I'm simply going to assume you have no clue what the term "authoritarian" is supposed to mean, the history of its use as a racist term against European people, nor have even read The Authoritarian Personality, which is the origin of the term's use as a racial epithet.
[–]kgt5003 0 points1 point2 points  (13 children)
I talking about "authoritarian" as it refers to governmental power... somebody who favors enforcing strict obedience to governmental authority. Wanting stricter libel laws and a more militarized police is absolutely authoritarian. Anyone who uses that word in regards to Trump or his followers are certainly using it in this way.
And I don't think people support Trump because of that stuff... but I think they find ways to overlook that shit when they wouldn't overlook it for another candidate. It would be a non-starter if it was Obama saying that shit.
[–]jacks1000[S] 0 points1 point2 points  (12 children)
Obama - and Bernie Sanders - supporters are far more "authoritarian" by that measure than are Trump supporters. It's the liberal left that want to expand state power into every aspect of people's lives.
Anyone who uses that word in regards to Trump or his followers are certainly using it in this way.
Except they aren't, they are using the term "authoritarian" in the way it was used in the Authoritarian Personality - a racist epithet for European peoples.
[–]kgt5003 2 points3 points4 points  (11 children)
Well it doesn't make sense that way. It makes sense in the way that he is calling for some authoritarian policies. Bernie certainly isn't for militarizing the police more or for "opening up" libel laws. I wouldn't really call medicare for all "authoritarian" unless you think that healthcare for all is the forceful arm of the government swooping in to try to make healthcare more affordable an act of authoritarianism. Government isn't inherently authoritarian. It depends on the application.
[–]cuntrymouse 0 points1 point2 points  (3 children)
Bernie is by definition authoritarian, because he proposes govt solutions to societal problems. If you don't want to pay Bernie's increased taxes (or if your employer doesn't want to pay his payroll tax), then do you think he would hesitate to use state power (i.e. policemen with guns) to either force you to pay or put you in jail?
[–]kgt5003 [score hidden]  (2 children)
So every government that ever collected taxes is authoritarian?
[–]cuntrymouse [score hidden]  (1 child)
i thought that was a given
[–]kgt5003 [score hidden]  (0 children)
Well that sorta kills the meaning of the word..
[–]jacks1000[S] 2 points3 points4 points  (6 children)
Bernie certainly isn't for militarizing the police more or for "opening up" libel laws.
I see. So, let's pick two essentially non-issues and use that to slander Trump's supporters as "authoritarian."
Then, ignore Bernie Sander's decades long career as a Washington insider where he's voted to expand the power of the state, voted consistently for arming apartheid Israel, his dozens of votes for war, bombing, and sanctions on various nations.
But, no, that's not "authoritarian."
It's really hard to take your argument seriously, since it's so obviously biased.
And again, you obviously don't understand the term "authoritarian" and how it has been used as a racial slur for European peoples.
[–]kgt5003 3 points4 points5 points  (2 children)
And as far as Israel goes... he supports them in some of their actions and he denounces them in some of their actions. When they were bombing schools and hospitals in Gaza he came out strongly against them while other senators and congressmen were defending their actions as being self-defense. Go ahead and look at AIPAC donations over the last decade. You'll notice that Bernie Sanders isn't getting shit from them. Rand Paul has gotten more money from AIPAC than Bernie Sanders. AIPAC hates Bernie Sanders because he speaks out against Israel all the time. The way you describe him you'd think AIPAC would love him... why don't they?
[–]jacks1000[S] 1 point2 points3 points  (1 child)
Bernie Sander's pro-Israel voting record is consistent and on the public record. It's not my responsibility to answer rhetorical questions about AIPAC.
Sanders has spent decades in Washington as a 100% reliable pro-Israel vote.
[–]kgt5003 1 point2 points3 points  (0 children)
Except for he also speaks out against them time and time again and denounces their actions. He supports funding things in Israel. He denounces their overuse of force. Trump hasn't been in government but it only took him one speech to pledge our military to Israel so that we can invade Iran for them if they want us to. Going the Israel route to try to make Trump seem better than Bernie is a tree you may not want to bark up.
[–]kgt5003 2 points3 points4 points  (2 children)
You are picking a very specific, less used, definition of the term to try to make it racist. How about you use the most accepted and applied definition? That's the way people use the word.
And Bernie certainly does believe in expanding the government in ways. I don't deny that. He isn't wielding the government for his own power though. He isn't a tyrant. He could only ever do the things he wants to do if millions and millions of people agree with him and vote in a congress that is likeminded (as he has said over and over again) and also agree to it at which point that would be the will of the people and make it not authoritarian. It would be democratic then. He doesn't say "vote me in and this is what I'll do." He says that he needs a literal political revolution to take place for him to be able to do any of the things he is proposing. He isn't inflicting it on people. He is presenting it and saying you'll have to vote for it to get it to happen.. and not just by voting for him but by also voting for congress.
[–]jacks1000[S] 1 point2 points3 points  (1 child)
You are picking a very specific, less used, definition of the term to try to make it racist.
