The Harbinger of Ferocity

Frokane's Mildly Politcal Hangout Thread

@Vilageidiotx

Security checkpoints needn't be and should not be intrusive. I am not advocating airline levels of invasiveness, but rather points located in areas of high traffic, be it vehicles or people, and strategic benefit; highways, toll roads, choke points and the like. Something as simple as the checking of a driver's license and registration. It needn't be as elaborate as a national database that tracks scanned identification, although it should to better establish continuity.

The purpose of such efforts is the first of the five fundamental "Ds". That being deterrennce and going hand in hand with detection. They needn't check every car or person, being random enough an observer cannot reliably predict if they will be stopped and not irritating enough to hinder the regular public. If the illusion is at least there, it helps to curb potential activity, both criminal and terror.

The people of the United States, the average American and not the exception, are granted more freedom than they know what to do with or understand. This is no secret and in a way, is beautiful in its own right. The issue with it is, is that most of the populace does not have an understanding of a treat that can arise at effective random, or how to actually curb it. Tactics such as these are not subversion, intrusion or exploitation of basic rights; this is little different than a checkpoint developed to dissuade, detect or stop intoxicated drivers or those under another influence.

Surrender to terror would be to abide by their rules, beliefs and laws rather than our own. To display a willingness to combat that and be wary of them shows and emphasizes resistance. The philosophy of, "Proactive prevention will harm, hamper, discredit and deny you the opportunity to hurt us." Being reactive, as people often criticize law enforcement for, is not a way to defeat fundamentalists. And the worst news people do not like to hear, is that this mindset, this air of alertness, is mandatory and essential; life will never return to the pre-9/11 era.

Because of my bias to the right, I believe it is essential that it undergoes and evolution to combat, counter and dissaude leftist policies, of which have become - in my lifetime - more extreme. Once upon a time I considered the Democratic party, but I find myself with no moderates to even back or invest in.

That quote about the left and right comparisons might have been more valid in the past, but I believe the modern left does buy into, or is at least willing to, support policies that are more radical in comparison to the right. For example, I believe most of the left consctibes to the notion that bathrooms should be used by those who identify as a particular gender, if any at all. The right by contrast I have heard just about every argument in between. My opinion? There should be male, female and neutral - open to all - bathrooms, as we saw once with "family restrooms" and I do not believe someone who has not fully transitioned should be permitted in the opposite sex's bathroom.

And no, let me state this clearly, because I find this ground dangerous and without room for error; I believe the far left has the inadvertent ability to accidentally, or even knowingly, allow a radical into their group who consctibes to their philosophy. This hypothetical person has the willingness, capacity and intent to utilize a firearm and or an explosive device for political movtive. In doing so, they kill American citizens.

It is my worst fear that this attack will provoke those present to participate in a small scale engagement at that time. It may or may not be coordinated on a low-level. Furthermore, it will provide a basis for the right to demonize the left as a whole and will compromise the credibility of anyone who has those leanings.

No, I do not believe in "right wing death squads" and I find that argument and notion silly, but I worry that current political violence will escalate and get American citizens hurt or killed because of negligence.

As for protesting, my policy in such a circumstance is to not attend. If you feel so strongly, acquire a permit if need be and legally engage in non-violent, non-intrusive demonstrations that do not impact those who want to attend or participate.

@Dynamo Frokane

I could not agree more that this has been a mostly polite discussion and civil. The entire time I have been involved it certainly has been, which is exactly as I hoped. I am fond of the idea that even dissenting opinions and opposed ideals can converse peacefully and make their points.

Frokane's Mildly Politcal Hangout Thread

@Penny

My commitment is not to any law, although it is, but principal. If my life is so terrible or under such great threat, I need to fight. I cannot choose to flee or freeze. If my home and lifestyle is under attack through those channels as you described them, I am doing a disservice to myself, my family and my nation by doing otherwise. I do understand that mindset that safe haven in another country is the best option, that it has the most promise, that it has the least likely dangers to face. It just so happens my beliefs coincide with the law.

In fact, I do actively support the concept of having both static and randomized security check points, mandatory uses of identification be it voting to just purchasing gasoline, and relatively deep screening for non-nationals. This is my area of bias because with my life this is considered normal, you have no option but to do these things, but they are again fundamental to circulation control and policing of a populace.

No less, I believe it is a simple task made difficult by the presence of government bureaucracy, the notion of border and immigration control; I do not believe the standard, untrained, undisciplined citizen should be carrying this out, on the contrary rather, but as I stated earlier I am of the understanding some things simply are the way they are, as with the military complex I spoke to in another albeit unrelated post. It will cost time, it will cost money, and it will cost emotional currency. It is essential one separates emotional motives from factors of enforcement. Would I feel bad to divide a family because I am carrying out orders? Yes, but at the same time they made their choice and as adults that choice affected their children, which ultimately impacted them now; this too could have been avoided if the law affecting their status as born citizens was changed to not include those of illegal immigrants.

While I believe the vetting process could use improvement in the department of efficiency, as well as increased standards, I again cannot move to the appeal to emotion the argument has.

