Online articles are only useful if you know the background, bias and agenda of who wrote it. EVERYBODY has an agenda. So many Americans are blind to this and think that CNN and Fox News are giving them honest news. BS has a massive liberal leaning leadership. It is shown daily. It is time to stop the charade.
Clam down. It was an honest question. Until seeing this thread, I was completely unfamiliar with the term as an antisemitic slur. So for making a sincere inquiry, I get a tirade from you about my "privilege"? What do you know about my background? Great way to make your case and educate the uninitiated.
This is what they do. You are racist or fascist. The don't need or want to know your background. You disagreed with them. Thats all they need. All they are doing is making the divide in this country worse by their close minded behavior, but remember they are open minded....if you agree with them Make sure you keep a pencil list (with an eraser handy) of what is an offensive term. It changes daily. I was told I was a racist for using the PC term of Native American. If I turn around and use the term Indian then I will be called racist by someone else. People within each ethnic group can't even agree on what is offense or not. How are we supposed to keep track of it? It is impossible to please everyone. No matter what you say you offend someone.
I'm out...I've said my piece. Call me a racist and lets move on. Go back to your open minded club of only like minded people. It is hard to be a soccer fan in this country and not be a raging liberal.
I come here to read about Soccer. If I want to read extreme political rant, I will read Huffington Post, watch Fox News or read Breitbart.
You said, "Now that liberals have gained control of society..." The media does not have control of society. If they did and they are liberal, then the federal government and the majority of state governments wouldn't be Republican.
There were three articles on this thread explaining why the term "globalist" is an antisemitic term. They looked at from three different perspectives. In trying to explain why it is, I'm asking what you disagree with in those articles. And if you are saying their conclusions are incorrect, provide a counter argument with some documentation. That is how we discuss this stuff. The three articles I am talking about: https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2018/3/8/17096876/globalists-explained https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2018/03/the-origins-of-the-globalist-slur/555479/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...fensive/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.65c30ca64da7
Um, you're walking away from an open discussion and complaining about other people not being open-minded? Ok then... And since the whole "liberal media boogeyman has come up, here's an interesting link and chart: http://www.allgeneralizationsarefalse.com/ [mod edit - removed duplicate image due to size]
Who did the majority of American's vote for, for president? Looking at state governments as what group controls America is seriously flawed. State populations are far from equal and thus their governments cannot be used as a source of political leanings of the whole country. Often the states that are liberal are the larger population states (minus Texas). Senators cannot be used for the same reason. Each state gets 2 regardless of population. The only ones that can be used to gage the whole country are US house of representatives (63% republican and this will likely change soon) and popular vote of president. This is split...one leaning conservative and one leaning liberal. I said control society...not governments. These are 2 distinct things. Liberal mindset is growing in media and population daily. Maybe they just yell louder and thus give me the illusion of controlling society. While I did not mean governments when I said society, I agree you do have a point. I don't agree with it, but there is an argument to be made.
If you can't see the difference in popularity of these sources then I feel sorry for you. This is why I said "main media". Of course media can be found on both sides. That is a no brainier. But you have CNN, MSNBC, Washington Post, New York Times, BBC on one side and Fox News and 1 or 2 others on the other. Thanks for making my point. Also, anybody judging ABC, CBS and NBC as neutral I can't take serious. More neutral than CNN, yes. Also I never claimed to be open minded, like the liberal group prides themselves on. I am not open minded. I have no reason or need to be. If liberals want to not be open minded that is their pejorative, but stop saying you are.
As is repeatedly being pointed out and you have admitted, you are choosing to be ignorant. Articles and sources have been provided in this thread and you have been asked specifically what you have problems with.
Literally every single one of those is listed in the neutral category of the source I provided. Meanwhile Fox News was listed on the conservative side, along with 21 others. Just 4 less than the 26 listed on the liberal side. Clearly. SMH. Shockingly you've once again jumped into a thread, driven it into a tangent, and ignored all actual sourced information given you as to why you're incorrect while providing no sourced information of your own.
And ironically, you're complaining about moderators who took action against an offensive political statement on a soccer board.
Is he? Really? Has the "rise of Trump", who happens to be the least anti-Semitic President we have had in, possibly ever, unleashed anti-Semitism? Really? Maybe it has increased, I don't know as I don't venture into the deep internet, but it would be hard to put the blame on Trump in this case. But I know, everything wrong in the World is Trump's fault.
1. Yes. Bannon was concerned that the school his children were attending had too many Jews, for one thing. 2. Trump said there were fine people in both sides in Charlottesville. I’m pretty confident he’s not the least anti-Semitic president we’ve ever had. Facts are stubborn things.