No, I am using the term as it was popularized by the book The Authoritarian Personality. That is where the term gained currency.
It's you that is using your own definition. Everyone else uses it the way I'm suing it. The Washington Post article which I linked in this thread uses the term the way I'm using it.
As for the rest of your stuff about Bernie Sanders, it's not really relevant to this thread.
[–]kgt5003 2 points3 points4 points  (0 children)
I didn't bring up Bernie Sanders... you did. And if you Google the definition of "authoritarian" you get the definition that I use. It's the first definition. I didn't create that definition nor is it my own.. it's the most popular/most used definition.
[–]alllie 1 point2 points3 points  (1 child)
Pissed.
[–]flyyyyyyyyy 1 point2 points3 points  (0 children)
in both the american and british sense of the word.
[–]NEROmania 0 points1 point2 points  (0 children)
We are the people.
[–]wrenagade419 -2 points-1 points0 points  (8 children)
Ok in personal experience, like people I actually know in real life, who support Trump, are the uneducated and the violent type of people. Ones that you find it hard to have a conversation with because the resort to name calling within the first 5 seconds of hearing something they disagree with. I have never been able to talk to one. And they aren't rich, they aren't the type of people who would benefit from what he wants to do. But they always seem to argue from a standpoint that what he will do will benefit them, and that's all that matters. Also, and I'm not making this up, every one , whether they be the uneducated ones, or the violent ones, are racist. Those are the ones I know, personally, but have stopped talking to since now they feel like dropping the N word is ok because, "they are just speaking their minds". My nephew is half black, I can't be in communications with some ignorant people.
[–]jacks1000[S] 5 points6 points7 points  (4 children)
the uneducated and the violent type of people.
Hillary Clinton won the "uneducated and the violent type" of people in the South - who happen to be black.
It's clear and obvious when you say "uneducated and the violent type" of people you are making a stereotype about white working class people - a stereotype you would NEVER make about black people, or Muslims, or mestizos, or any other race.
Because you're a racist.
[–]wrenagade419 -1 points0 points1 point  (3 children)
well that's not even close to true. but you really spun that well. and the fact you are offended by my PERSONAL experiences really says something about you.
EDIT: here is where you are ignorant, btw. If I was stereotyping anything, it was the Trump supporters I KNEW, but you tried to say that I was stereotyping white working class people.
let me try and break this down, because you calling me a racist is pretty ignorant, and it's obvious you didn't grasp what I was saying. Trump supporters are uneducated and poor, is NOT the same as saying the uneducated and poor are Trump supporters.
I don't want to be coming off as mean, as I didn't attack people supporting Trump, just the people who I had interactions with, it just sucks being called a racist and people trying to insult me when I didn't even come close to doing that to you. But I kind of thank you for proving that even if I don't know you and you are a Trump supporter, there is a good chance you are uneducated.
[–]jacks1000[S] [score hidden]  (2 children)
I think the other poster has it right. You surround yourself with uneducated and violent type of people, so that's your experience.
Most people I read who are Donald Trump supporters have PhD or are otherwise highly educated.
But I think it's obvious your racist bigotry is coloring your view of Trump supporters.
[–]wrenagade419 [score hidden]  (1 child)
yea, not a racist, and if you read the whole thing you would know i don't surround myself with those people. I mean I speak of from personal experience and look what kind of response I get. LOL, you all get offended, which, if you weren't part of the people I was talking about, why be offended? You could easily have a discussion instead of attempting to insult me, unless you are incapable of it. I didn't attack anyone, I told the truth, and am met with a few people making bogus assumptions about who I hang out with. Which, AGAIN, as I stated in the initial post, I don't hang out with them anymore. I seem to be surrounding myself with even more ignorant people though by just talking about Trump. These replies are proof.
[–]jacks1000[S] [score hidden]  (0 children)
Oh, sure, "I'm not a racist, but ... here's this racist stereotype about people I feel superior to..."
[–]cuntrymouse 1 point2 points3 points  (1 child)
you know lots of uneducated violent Trump supporters because you are surrounded by uneducated violent people. I only know well-educated law abiding Trump supporters, because I don't have any uneducated violent friends
[–]wrenagade419 [score hidden]  (0 children)
No reason to be offended, was just answering from personal point of view, and if you read the whole thing, you would see I don't hang out with those people anymore, because now they feel it's just speaking their mind and not being racist.
And let's not forget the lawsuits over discrimination against Trump when he refused to rent to blacks. But you being offended when I didn't even attack ALL Trump supporters, just the ones I knew personally, is weird, like you just kind of jumped into the line of fire and it wasn't even directed at you.
Use of this site constitutes acceptance of our User Agreement and Privacy Policy (updated). © 2016 reddit inc. All rights reserved.
REDDIT and the ALIEN Logo are registered trademarks of reddit inc.
π Rendered by PID 30365 on app-422 at 2016-04-03 03:34:42.832538+00:00 running 26b0b45 country code: nl.
0%
 
10%
 
20%
 
30%
 
40%
 
50%
 
60%
 
70%
 
80%
 
90%
 
100%