I was referring specifically to calling people 'baby killers'

This is the post I responded to.

So the answer is to my question is "no". Unsurprising, but normally you just slink off instead of just taking this confident of a stab at it. Even like, after specifically being made fun of over it.

Fly, it's still good to see you opposing the myth of liberal/lefties calling people 'baby killers'.

Do you go as far as recognising that the myth that they did is good for the right?

Good points. It may be true that too much is better than not enough. I'm asking this because I participate, watch various people I know do the same and am watching it all slip away regardless.

Propaganda works like you say, but does it also work in other layers? That's what I'm asking. The utter lack of introspection on the part of the obvious victims of the propaganda is easy to identify. Why is there so much resistance to applying that introspection to our own reaction as well? The fact that we are right doesn't absolve us of examining whether we are effective. Frankly I am more concerned with it working by design against us. It's being spoon fed.

They are comfortable lying. We are comfortable thinking. Let's not lose that or fall into a trap of stopping short because it's easier.

the roving band of hippies is in the other part of the blog. they are a gang walking around a bus M street waving freakin viet cong flags on a normal day while ppl are going to work or lunch. again, story checks out surely.

Good old The Discourse Lover chez blatantly gaslighting in bad faith.

Listen, it's completely plausible that someone would call a soldier "baby-killer" and that not end up in the paper. That's not true about spitting. That's the whole point!

You're so invested in your obsession with civility and your vendetta against the people who were mean to your Nazi friends that you're literally not participating in the same conversation.

Go back to SMP.

Jesus Christ.

It's the same **** we see today, though. People sharing stories about ISIS flags in towns with Sharia law, BLM advocating murder of police, Muslims celebrating 9/11. It's all a straight line, and the norm of headpatting and smiling politely at OBVIOUS BULL**** leads to 30 years later, that bull**** being conventional wisdom.

In 10 years the number of people who claim Muslims celebrating 9/11 will be larger than it is today PRECISELY because of the way Trump said that **** and then got "Trump makes controversial claim" media coverage

Baby killer messages would be even more likely to have a record.

But are you saying you have no problem with the myth of 'baby killer' name calling. Was It giving you too much credit?

chezlaw, I am extremely confused as to why you are confused. fly and dvaut claimed that the conventional narrative about returning vietnam soldiers being called baby killers and spit on was completely fabricated by the right wing as a way to 1) attack liberals and 2) kill any sort of anti-war sentiment going forward.

its really not complicated if you actually read the thread.

We have evidence the spitting is a myth, chezlaw, stop ****ing spazzing about in this bizarre way where you're trying to outflank me from the left by making **** up and go back to SMP

This is part of my concern exactly. Trump/Spencer/coulter/hanity loudspeaker it and we echo it while "discrediting" it.

How is it effectively combatted?

I'm not confused.

Fly/dvaut appear to be concerned that the myth of calling people 'baby killer' is an effective attack on liberals i.e. good for the right. It's good to see because I obviously agree. The same then applies when it's actual ott name calling - bad enough when it's a myth, let's not make it true.

Then again maybe it's only the myth of spitting Fly objects to. Perhaps he approves of the 'baby killer' bit and I was giving him too much credit.

fly calls racist ppl racist. I dont think that is the same thing.

like, I dont think the right can use the attacking of white supremacists and neo nazis as a way to denigrate the left.

Fly does a lot more than that but I'm happy if he thinks 'baby killers' would have been bad.

It also sounds like we've established that some level of name calling by the liberal/left is good for the right.

Starting at the end of your post, I don't think "we" and "they" map very well on to Dems and Rs or liberals and conservatives or left and right.

And, the bolded is interesting and debatable. Think of the Sartre quotes that come up often. Some people are just fooled by propaganda and some of those people do change. For example they may find out that My Lai wasn't such an isolated incident and rethink things. Others are disingenuous when they claim to be offended on behalf of disrepected soldiers. Their "belief" in the shameful reception returning heroes received is a thin film atop a deep well of hating liberals. When push comes to shove, if a military hero is in their way they will happily swift boat them or say they like people who weren't captured.

And I certainly don't mean to put everyone in the second category. I'm an American and my parents weren't spoonfeeding me radical propaganda. I don't remember having even thought about whether the returning soldiers being widely mistreated was suspect until quite recently. I read Manufacturing Consent about a year ago.

You are confused. The fact that it's a myth is the problem. The Weathermen bombed a recruiting centers, police stations, the Pentagon, the US Capitol building... A lot more than spitting. The problem is that the reactionaries can make up lies and the centrists, and even polite discourse promoters, end up facilitating.

It's weird that spitting on soldiers is probably "known" by almost everyone and probably 5% of Americans max know who The Weathermen were.

If you voted for Nixon over McGovern, getting spat on and called a baby killer is certainly fair.

That's a separate point to the one I'm making. The way myth's propagate and their use in propoganda is also interesting and of course it's a problem.

Unless you mean Fly would have no issue with 'baby killers' name calling and I'm confused into thinking he does - that's possible but I like to give people the benefit. Anyone who doesn't think that would help the right should only have an SMP concern over whether it's a myth or not.

It's certainly not as unreasonable as directing it at the troops. Still not something that the vast majority of liberal/lefties would ever do so if there were stories of it being common they would almost certainly be a myth.

Directing it at the troops would have been worse because most of the troops were children. From my pov 18 or 19 isn't that much different than 14 or 15. Other than that people are responsible for what they do even if someone in a uniform tells them to do it.

For any people who still think chez is a good faith but misguided poster, this sentence being a flat out lie should close the book on that ****.

chezlaw you ran a ****ing white supremacist subforum for months until unchecked Nazism got it closed, but oh, man, I'm the bad guy? I'm bad for the cause? **** off.

There really were anti-war protests. Those protests were good, those people were on the right side of history, and I don't give a **** if they wrote swears on their signs.

Right wingers spread pernicious lies to advance the stab in the back myth and chez's ****ing takeaway is to prevent that in the future we should just agree with them. You gotta be ****ing kidding.

You went out of your way to attack a liberal for issuing a story that doesn't align 100% with the narratives you want to write on 2n2. While I stuck up for that liberal. You're doing Trump's job with a better vocabulary than him. That's all.

You used to have a little class.

Paul whining about class in the same thread where he analogized Vietnam vets making up stories about getting spit on by hippies ungrateful about their war crimes decades after the fact to RAPE VICTIMS cowed into silence.

Was he right, or was I? He was ****ing there, all I had was my limitless supply of internet rudeness and the sheer effrontery required to contradict a white man during white man story hour, but you wanna close the books on whether multiple Vietnam vet neighbors of Dom were mistreated and had their homes vandalized by anti-war activists? It's a yes or no question.