In the end am fond of the phrase, "No safety, know pain - know safety, no pain." The United States should be setting the trend for fostering an environment of stability, safety, security and standards. This includes planning for the future and executing it as a long term, overarching objective that stretches beyond presidencies and politics, of which monitoring and controlling immigration both illegal and legal are essential.

@Dynamo Frokane

I will not disagree with you there, but again I admit I can only speak to what I have experienced or known. To reiterate, not that those things do not happen to the left - there's videos of it all over YouTube, Facebook, and any other flavor of social interaction on the internet - but I have not seen it myself. The only people I have witnessed did so in a manner as to mock it, alas I am certain there are those in the "Alt-Right" who use it unironically like those in the actual Alt-Right who have embraced it.

To the other point, I have not encountered a situation wherein a woman or immigrant was under attack in any sense specific to them being one, the other, or both. I also make no mistakes that extreme views are an avoidable factor of life, in which people should abstain from acting on their biases in day to day life and in private. As an example of what I mean and to use myself, I might not be fond of illegal immigrants, but I treat them with human decency; they are not relegated to some "unclean" caste or "lesser" status of people. They are simply people who broke the law. I say even the same for those who are considered the lowest of low as with sexual offenders, to which they should be punished to the fullest extent as with any other criminal.

@Vilageidiotx

I have to disagree that operations of terror and their motives are not continuous to meet those goals, largely because they can fall under a general banner and all meet a net gain. By this I mean, even in the fringe case of an actual radical national acting under extremist views for a certain group alone, all of them benefit. The reality is that the self-radicalized are the most dangerous because of how easy it is to convert moderates to actual extremists in any spectrum, or at minimum to make them sympathizers; just look at politics to use another example.

Terrorism in the United States is not succeeding overtly, but it doesn't need to as history has shown us time and time again; an attack only needs to happen - it needn't be another 9/11 - it just needs to elevate the public perception, get into the media and provoke a government response. The fact that Islamophobe is thrown out as a slur now is a tell tale sign of that; people are legitimately wary of the Muslim population. Does that mean every Muslim is a terrorist? No, not at all and anyone who believes so is unbecoming of decency to themselves and others.

To address the point of conversion, no, but that is an ideal outcome for the motions from the extremes you see in Europe; subversion is a more likely result. To address it again, the radical population which leverages and motivates the moderates around it, demand special considerations like that of infamous Sharia Law or that non-members obey their customs and cultural values. The average German, to use any non-specific example, is under no obligation to obey Islamic ideals or laws in Germany, just the same as it is not the duty of the German government to recognize, advocate, foster or cater to these pockets of culture. I sincerely doubt Western civilization will bow as a whole to it and convert, but it is and will continue to suffer damage it could otherwise avoid.

Moving on to the next topic, I do not believe you are likely to see a legitimate uprising of Alt-Right or "Alt-Right" politically that will have or act on nationalist motives sufficient enough to provoke international incidents. In part because they have not the numbers or the platform, but also because the way the American political field is stratified. What I believe we will see, at least with the United States, is a comparatively strong - to compare it with the recent past of the more left leaning - center-right and actual right push across all boards. Not because of the "loony left", but because the left has lost its basis of power and has gone too far into its own extreme, examples being Bernie Sanders, Maxine Waters and Elizabeth Warren among others, helping to mobilize the right better; Hillary Clinton's failure as a supposed moderate indicates this to me further.

I believe the actual right to be too politically disorganized to be a threat to anyone but itself as I see more squabbling and in-fighting there than I perceive elsewhere and the actual Alt-Right riding on the coat tails of the "Alt-Right" and moderates. Among the left there seems to be certain aspects they generally agree on enough to collaborate on as a singular political unit.

Antifa I will state again only has the capacity to act on their anarchist beliefs in a manner that will turn the right and the moderates decisively against them. They are the caliber of organization that may include a radical who acts with deadly violence against their opposition, not because the entire group advocates that - although what I have read and seen, they do advocate violence and "resistance" as a whole - yet instead because of it. They may be throwing fire crackers for the time being or bringing airsoft guns as a "show of force", but all it takes is one person to bring an improvised device or discharge a firearm to set off a potential hysteria. I do not believe they have the discipline, knowledge or desire to prevent such an incident; the actual Alt-Right and the "Alt-Right" have, in contrast, at minimum demonstrated basic, entry-level small unit tactics and trigger discipline, as well as a bias against random acts of violence against civilian population and structure.

And to finally address the issue of Islamophobia, I again see this as a natural outcome from a faction that has made itself a persona of terror. If it were not for those extremists who continue to receive attention, continue to carry out attacks, and continue to display their ability to appear at seeming random, I would agree with you, although I find this to not be the current case. American citizens should always be wary of people they are not familiar to regardless of who they are for their own safety and should foster an environment of vigilance and a culture of watchfulness. However, it is the reality that a specific set of ideological people have branded the rest of their population the "enemy" by proxy.

