All my posts are being monitored ?

I'm sorry to hear that. There are a lot of autists on here who seem to react to things people say in an even more irrational and aggressive manner than the average neurotypical. 

Irrational, to you.

Perhaps it would be wise to acknowledge that, regardless of your own views, there are others here who will feel offended, undermined, and targeted by some of the words used and the things people say.

I'm not transgender, I have no dog in that fight, but when I see words like 'Tranny' being used in an environment in which there are transgender and LGBTQ users I start to understand a bit better the world they have to live in, the sort of comments they have to endure by people with their 'opinion' they have to make everyone aware of. 

This place is supposed to be welcoming, inclusive, and aware of the fact that it's users have quite unique differences, not a place where people come to be told that if they take offense to something it's a result of an autistic fault, rather than becauss they're a sensible person capable of reason and rational thought. 

You talk of people being aggressive... I personally have stepped away from debates with yourself and others because I acknowledge this is a forum for autistic people. Had I not given people the courtesy of remembering they are autistic I would have reacted in the same way I do with anyone else spouting the same right wing clap trap while at the same time not having the bravery to identify themself as right wing, preferring anti-woke, or anti-PC. Personally I don't consider myself to be either of those things but I'd rather wear those badges than the alternative. 

Hmm...

Maybe we should outlaw the use of certain words like 'gammon' to avoid causing offence? Sort of like what the left suggest we do in not using derogatory terms to describe people of different ethnicities and sexual persuasions. But don't the right think we should all be able to freely use whatever words we like and ignore the snowflakes who have a problem with it?

In this case I'm going to take the approach of the right wing and say my opinion of the word and those it describes are more important than the feelings of those such words offend, and they'll just have to get over it.

I could be more civilised and sensitive and underdtanding and reasonable but I choose not to be. 

Good! Your mind is equally closed.

Plastic said:

Martin said:

white men, do not constitute a race,

Seems to indicate a certain sector of the population.

..but what he really said is

Martin said:

Red-faced, apoplectic, opinionated middle-aged white men, do not constitute a race, in anyone's reasoning.

LOL! I've seen misquotes before but to take PART of a sentence to fit your own needs. 

aye but still the term gammon is usually used as a sluur word to racially attack white people for the colour of their skin and can be applied to any white person. is attacking someone for the colour of their skin not racist? i think it is, unless the rules have now changed again, in which case people can now make derogatory comments about brown coloured skin now then? lol

I'm not going to engage with your closed mind - there's literally no point.

The same happened in Britain, war imposes stringencies on businesses and individuals alike. It isn't caused by or described as socialism, it is caused by and described as 'war of attrition', or 'the Home Front'.

Martin said:

Are you attempting to invalidate me?

Not at all  - but as you have stated your 'facts' and I know mine, there's little point going forwards - I suspect we disagree to such an extent on so many things that there is no middle ground.

I was using 'reverse racism' in the context that people with rosacea and freckles and red hair are not races.

Hogwash. There is considerable doubt that such a thing as a 'white race' exists. As far as genetics goes, there is more genetic distance between an Ethiopian and a Nigerian, than there is between an Irishman and a Japanese or a Maya. All non-Africans are descended from a sub-clade of humans that left Africa, while the people of Africa (Sub-Saharan) are the most genetically heterogeneous in the world.

Hitler did not nationalise industries, when he became chancellor he PRIVATISED state industries. Go check it, it's a fact. Of course Hitler and his party were not socialist, they were nationalists and fascists.

Plastic said:

Either way, I'm not understanding your involvement in this thread.      

Are you attempting to invalidate me?

Martin said:

none of the great German businesses, the Krupps, Messerschmitts etc., were ever nationalised.

Absolutely wrong - they were put under strict government control - to a ludicrous extent where the ministers and bureaucrats almost crippled the business and they eventually cost Hitler the war.

Hitler totally rejected capitalism - it was a product of the hated (people of a certain religion)

There are some excellent tv shows "War Factories" that go into great detail through the history of the various companies in WW2 - I suggest you watch the one on Krupps and there's a good one on the German aircraft industry under government control through the war.    Classic socialism.

he needed power, he was a smart man.... the modern day socialists are doing that too though.... why do you think all these brands are on the socialists side? .... every single lefty social activist thing you see big capitalist brands hijack and promote.... just the same innit? history always repeats.. and you cannot do anything without this anyway, man with no money or influence gets nowhere. this is why true socialism never comes from the ground up, this is why they always end up with big brands on their side lol this is probably also why they become massive hypocrites and do the things they claim to oppose and say its ok when they do it.

A central tenet of true Socialism is the brotherhood of the working classes across political boundaries, this is hardly the same as the concept of the German Übermensch, that Nazism embraced. Hitler engaged capitalism to support his cause, none of the great German businesses, the Krupps, Messerschmitts etc., were ever nationalised. Also in the rise to power of Hitler in 1931-33, financiers and industrialists poured money into the Nazi Party.

Nick Squiggler said:

I don't know many people who wanted Brexit.

I'm guessing that anyone so bothered as to be still asking about it are the sort of people that most normal people will avoid engaging with.

Nick Squiggler said:

I don't know many people who wanted Brexit.

I'm guessing that anyone so bothered as to be still asking about it are the sort of people that most normal people will avoid engaging with.