@Dinh AaronMk

I would say walking out on anyone during a speech, presentation, or ceremony is disrespectful and in such poor taste it makes one childish. You do not need to agree with them, but you should show them respect for their position and prestige, at bare minimum that they have been honored or selected for such a role. I am no fan of Barrack Obama, but I would still stand or sit politely in such a situation and not disrupt him, just as I would shake his hand or wish him a good day.

Frokane's Mildly Politcal Hangout Thread

I believe some people are simply poor human beings to others for any number of reasons, punctuated at their worst by making certain specific targets of groups on grounds such as this one of gender alone. I was specifically and definitively speaking to an unusual circumstance wherein someone who appeared and behaved as a normal functioning member of society otherwise turned out to have a deep and dedicated sexist leaning. Or, contrarily, a series of continued, measurable instances you were aware of relating to this issue that recurred. Given you are not comfortable or interested in sharing those, it is not my business to pressure you for them but to instead state the following on it; in my opinion, women are treated fairly in the United States by and large.

To move back from that topic, again the reality of illegal immigration is that while these people might be escaping those things, they need abide by the laws of the nations they pass through and seek shelter in. It cannot be endorsed or incentivized that this behavior is acceptable or fair to the people of the country affected.

D&D 5e - Hoard of the Dragon Queen

Knowing how conservative this group is with almost anything @Gordian Nought, I am more worried people might not feel comfortable handing it out at all. It should be in pretty clear cases an aspect of reward, as with the dragon conflict or whoever manages to, successfully and in-character, convince the captive to spill the information with say, minimal reliance on the dice. Aspects such as those I feel are well deserved.

"You Are Your Avatar"

The jarring of machinery, mechanisms, arms and armor came to the ear even before the footfall shook the ground with even the most distant steps one could sense. Whatever it was, it was certain that it had come to this place with a purpose, to which it revealed once it at last became present.

"Perhaps you could enlighten us just what a 'spheroid' is?" Was the answer it received, accompanied by an expression of curiosity.

Frokane's Mildly Politcal Hangout Thread

Unfortunate as it is to say, as they should be uneasy in the United States when they have done so illegally. There is a set of rules, regulations, and procedures in place to become part of the nation. The only issue I take is that anyone who is abiding by those rules of immigration and naturalization being treated unfairly because of their background as an immigrant; those following the law should have no such weight placed upon them, be it socially, politically or otherwise.

Perhaps because of where I find myself located, despite my travels, can you elaborate on examples of misogyny, @Penny? I am not speaking to the renegade or rogue people who are just detestable personalities innately. A major incident such as being accosted or something vastly affecting people, namely women, is what I am referring to.

As a portion added later, I ask this question as well, "What do you consider to be misogyny or sexism?"

Frokane's Mildly Politcal Hangout Thread

As a woman and an immigrant I can relate. It isn't a fun feeling.

@Penny

If you are a lawful citizen, you have my sympathy that some people might shuffle you into such a place. However, I have still yet to see a case of legitimate or potentially valid misogyny that demonizes women within my life and lifetime. This is not to say it has not or does not happen, as that would be far flung, but I can only report reliably on what I know of in concrete and through repeat observation.

The wandering beast of the forest is staring into your eyes, look away

You would not be the only wandering spirit of the wild here, @Ageca. Welcome to the Guild.

"You Are Your Avatar"

"I tend not to make enough appearances for it to matter, even if that were my name." Came the reply, one both plainly said and largely, albeit not completely, untroubled despite the bending whims of reality before it. "Nonetheless, you may call me by my mantle, or rather the title I bear."

The great cat laid a paw to its wide chest in introduction, "I am the Harbinger of Ferocity."

For something so seemingly calm or even well spoken, that might have been hard to believe with any credibility. The voice, the figure, the entirety of it all looked and played the part, except of course for how it apparently addressed itself. Yet just when it finished it provided a subtle albeit overt nod, asking thereafter, "And you would be...?"

Frokane's Mildly Politcal Hangout Thread

I'm never sure why right wingers are so dedicated to trying to make it seem like they are the tiniest, most exclusive, romantic resistance group fighting the Goliath opposition as if they don't make up damn near half of the country.

@Dynamo Frokane

Speaking from that center-right, a number of us felt that way because whenever we voiced an opinion contrary to our vocal opposition we were met with cries of "hate speech", "racist", "sexist" and any other throwaway that is cringe worthy at this point.

To give you an anecdote, a subordinate had heard I was considering Donald Trump for my vote back during his earlier running career in 2016. Without any base to stand on, they mechanized anyone who was sympathetic to the left to brand me "racist" because I had also agreed in another instance that illegal immigrants are unlawful citizens and need to be removed from the country.

It is it an anecdote? Beyond a doubt, but having nearly twenty some-odd people jump at you just because they thought you were a true Alt-Right'er tends to give that impression. The good news is, I had the authority to make be still and explain just that - my belief and my considerations of the candidate - but this type of behavior is not limited in scope.

You tend to feel like a small number when there are not a lot of you who feel like you can safely say or do anything without becoming demonized.